Intellectual disabilities are very common, and one that security officers can expect to encounter during certain patrol operations. Persons with intellectual disabilities make up approximately 3% of the general population.

To understand the condition of intellectual disability, consider these three critical components:

Intellectual disability refers to limitations in the ability to learn and to perform well in social situations. Intellectual disability is not a disease; it is a condition. No one “catches” it, and it is not curable. Education and training of the individual is directed toward maximizing his or her potential and developing socially appropriate behaviors.

In the vast majority of known cases, there is no apparent cause of the disability. Those causes that we do know are classified in three major areas:

Not all individuals with intellectual disability function in the same way. There are varying degrees of disability, ranging from mild to profound.

As a result of this movement, thousands of people have moved out of institutions and into small, family-sized group homes with staff to assist them in daily living activities. These group homes are located in residential neighborhoods. The residents can choose when to go shopping, whether to fix meals at home or eat out, where to ride public transportation, and other daily living choices. Others with developmental disabilities live with their own families or in an apartment or home on their own. Today, more people with developmental disabilities have the choices and opportunities to live, go to school, and work in an environment that enhances the quality of their lives. Because of this, security officers have a greater likelihood than ever of interacting with citizens who have developmental disabilities.

The most frequent type of interaction with citizens who have developmental disabilities may be as colleagues or as citizens asking for information or assistance. In each situation, the security officer must respect the individual, communicate in a manner that is not demeaning, and focus on what the person can do rather than on what the person cannot do.

The security officer may also encounter people with developmental disabilities in the role of victim, witness, or offender. In general, an individual with a developmental disability who is the victim, witness, or perpetrator of a crime will react the same way as any other human being would in a similar situation (excited, tense, vulnerable, etc.).

When considering victims of crimes, the way a person reacts depends upon what the crime was and who the person is. All people will react differently—that is just individual human nature. However, a major difference between the victim of crime who has a disability and one who does not have a disability may be the way the security officer responds to the victim. The situation can be made less stressful if the officer remembers the key points for effectively communicating and interacting with a person who has a developmental disability.

It is also important to recognize that there will be differences among victims who have developmental disabilities depending upon the specific disability. A person with cerebral palsy who is a witness to a crime may not be able to communicate information as clearly to the security officer; a person who is blind and the victim of the crime will not have seen the perpetrator. Although the disability may influence how a person experiences a situation, as well as how or to what degree the individual can give information to the security officer, the disability does not invalidate an individual’s testimony or the fact that he or she is a victim or witness.

When considering guidelines that will help security officer’s work with any crime victim who has a developmental disability, always try to remember the following:

Security personnel face a dilemma when encountering a person with a developmental disability in a confrontational situation. The security officer’s first duty is to stop an unlawful action, protect persons and property, and identify those involved. At no time can the officer jeopardize his or her own safety.

Although it may be surprising to some people that a person with a developmental disability may commit a crime, it is a possibility and it does happen. The person with a disability may be unknowingly led into committing or participating in a crime, or the person may be fully accountable for his or her actions. In either case, that person is not exempted from responsibility for action or consequences due to the level of disability. The individual with a developmental disability who commits a crime has the same rights as the person without a disability and is required to obey the same laws as the person without a disability; but, where appropriate, standard security procedure may be adjusted to compensate for the special needs of these persons. However, it cannot be stressed enough that, in every situation, the safety of the security officer and all other persons takes precedence over special considerations resulting from a disability.

In summary, when a person who has a developmental disability is the perpetrator of a crime:

Often, we label and group people without finding out what kind of people they are or what positive contributions they can make. For example, most people react positively or negatively to other people based upon a label such as a job title, professional status, or education. Many people are influenced by a person’s physical appearance. Some people will react in a positive or negative way towards someone based upon how the labels they attach to the person make them feel.

The words often used to describe persons with disabilities can have negative connotations:

These labels describe neither the person nor the condition. Yet, because of these labels, people with disabilities may be feared, ridiculed, segregated, and sometimes abused. When we label and begin to think of a person as handicapped or disabled, an image is created of a homogenous group of people. We see this person as different and apart from ourselves. The person’s primary identification to us becomes his or her impairment or disability. The person’s abilities and similarities to other people are lost to us or become something that surprises us when we cannot ignore them.

When referring to someone with a disability, recognize the person first and then the disability. So, for example, rather than calling someone intellectually disabled or epileptic, always try to refer to them as “a person who has an intellectual disability” or “a person with epilepsy”. This language pattern emphasizes that the disabling condition is only one aspect of the person. People with disabilities are more than the sum of their impairments. They want to be perceived in terms of their strengths as well as their weaknesses, their similarities as well as their differences. They want to be seen as individuals.

First of all, please do not assume that because a person has a visible disability that he or she cannot communicate. In each situation, assess the individual and do not jump to stereotypic conclusions. The security officer must respect the individual, communicate in a manner that is dignifying rather than demeaning for the person, and focus on what the person can do rather than on what the person cannot do.

The following suggestions may help to make the communication/interaction process less stressful for both parties:

There is no magic formula for communicating with people who have developmental disabilities that involve communication impairments. Someone with above-average intelligence may not be able to speak clearly because he or she has cerebral palsy. Another person may have a hearing impairment. Yet another may have intellectual disability that limits his or her language skills.

When you encounter someone with a developmental disability who is a victim, witness, or possible perpetrator of a crime, his or her communication skills may be further impaired by the stress of the situation. During questioning or conversation between a security officer and someone with a developmental disability that involves a communication impairment, the officer must phrase questions and statements clearly and carefully so that meaning is clear. The officer should avoid using terms and words that are complex, technical, or beyond the individual’s knowledge or experience base. Think carefully about the words you choose, your tone of voice, and your mannerisms. Avoid being condescending or patronizing. Establish eye contact with the person with whom you are communicating.

When you think someone may have a developmental disability that will affect his or her communication skills, think of ways to help them communicate with you that are specific to their disability:

There are alternative communication modes a security officer can use besides talking. If the person with a disability fails to reply to questions, is unintelligible, or attempts to demonstrate his or her response without success, other nonverbal communication techniques for asking or answering questions may be used. These include the following:

In summary, it is quite possible that a security officer will have to draw upon a variety of communication styles or a combination of several, as well as the ability to use appropriate words, tones, inflections, body language, eye-to-eye contact, and mannerisms when communicating with persons with developmental disabilities that involve communication impairments. Above all, the key word for the officer is diligence. It may be necessary to say things several times, in several different ways, before you are fully understood. It may be necessary to listen for a long time before an important fact emerges. Each situation will be unique, just as the characteristics, behaviors, and abilities of each person will be unique. Security officers must be aware of all of these components and use them as their experience, knowledge, and instinct guide.

It is important to use the appropriate vocabulary when interacting with an individual with some type of disability. The words we use when dealing with one another can have a significant impact on how we are seen by others and in the actions we may experience in response. With that in mind, here are some alternatives for some common terms that may be seen as hurtful or insulting to those individuals with a disability.