First off, let me say that I truly have no idea. I suppose, at first glance, it would seem that a female would never behave in this way. However, I suppose it is possible that some female dispatcher who had never thought about the victims of rape or had never dealt with one or had never met with any victims before could be that insensitive.
It could very well be true that the dispatcher needed the victim to stop crying so they could get the needed info. But surely there was a better way to tell them that?
The headline to this story is:
911 Dispatcher Tells Rape Victim to ‘Quit Crying’
Apparently, a 20 year old female rape victim called 911 for help and, among other things, the dispatcher who answered seemed to be a real fool and told her to “Quit Crying”.
This dispatcher seemed to have zero empathy for the victim and this victim told the dispatcher this in no uncertain terms.
There is one part of this story that really disturbs me. That is the supervisor of the dispatchers (I take it) made the statement that the dispatcher would not be disciplined since, “the victim has been helped and a suspect has been charged.”
Most every day when I read a newspaper (or a news site), it just gets more and more difficult to believe this is the same country that I have known all my life.
What in the world has happened to people?
In case it’s not clear, I am very much opposed to this 911 dispatcher keeping their job - regardless of their gender. I believe - at a mininum - they should be fired from their job.
911 dispatchers aren’t grief counselors. Their primary job is to gather information, ascertain the nature of the emergency, and dispatch fire/police/EMTs as warranted. I’m told it’s a rather stressful profession.
The dispatcher certainly could have handled the situation better, but think about it…could YOU handle that type of job, day in and day out?
Well the fact that the supervisor hasn’t even reviewed the call and decided that there won’t be any discipline due to the fact the person was caught is unacceptable - and shows why the dispatcher thought it was ok. Would the person be disciplined if the person wasn’t caught - of course not.
People are human beings and should be treated as such. Now of course I don’t know what really happened. But there is a line - if the dispatcher says “stop your damn crying” with zero empathy whatsoever - he/she is actually impeding the gathering of information.
I’m also not going to suggest that there is no room for being a little tough and saying something “look - it’s important we act quickly so I need you to focus and stop crying so we can get someone there ASAP.” But it doesn’t sound to me like that is what happened.
If you listen to the news report in the link, it is obvious the dispatcher is a woman…not sure why you couldn’t tell that from the voice. They distorted the voice of the caller (at least I hope they did…if that is the voice the dispatcher heard I could see why she might be skeptical) on the recording, but the dispatchers voice is clear. And they DID review the call, if you listened to the story. It didn’t come up in the random reviews they do, but they reviewed it after being alerted to the situation. I know we aren’t hearing the whole call, but if the only description the caller gave was “it was a small white boy, you need to catch him quick” I can see where they might need more details. I do agree that the dispatchers tone was a bit dismissive, but I’ve heard worse on other dispatch calls that have made the news.
911 operators are trained to gather information…part of that process involves taking control of a call.
Probably what this operator was attempting to do, if (more than) a bit clumsily.
I agree with the decision to not formally reprimand her. As far as the supervisor saying it’s because the susepct was caught…well, the supervisor was probably trying to explain it off-the-cuff and didn’t think that statement through, much.
Many women prefer not to go to a female gynecologist because they feel that a female doctor is more likely to tell you to “suck it up” and have less sympathy for your issues.
I can’t believe that you can’t believe a woman would be harsh to another woman. Have you never heard of Mean Girls?
I think that the supervisor said what was needed to be said. Anybody who calls a bureaucracy should blamed well know that they aren’t going to get therapy; if not, they need more therapy than can be provided by a 911 operator.
The supervisor need not defend the operator’s actions. Anybody who complains is looking for 911 to be part of some healing/loving process, and that is too tall an order to place on some phone operator.
The dispatcher didn’t say that, though. She said, “Ma’am, you’re going to have to quit crying so I can get the information from you.” They didn’t play the recording of the whole call, but from what I heard, it seems like the dispatcher was trying to get information in a concise and businesslike manner, which is exactly what I would expect a 911 dispatcher to do. I can’t fault her. She needed to get the information out to the officers so they can respond to the situation properly. They’re not expected to be grief counselors. There are other people who are trained for that and can help the victim after the police have arrived on the scene.
How else would you ask the caller to stop crying? It seemed to me the dispatcher was trying to get clear information in a short amount of time. The rapist could still be nearby, and she or someone else could be in danger. The dispatcher wasn’t rude.
“Quit crying,” no matter how many "ma’am"s preceed it, is a terrible phrase to use with anyone who is crying. It has never not once worked to stop crying ever in the history of crying.
“I know this is hard, but I need you to take some deep breaths, and we’ll figure out where you are together. Okay? Deep breath. And again. Okay… Do you see any mail lying around? Is there an address on it?”
Acknowledge. Empathize. Deescalate. Problem solve. It’s not hard. It’s not hard to teach, and with a little practice, it’s not hard to do.
Dispatchers are absolutely trained to help people remain calm or regain calm, in a good dispatch center. That’s HOW they can fulfill the rest of their job duties by getting information and applying it.
Gathering information from callers who are caught up in the emotion of the moment can be one of the more challenging aspects of the job. If a caller is emotionally frozen in a state of hysteria then call takers should resort to their training. One proven technique is persistent repetition - and it can seem unkind.
Persistent repetition involves asking for the same simple information with the exact same words. The call taker increases his/her vocal volume as the query is repeated. There are two schools of thought - increase volume gradually, maintaining a firm voice; or maintain the same volume through several repetitions before dramatically increasing volume all at once. The second option can come off as yelling, though the intent is to break through the caller’s hysteria.
With either track, once the call taker breaks through the hysteria, he/she lowers his voice and changes his tone of voice to a more soothing tone.
Persistent repetition as a technique was codified by reviewing thousands of 9-1-1 calls from hysterical callers in the state of Arizona. The review panel attempted to identify common techniques in use and analyze what methods of breaking through the hysteria worked best. Not surprisingly, no technique works every time. Call takers are advised to vary their approach if one technique is not working.
In the call in this news report the caller did not know her location. That is THE key piece of information a call taker needs before help can be sent. A caller can report something horrendous, but without knowing WHERE that is happening, the 9-1-1 center cannot send the needed help.
In this case the caller seemed to think the 9-1-1 call taker could automatically obtain her location. The call taker could not. Around 15% of the United States population is served by 9-1-1 centers which do not have the ability to automatically obtain the location of a cell phone a caller is using.
The news report highlighted statements made by the caller during the call but only played the two statements from the call taker. Neither were unprofessional in and of themselves, though a review of the entire call would be needed to understand the context.
Telling a caller (not asking - telling) to calm down, stop crying, stop shouting, or any of various other instructions actually works much of the time. The instruction is best coupled with a empathetic phrase. (i.e. Stop crying so I can understand the location to get you the help you need.) To that end the call taker in this report could certainly be counseled in ways to improve.
I’m female and found that what the dispatcher said about not crying was no big deal. Sure, there were probably more diplomatic ways to say that, but it certainly wasn’t with ‘zero sympathy’ or whatever. The thing that should’ve been taken more issue with (if at all) was telling the victim that no one would be caught with the information provided. While that was obviously true, there was no reason to share that with someone so totally distressed. The only thing needed there was a “We’ll be working on it / doing our best, ma’am.” and then let the officers who would interview everyone figure out the specific details. Definitely, no should lose their job. All she was doing, all be it clumsily maybe, was attempt to get the facts.