So you’re ordered to
a fitness-for-duty exam
One of the more upsetting events in the
life of any law enforcement officer can be an
order to appear for a fitness-for-duty exam-
ination. These exams can take the form of a
requirement to see a psychiatrist or psychol-
ogist as well as a medical doctor. The biggest
problem in these instances is the fact that
employers need to give little supportive doc-
umentation to compel compliance with the
order – even if a good argument can be made
that the order was given for harassing or dis-
criminatory purposes. The general rule that
an officer must follow a lawful, albeit ques-
tionable, order leaves the officer with a difficult choice: Either
obey the order and run the risk of a negative finding or defy the
order and be charged with insubordination.
In most instances, the officer has little choice but to honor
the order, unless there is absolutely no legitimate reason pro-
vided. Generally speaking, employers will provide a fig leaf, at
the very least, to support such a demand. Courts will also gen-
erally give employers wide latitude in ordering examinations if
there is a “reasonable basis” for sending the officer for such an
evaluation.
Assuming an officer is required to comply with a demand
12
NEW JERSEY COPS
■ JANUARY 2019
for a psychological examination, some steps
should be taken immediately. The officer
should document any opposition to the rea-
sons for the order. This can take the form of
an acknowledgment of compliance, while
simultaneously objecting to the lack of legit-
imate reasons for the order. Some examiners
may require the officer to sign some type of
waiver form. Prior to even meeting with the
examiner, officers should request a copy of
any form that they might be required to sign
and read it carefully. Ideally, the officer should
also review it with an experienced lawyer.
At the time of the actual meeting with the psychologist, an of-
ficer can also take some steps to limit exposure to a negative
finding. This can include a demand that the records of the psy-
chological examination be made available to the officer; that
the interview be tape-recorded or similar actions designed to
memorialize what takes place during the psychological exam-
ination are taken. While certain psychiatrists or psychologists
to whom many officers are sent will reject such demands, at the
least an officer should document his or her requests and the
objection to continuing. Officers can also advise employers of
their refusal by the examiner to hear those demands, with a re-