Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
When training staff in the use of physical force it is important that the techniques provided enable staff to achieve the desired outcome, i.e., the physical control of an individual with minimal risk to all concerned or the successful defence of a person likely to be attacked. Therefore, it is fundamentally important that the physical skills taught to staff complement their ability to achieve the desired effect.
Physical use of force, like any other physical activity, requires the use of various physical motor skills. Motor skills can be defined as movements that are performed with a desired goal in mind. In sporting environments this may mean achieving such aims as holding a handstand in gymnastics. In physical restraint it means achieving the aim of staff being able to use a technique to physically control a violent person whilst reducing the harm to them and to others, and in self-defence it is the ability to defend oneself quickly and effectively..
The balance therefore in developing any system of self defence or physical restraint must be to make staff effective by the efficient use of skill and energy by designing skills and techniques that achieve their desired objective in real operational situations.
Gross Motor Skills v Fine Motor Skills & Stress
There has been a lot of research in recent years about the relationship between motor skills and performance, especially how certain skills respond when used in situation of distress or high pressure and the findings are very important for all of us who use or teach physical force.
To understand this a little better lets firstly define what a 'Gross' and a 'Fine' motor skill are.
A fine motor skill is one that is performed by the smaller muscles in the body such as the hands of fingers and which involve good hand-eye co-ordination. Activities such as playing the piano, handwriting or typing would be considered fine motor skills. Fine motor skills work best and achieve optimal performance in situations of low arousal. For example, if a concert pianist is about to walk on stage at the Royal Albert Hall the audience will be hushed to allow the pianist to concentrate on the complexity of what he or she is about to perform. In many hospitals now classical music is played in the operating theatre to reduce the arousal of a surgeon about to undertake brain surgery on a sedated patient.
Gross motor skills are skills which generally involve the actions of the larger muscle groups and examples of gross-motor activity would be walking, running, pushing and / or pulling movements. Gross motor skills are also referred to as 'strength events' because it normally occurs in situations where a high level of arousal is taking place, which serves to increase the optimal performance level of the gross motor skill being used.
Therefore, if we are to prepare people to use force for either their defence or to have to control an aggressive or violent person, in situations of high emotional arousal, the we have to train them in techniques that involve gross motor-skill construction if they are to be effective in what they do whist optimising their personal energy stores efficiently.
Training someone in techniques that involve 'fine' or more 'complex' motor skill construction will only work if they are to be used in situations of low or non-existent stress and intensity. However, if the person is then expected to use these techniques in situations of high emotional arousal then the technique is very likely to fail and the margin for error for an injury or a fatality will increase.
Too Many Techniques
Another factor that increases the risk of failure is that people are taught too many techniques in self defence and restraint classes. The net result of this is that they will forget what they have been taught. If they forget what they have been taught then there are only a few basic options left - a) freeze and become a victim or b) revert to something else.
In the former people get hurt and hurt others because they hesitate, they doubt their ability and this increases the margin for error. In the latter people 'revert to type'. What this means is that they will default to a technique that is more effective that they can do that they have learned elsewhere. Although this is not too much of an issue in a self defence situation, it can create problems in an arrest / control and restraint situation and can result is someone using a full-nelson or a choke hold or throwing someone to the floor and then placing a knee on their neck or back. Although these techniques may be effective, they can also be deadly.
Nice Training
Traditionally (and even still today) use of force training by many organisations is taught in 'static' environments where a skill is practiced without any pressure. This is primarily because many organisations do not wish to train staff in pressurised scenario situations for fear of someone being injured and then the organisation being sued for the injury.
However, the dichotomy is that if organisations fail to train people properly to meet the demands of the task they are expected to undertake then it is highly likely that whatever is taught in a 'nice' and 'safe' environment, is very likely to possibly fail when the member of staff is finds themselves in a hostile and violent confrontation.
In short, staff enjoy the training because it is 'fun' so the feedback is good because they 'enjoyed it'. However, it is a false economy. The fun they had in training is likely to turn into real distress when what they were taught fails them in a confrontation, and there is more bad news too.
Some companies, in an attempt to avoid being held accountable, will actually make the staff feel as though they are at fault by saying that the technique failed because 'they probably didn't do it properly', and to prove this they will show them their own feedback from the course which reflects that they 'enjoyed' the course and so could do what they were shown. However, what they were shown was only designed to work in situations of no pressure. The net result a member of staff is hung out to dry.
Ability
When we refer to ability, we draw reference to stable and enduring traits that for the most part, are genetically determined and as such underlie an individual's skilled performance. Abilities range from visual activity to body configuration (height, weight and build), numeric ability, reaction speed, manual dexterity, kinaesthetic sensitivity, etc.
However, there is also the difference in gender to consider. This is an important factor to consider if the training is to be provided to a predominantly female workforce who are, for example, expected to physically control male service users.
Recent research has highlighted some fundamental differences between men and women with regard to aspects of personal ability. Therefore, although men and women should be equal in terms of their rights of opportunity and the right to exercise their full potential, men and women are definitely not identical in their innate abilities. And if these fundamental differences are not addressed in a competent training package, they will only serve to increase the risk to all concerned.
For example, the Allied Dunbar National Fitness Survey found that men are taller and heavier than women and that men have more active muscle tissue and an increased blood volume than females, contributing to them being faster, stronger, more powerful and having greater endurance.
A summary of some of the findings from the survey are itemised below:
- Men and Women have the same number of muscle fibres. However, the muscle fibres in men tend to be larger and this is thought to be linked to the male hormone testosterone. As a result men tend to be stronger and more powerful than women because they have a greater lean muscle mass.
- Men have 10% larger hearts than women therefore having a greater capacity to pump more blood and oxygen around the body to feed the increased muscle mass.
- Men have 10% larger lungs than women resulting in a greater capacity to oxygenate the increased blood more effectively.
- Men also have 1 - 1.5 litres of blood more than women and within the blood men have approximately 5.4 million blood cells per microlitre of blood whilst women have 4.8 million red blood cells per microlitre of blood. This means that men have a greater capacity for carrying oxygen in their blood than their female counterparts.
- Women also carry 10% more of their overall weight as fat than males. Therefore, the female heart has to work harder in order to deliver the same amount of oxygen to working muscles in a given time interval, resulting in men having more active muscle tissue than females contributing to them being faster, stronger, more powerful, having higher aerobic and anaerobic power and greater endurance, than the average female.
What this research shows is that the physical and physiological differences between the sexes means that men have disproportionate levels of strength, power and endurance than females do. In personal safety terms this means that men will be able to rely on greater reserves of strength, power and endurance during a physical conflict situation.
In the context of using physical force this means that men will be able to rely on greater reserves of strength, power and endurance during a physical conflict situation. On that basis women who will be expected to use physical force will require more effective methods of control, especially if they are expected to control a male. Men, by contrast, should, generally, be able to use less force to achieve the same outcome.
So why is this important?
Under the Corporate Manslaughter & Corporate Homicide Act 2007 Courts are now allowed to look at the culture of the organisation. They are allowed to look at what is being taught and why. We can demonstrate what works and what doesn't.
The question you need to ask yourself is this - can you?
Mark Dawes
Director and National Coach Tutor, NFPS Ltd.
