Vision Standards

[normy0]

I was just wondering what is up with all these vision standards. Is there a reason beyond it? Because honestly I can't figure it out. Almost every position requires 20/100 uncorrected. I believe mine is 20/200 but I wear contacts and my vision is better than 20/20 with them in. The standard...at least to me...makes no sense. When am I ever going to be without contacts? So, any help on the reasoning behind this would be excellent.

[PeeOwed]

Reasonable people can debate the reliability of contacts. That said, in a law enforcement line of work, it's not hard to imagine the possibility of environmental and situational factors that could arise that could impair someone with contact that wouldn't have as adverse effect upon a naturally well-sighted person. Contacts do slip, get irritated, tear, etc. in much more mundane non-performance critical situations. If an authority is giving an officer or agent the responsibility of a firearm, the obligation to have your partner or team-members' back, etc., it is in that authority's interest to have its officers or agents as able bodied and sighted as possible. Given the nature of the range of human population, it's just not necessary to lower uncorrected vision standards (that is, there are plenty of naturally well sighted people out there interested in the job so exceptions for corrected vision can be so stringent).

I'm not saying it's fair, but it is what it is.

[a cashew]

If you can, get LASIK. Best investment I ever made.

In the long run, you will save money and grief by not having to buy contacts, go to the eye doctor, worry about scratching/irritation/losing one.

Even if i never get hired by an agency, I will be glad I got it.

[kip2847]

If you can, get LASIK. Best investment I ever made.

In the long run, you will save money and grief by not having to buy contacts, go to the eye doctor, worry about scratching/irritation/losing one.

Even if i never get hired by an agency, I will be glad I got it.

i agree. i got it and i swear i can see through walls.
Dont go cheap. Do your research. You have one pair of eyes, and last time i heard they can't be replace (might be wrong though).

[FPS1588]

I was just wondering what is up with all these vision standards. Is there a reason beyond it? Because honestly I can't figure it out. Almost every position requires 20/100 uncorrected. I believe mine is 20/200 but I wear contacts and my vision is better than 20/20 with them in. The standard...at least to me...makes no sense. When am I ever going to be without contacts? So, any help on the reasoning behind this would be excellent.
Reasoning is that if you get in a situation, such as a fight, and lose a contact lens, will you still be able to do your job without them. For instance, a deadly force situation where you have to distinguish bad guy from everyone else. If you inadvertently get sprayed by OC, can you still function when your contacts are of no more use to you. Some examples I was given when I used to have 20/200 vision.

[Code Seven]

http://www.officer.com/images/officer.com.jpg

[PeeOwed]

People out there "interested," but not "qualified" or the "best qualified"...which is why California POST recommends no uncorrected vision requirement for soft contact lenses wearers...........You would be surprised at how many people would otherwise be disqualified based on uncorrected vision alone........

If I understand your post correctly, I'm not at all surprised by otherwise able-bodied and minded people getting DQ'd in a lot of professions for factors that are considered trivial by the rest of the world. That's life. However, I am unclear on your California illustration. Are you saying the state of CA recommends uncorrected vision be disregarded/unexamined as long as the candidate's vision can be brought up to standard through soft contacts?

[Code Seven]

http://www.officer.com/images/officer.com.jpg

[bostoncommon]

Hi there,

As a former special police officer, I was not held to some of the standards out in the field today, such as the vision standards. I was in the same boat you're in.

Anyway, I was involved in a physical altercation and was pepper sprayed by my partner. I like to think it was an accident lol

I rubbed my contacts right out of my eyes, and couldn't drive back to the station by myself. A few weeks later I had the LASIK procedure done, it was the best $3800 I ever spent. And that was 6 years ago.

Best of luck!

[a cashew]

mine also came with free lifetime correction so if my vision ever deteriorates they will correct it again.

[1811orBust]

Yeah, but the million dollar question is: How many times do you want them shaping your cornea's with a laser beam?

[AWarr]

Yeah, but the million dollar question is: How many times do you want them shaping your cornea's with a laser beam?

EXACTLY!!!

This should be a ONE TIME correction......PERIOD!

[GreenLine]

People who had LASIK are like recovering alcoholics: they'll preach at you about the benefits of it any chance they get :D.

I'm actually one of them, so I can say that. Best money I ever spent and should have done it sooner. That risk factor tends to look like less of a risk when you've spent your entire life nearly blind as a bat and it has forever kept you from doing the things you've wanted to do.

I realize that doesn't diminish the risk, but it gives you something else to think about besides the risk, alone. And besides, the risk is quite a bit less today than it was even 5 years ago. I'd do it again if I had to.

[1811orBust]

Is it worth it if you are like 20/60?

[GreenLine]

Is it worth it if you are like 20/60?

I have no idea what the degree of impairment is for 20/60, but if it were me and I needed glasses or contacts for daily use and better corrected vision for my career, I'd still do it. If you don't have all of those issues, you'll have to evaluate it on your own. I was 20/800 uncorrected, so it was a no-brainer for me.

I believe a lot of the problems with eye surgeries in the past were not with necessarily with LASIK, but with other types that LASIK "evolved" from - RK, PRK, and the like. Cost was also high and has come down quite a bit.

If you decide to get it, do your homework and be informed. My info is dated because I got it almost 8 years ago, but even back then, the "risk" was minimal.

[hunter2good]

alright... so my vision was 20/200 because of a stigmatism... my cornea was to thin to do lasik, so i had PRK done in march, and even with that surgery my eye sight wont ever get bettter then 20/30 at best!! Im in the same situation, trying to figure out what i can do with my eye sight being the way it is... I just took a eye sight test through another job and they had me at 20/50! I would love to become a BLM ranger or warden, but they all require 20/20 corrected. The only thing is for me, is now that i have 20/30ish, my eye doc, said contacts or glasses wouldnt be able to help me... so here i sit, pondering what i can do. I belive i am gonna try to get contacts and see if they do infact work. granted my vision is still flucating from the surgery still...

any more info on this type of stuff, please post on here or PM me!
Thanks
Chris