Active bystandership across public safety

In the high-stakes corridors of correctional facilities, on the frantic scenes of medical emergencies, and during the split-second decisions of patrol work, a single moment can define a career or end a life. As a psychologist working in the public sector, I am well aware of the stressors that plague these professions.

Throughout my work delivering training across the country, I have seen the elevated risks of suicide, the creeping shadows of burnout, and the erosion of institutional knowledge as a post-pandemic workforce undergoes a massive generational shift.

In my role with the Active Bystandership for Law Enforcement (ABLEopens in new window)® and Heroesopens in new window® programs, leadership frequently shares a sobering reality with me: in many jurisdictions, more than 75% of the workforce has fewer than 5 years of experience. When I combine this lack of "street-level" or "facility-level" experience with the unique psychological inhibitors of high-rank hierarchies, the result is a perfect storm for preventable mistakes and misconduct.

For years, "duty to intervene" policies have existed on paper. But as psychologists, we know that a policy is not a behavior. To bridge the gap between rules and reality, my colleagues and I at ABLE and Heroes have implemented an evidence and research-informed framework to safeguard staff and the public.

The legal and ethical mandate: An evolving landscape

While it is important to note that case law is never static, the legal obligation of public safety professionals to intervene is well settled. In law enforcement, this duty has been upheld since Byrd v. Brishke (1972), with subsequent case law emphasizing the prevention of harm and the mitigation of individual liability (Figueroa v. Mazza, 2016; Yang v. Hardin, 1994).

The correctional field has seen similar, often tragic, instances of this mandate being reinforced. In 2022, the department of justice announced the sentencing of a former Alabama department of corrections lieutenant for failing to intervene while a subordinate assaulted unresisting, handcuffed inmates. More recently, this can be seen with the investigations into the New York State department of corrections regarding the death of Robert Brooks.

New precedents continue to emerge in the fire and EMS sectors as well. Including the widely scrutinized Marion County fire department incident in Florida. A case where responders allegedly engaged in violent hazing and failed to intervene. Which has gone on to illustrate how inaction can create significant legal exposure while simultaneously eroding organizational culture and public trust (Assunção, 2025). All of these scenarios underscore a haunting truth: the bystander’s silence is often as damaging as the actor’s violence.

The science of silence: Why policy isn’t enough

Why do people stand by and watch harm happen? This is the central question I explore with participants. We move beyond simple "compliance training" by grounding our work in foundational psychological research. We challenge trainees to grapple with the findings of Latané and Darley (1970) on the diffusion of responsibility and the Milgram (1963) experiments on obedience to authority. By discussing the ethical distress experienced by Milgram’s subjects, my colleagues and I help responders recognize that the pressure to remain silent within a hierarchy is a powerful biological urge to remain a member of the ingroup, not a character flaw. I invite my colleagues to recall our shared understanding that punitive-based learning is largely ineffective; therefore, active bystandership is not a finger-pointing exercise for those who fail to intervene. It is a journey into understanding the "why" behind human behavior so we can move responders from mere self-awareness to concrete, skill-based action.

One of the most profound shifts in these programs is the redefinition of loyalty. In traditional public safety culture, loyalty often means "having someone's back" by covering for their mistakes. I work to transform this into the concept of Constructive Loyalty: the idea that the most loyal thing you can do for a peer is to prevent them from making a career-ending mistake. Even medical students who are deeply immersed in clinical science, ethical training, and the gravity of how their actions affect others consistently share with us the significant challenges they face when providing peer feedback regarding potential harm. To address this, we piloted the Heroes health service-focused module at the Anne Burnett Marion School of Medicine at Texas Christian Universityopens in new window. During this program, experienced physicians shared "I wish I knew then what I know now" narratives regarding missed interventions. These stories urge the next generation of providers to prevent foreseeable harm, thereby safeguarding both their own professional integrity and the public’s trust in the medical profession.

Evidence-informed outcomes: ABLE and Heroes

The impact of this training is no longer theoretical; it is increasingly supported by emerging research (Isaza, 2025; Kurtz & Tucker, 2023) and is rooted in a mixed-methods approach that uses qualitative feedback, practitioner experience, and training-volume metrics.

Since 2020, the ABLE project has seen unprecedented growth:

• 432 ABLE agencies across 43 U.S. states and 3 Canadian provinces.
• 3,169 instructors trained.
• 169,000+ officers at ABLE agencies serving over 181 million community members.

The Heroes program (launched in 2023) has expanded into corrections, fire, EMS, and healthcare. To date:

• Seven correctional/criminal justice agencies and three fire/rescue/EMS agencies have adopted the curriculum.
• One state criminal justice training academy uses the program to train all correctional officers in the state.
• Just under 1,000+ agency instructors and over 20 national instructors are now active.

My colleagues and I have closely monitored Train-the-Trainer feedback in Heroes (n = 600+), and the data suggest a high level of buy-in:

• 94% "very satisfied" with the effectiveness of national instructors.
• 84% "strongly agree" they will apply what they learned.
• 83% "strongly agree" that the training engaged students in collaborative learning.
• 90% "strongly agree" they see a need for this training in their line of work.

At the Anne Arundel County (Maryland) detention facility, they measured knowledge and the frequency of active bystander behavior before the implementation of Heroes and one year after. The results showed significant improvements in staff perceptions of the intervention. Superintendent Christopher Klein summarized the goal perfectly: “The purpose of active bystandership is to prevent harm and save careers and maybe even the lives of the people we work with.”

The most moving data points are often the anonymous reflections from the trainees themselves. One agency instructor in corrections shared this after a session with my colleagues, Ian and Mike:

"I wanted to thank you for the time and effort you put in to produce a great class. To be honest, I was asked if I wanted to attend the training and was a little hesitant. I feel all training is beneficial, so I decided to say yes. I was truly unsure what the class was about and assumed it was a 'snitch class' or something about reporting misconduct. Ian and Mike (Heroes National Instructors) did an amazing job at the beginning of class to make the participants aware of what the class is really about. What I took from that was the class is about us, our partners and how to intervene prior to or early on to mitigate mistakes or misconduct. Hopefully when I instruct, I can relay the fact I was hesitant at first as well and how I bought into the program based off what I saw in the training. Throughout the course I was able to gain even more passion in the HEROES program and how it could assist my partners and the department."

The role of the public service psychologist

As psychologists, we are guided by the APA ethical principles of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence—the obligation to act for the benefit of others and do no harm (American Psychological Association, 2017). We are also called to the principle of Justice, ensuring that all persons have access to high-quality, psychologically informed services.

The training landscape in public safety is at risk due to budget constraints and limited access to training grounded in psychological science. We must recognize that even if you do not work directly in police, corrections, or fire/rescue, or healthcare/hospital settings, active bystandership has life-saving implications for all of humanity. For those looking to dive deeper into these concepts, I highly recommend two seminal texts: Ervin Staub, PhD’s The Roots of Goodness and Evil and Catherine Sanderson, PhD’s Why We Act. Both provide essential frameworks for understanding how to move from passive bystander status to active intervention.

I call on all of us as psychologists, those working in or alongside public safety, to learn more and advocate strongly for these models. We know that a rule or a law (e.g., the "duty to intervene") is not enough to overcome the social inhibitors that prevent a peer from stepping in. People need quality training to unpack these psychological concepts and build the skills to overcome them. This cross-disciplinary approach reinforces our unique role as psychologists in guiding organizational change, advancing ethical practice, and enhancing safety across the full spectrum of public-service professions.

References