ABSTRACT
Prior to the 1970s most studies on U.S. workers took a segmentation approach-ignoring as sources of stress the family and often even the work environment. The family unit was assumed to be isolated from work by virtue of its specialization, particularly family division of labor based on gender. The labor force, dominated by men, meant that working men could compartmentalize their lives focusing on work while at work and then leaving work to relax in a home, made comfortable by a full-or part-time housewife or stay-at-home mother. This was considered comfortable by a full-or part-time housewife or stay-at-home mother. When workers’ stress emerged, individual characteristics such as personality and coping skills were assumed to be at the root. Thus, stress prevention strategies focused on helping workers cope with job demands. Without question, the importance of individual
Historical Context 139 Police Culture 141
Mechanical Solidarity 141 Exchange Theory 144 Feminist Theory 145
Academic and Legislative Response 148 Breaking the Silence 148
Model Departmental Policies and Programs 150 Chicago Police Department 151 No Mandatory Arrest 151 One-Hour Rule 153 Independent Investigators 153 Posting Policies 153
Conclusion 154 Endnotes 155 References 156
differences cannot be ignored. However, scientific evidence suggests that certain working conditions are stressful to most people (Strong & DeVault, 1992, p. 380). Such evidence argues for primary prevention strategies that emphasize redesigning working conditions (e.g., level of job autonomy, safety, task meaning, deadlines, and production expectations). Whether the primary cause of job stress lies in worker characteristics or working conditions, the impact of work stress on nonwork domains received little attention (Strong & DeVault, 1992).
