by Paul Gullon-Scott BSc MA MSc MSc FMBPSS
Digital forensic investigators (DFIs) are routinely exposed to traumatic material, such as child sexual abuse material (CSAM), in their line of work. This exposure places them at significant risk for secondary traumatic stress (STS), burnout, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Recent lawsuits by content moderators against global corporations highlight the consequences of failing to provide adequate mental health support for employees exposed to distressing material. This article examines the potential impact on employers if they fail to provide adequate support, including possible litigation. It also highlights key challenges and offers actionable recommendations to mitigate risks.
Psychological Toll of Investigations
Digital forensic investigators play a crucial role in identifying and prosecuting crimes involving traumatic digital content, including CSAM. The psychological toll of this work has been well-documented, with research showing increased risks of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and compassion fatigue among these professionals.
Recent legal actions by content moderators have brought attention to the ramifications of neglecting employee mental health in similar roles, underscoring the importance of organisational responsibility.
Employers of digital forensic investigators (DFIs) must recognise the parallels between content moderation and digital forensics, as both professions involve prolonged exposure to traumatic, graphic, and distressing content. Without adequate mental health support, organisations risk significant consequences, including legal liability, reputational damage, and operational inefficiencies.
For example, Facebook’s $52 million settlement addressed claims from content moderators who developed mental health conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), due to repeated exposure to disturbing material. Similarly, lawsuits filed by content moderators in Kenya highlighted poor working conditions and inadequate psychological support, drawing global attention to the importance of employee welfare in such roles.
Burnout and Moral Injury
These risks are not limited to social media companies. Law enforcement agencies and private firms employing DFIs have also faced challenges due to insufficient mental health resources. A notable example is the increasing burnout among forensic investigators tasked with analysing evidence in criminal cases involving child exploitation or violent crimes.
Many investigators grapple with moral injury, a profound sense of helplessness or guilt, especially in cases where their efforts fail to deliver justice for victims. Compounding these challenges, individuals performing dual roles, such as paedophile online investigators (POLIT) and forensic examiners, face even higher levels of psychological distress and lower job satisfaction compared to those focused on a single role.
Without mental health programmes or counselling services, such employees are more likely to experience decreased productivity, higher absenteeism, and even resignations, further straining organisational resources. Additionally, failure to address these concerns can damage an organisation’s reputation, as the public becomes increasingly aware of workplace mental health issues.
Organisations prioritising the well-being of DFIs can not only mitigate these risks but also foster a more supportive and sustainable work environment, ultimately improving both employee satisfaction and overall operational performance.
Consequences of Inadequate Support
Employers who fail to address the mental health needs of digital forensic investigators (DFIs) face serious legal, financial, and operational risks. Lawsuits over inadequate mental health support—such as those filed against Facebook and the UK Ministry of Defence—have resulted in substantial settlements.
Beyond legal liability, organizations may face regulatory fines for failing to meet occupational health and safety standards. In the UK, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) enforces these regulations and has the authority to impose unlimited fines. The Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008 expanded penalties, while the Sentencing Council’s 2016 guidelines led to a sharp rise in fines—from £18 million in 2014/15 to nearly £70 million in 2016/17.
Neglecting mental health support also impacts workforce stability. Burnout and PTSD drive experienced DFIs to leave, forcing organizations to recruit and train replacements—a costly and time-consuming process. Meanwhile, remaining staff face heavier workloads, compounding stress and reducing productivity. Workplace stigma further erodes morale, creating a cycle of attrition and operational strain.
Implementing Interventions
To mitigate these risks, employers should implement a comprehensive set of mental health interventions. These interventions should span multiple organizational levels and address both prevention and support:
- Technological Solutions: Implement advanced content filtering and artificial intelligence systems to reduce direct human exposure to traumatic material where possible, while maintaining investigative effectiveness.
- Regular Psychological Support Programs: Implement mandatory counseling sessions and psychological screenings on a scheduled basis. These sessions should be conducted by qualified mental health professionals with experience in trauma-related stress, allowing DFIs to process their experiences in a safe, confidential environment.
- Resilience Training and Skill Development: Establish comprehensive resilience training programs that equip employees with practical coping mechanisms and stress management techniques. These programs should include both initial training for new hires and ongoing refresher courses for experienced staff.
- Exposure Management Policies: Create and enforce clear guidelines around exposure limits to traumatic content, including implementing tenure limits for DFIs in high-exposure roles. This should include structured rotation schedules and clear protocols for when and how investigators can take breaks from particularly disturbing cases.
- Workplace Culture Initiatives: Foster a supportive workplace environment by actively reducing mental health stigma through awareness campaigns, promoting open dialogue about psychological challenges, and providing anonymous support channels for those who prefer confidential assistance.
- Management Training and Oversight: Develop specialized training programs for supervisors and managers, focusing on early identification of psychological distress among team members and appropriate intervention strategies. This should include regular check-ins and standardized assessment protocols.
Final Thoughts
The psychological challenges faced by DFIs are deeply significant and align closely with those encountered by content moderators. It is essential for employers to recognise their moral, legal, and operational responsibility to address these challenges with care and foresight.
By prioritising the implementation of robust mental health support systems, nurturing a culture of empathy and well-being, and leveraging innovative technological solutions, organisations can safeguard their workforce while fostering a healthy, supportive environment. These efforts not only protect employees but also help reduce potential legal and reputational risks.
The recent lawsuits against global corporations serve as a stark reminder of the consequences of inaction. For employers of DFIs, the path forward lies in prioritising employee well-being, ensuring ethical practices, and building resilient organisational structures.
Paul Gullon-Scott BSc MA MSc MSc FMBPSS is a former Digital Forensic Investigator with nearly 30 years of service at Northumbria Police in the UK, specializing in child abuse cases. As a recognized expert on the mental health impacts of digital forensic work, Paul now works as a Higher Assistant Psychologist at Roseberry Park Hospital in Middlesbrough and is the developer of a pioneering well-being framework to support digital forensics investigators facing job-related stress. He recently published the research paper “UK-based Digital Forensic Investigators and the Impact of Exposure to Traumatic Material” and has chosen to collaborate with Forensic Focus in order to raise awareness of the mental health effects associated with digital forensics. Paul can be contacted in confidence via LinkedIn.
Further Reading
- College of Policing. (2019). Supporting the wellbeing of Internet Child Abuse Teams (ICAT).
- Irwin Mitchell. (2022). Helping cybercrime specialist get compensation after Ministry of Defence denied him support. Retrieved from https://www.irwinmitchell.com
- NPR. (2020). Facebook to pay $52 million to content moderators with PTSD. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2020/05/12/854998616/in-settlement-facebook-to-pay-52-million-to-content-moderators-with-ptsd
- Redmond, T. (2023). How we can protect the protectors. Frontiers in Psychology.
- Sentencing Council. (2016). Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter, and food safety and hygiene offences: Definitive guideline. Sentencing Council. https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk
- Seigfried-Spellar, K. C. (2017). Assessing the psychological well-being and coping mechanisms of law enforcement investigators vs. digital forensic examiners. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology.
- Strickland, C., Kloess, J. A., & Larkin, M. (2023). An exploration of the personal experiences of digital forensics analysts. Frontiers in Psychology.
- Tehrani, N. (2018). Psychological well-being and workability in child abuse investigators. Occupational Medicine.
- The Guardian. (2024). Kenya: Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of severe PTSD. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/18/why-former-facebook-moderators-in-kenya-are-taking-legal-action
- Wilson-Kovacs, D. (2021). Dirty work? Policing online indecency in digital forensics. The British Journal of Criminology.
