NEWS
Comprehensive framework urgently needed to ensure officers choosing to carry naloxone are fully trained, protected, and supported
NALOXONE DEBATE
and it’s not fair on officers either. There need to be firm agreements in place that clarify roles and responsibilities, so the right people respond. “If officers are trained and equipped
As more forces continue to rollout the medication, designed to reverse opioid overdoses, the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) is continuing to press the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the Home Office for clear guidance on training, storage, clinical oversight, and data monitoring. Discussions around police forces introducing naloxone emerged into the public domain back in 2018, with Durham Constabulary announcing it would be one of the first police forces in the country to introduce it into custody suites. Then in 2019, West Midlands Police became the first force in the country to train frontline officers to administer the emergency medication. Since then, according to the latest government data, the majority of forces are continuing its roll out, while others are piloting, or are due to pilot. Two forces, Greater Manchester Police and Suffolk Constabulary, stated they do not plan on using naloxone. Asides from clear guidance, PFEW has
always held concerns over the impact it could have on public safety, the extra pressure placed on officers and the impact on them in the event anything
06 | POLICE | AUGUST | 2025 goes wrong.
PFEW Operational Policing Lead Simon Kempton said: “Our position has always been clear - we don’t oppose use of naloxone, and we understand it has proven useful, however we do have an issue if it is imposed on officers to be used. We would prefer if officers volunteer themselves. We know officers in several forces across England and
“It’s about making sure officers
aren’t put at risk professionally, legally, or emotionally without the proper structures in place.”
Wales already volunteer and we expect IOPC to keep their commitment to support our officers from misconduct investigations, unless there is ‘clear evidence of intentional misuse’. “An opioid overdose is a serious medical emergency. It requires professional clinical care, and that’s what paramedics are trained for. We’re deeply concerned by the prospect of police officers, simply by having naloxone, being dispatched in place of ambulance services. That’s not safe for the public,
with naloxone, the danger is they get pulled further into the space of health professionals - being sent out to overdoses proactively, which we’re already seeing in other areas of policing. This not only puts extra pressure on police, but it could lead to ambulance responses being downgraded, simply because officers are present. That’s not how emergency care should work. “There’s also the very real issue of professional jeopardy. We’ve seen legal advice that suggests any death following an incident involving naloxone - whether it’s used or not - could trigger a serious investigation. Even if an officer acts in good faith and follows their training to the letter, they could still end up under investigation by the IOPC. That’s an enormous burden to place on individuals who are simply trying to help. “We need clear guidance on training, storage, clinical oversight, and data monitoring, as this still hasn’t been delivered. We urgently need a proper framework to ensure if officers do carry naloxone,
they’re properly trained, protected, and supported. “What we’re trying to do is strike the right balance. There are officers who feel strongly about carrying naloxone, and we support them. But there are many who are deeply uncomfortable with it - and we absolutely defend their right not to carry it. This isn’t about blocking progress; it’s about making sure officers aren’t put at risk professionally, legally, or emotionally without the proper structures in place.”
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
