News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
May 1
Mental illness and depression are public health issues, which have been the subject of debate on college campuses long before the tragic shooting at Virginia Tech.
Last year, the Bazelon Center, a nonprofit, legal advocacy organization for which I work, represented a George Washington University student who voluntarily sought hospital treatment for depression and as a result faced disciplinary action by the university administration and was subsequently suspended from school and barred from campus. In another suit, we represented a Hunter College student who also voluntarily admitted herself to the hospital for treatment of depression and as a consequence was locked out of her dorm room by the college administration.
Such responses by colleges send students who seek help for mental illness the wrong message. When students have done the right thing and reached out for help, removing them from colleges sends the message that they have done something wrong and are not wanted on campus. It also inappropriately isolates these students from their community and the supports they need during a time of crisis. Moreover, these policies may actually increase the risk of harm by discouraging students from getting help for themselves or others.
In the aftermath of incidents like that at Virginia Tech, people often look for quick solutions to re-establish a sense of safety. Many commentators have suggested removing students who show signs of mental illness from campus. Some lawmakers have even suggested removing students’ privacy protections. However, these short-sighted reactions will only discourage students from seeking help. Instead, colleges should be committed to the success of all students, including those with depression or other mental illnesses.
To that end, colleges should make suicide prevention a priority and acknowledge, but not stigmatize, mental health problems. Whether on campuses or in our communities, individuals with mental health problems need ready access to counseling and other support systems without long delays and without fear of repercussions. Colleges can take actions to encourage students to seek counseling and mental health treatment through campus services or other available avenues. Colleges can integrate mental health information into student orientation and other aspects of campus life. Colleges can provide training so that faculty, staff and students know what supports and services are available, how to make referrals, and how to access supports and services. They can encourage the formation of peer-run groups on campus to support students with depression and other mental illnesses. Colleges can ensure that emergency psychiatric services are available at all times, either on campus or in the community. Mental health programs need to get out of the clinic and reach out to people who demonstrate a need for services in order to engage them and keep them engaged.
Students are often faced with a dilemma: to seek help or accommodation of their mental illness and jeopardize their education, or to forego needed mental heath treatment. Colleges need to address this dilemma by removing barriers to seeking treatment and by providing accommodations.
In educational settings, such accommodations should include an offer of liberal voluntary leave for students who feel that they would benefit from time off, ensuring that their education is not jeopardized for taking leave. Colleges can also provide for reduced course loads, exam extensions or postponements, medical withdrawal and pro-rated financial reimbursement.
Privacy is also critical. Students are often fearful that they will be denied jobs, housing or educational or social opportunities if they disclose their mental illness. To encourage students to seek treatment, colleges must ensure confidentiality. Those who suggest changing privacy rules wrongly imply that the laws prohibit colleges from disclosing information about students who may be a danger to themselves or others. However, under current laws, counseling centers and colleges can disclose information about a student to the extent needed to protect the student or others from imminent and serious injury, if the student will not consent to interventions that will ensure safety. Colleges can also act proactively before a crisis occurs. For example, they can ask students upon matriculation to identify individuals who can be contacted in case of a medical or psychiatric emergency.
Financial issues are often paramount. While students may have adequate health insurance covering inpatient and outpatient services while in college, coverage often terminates upon medical leave from the university. Health insurance may also exclude inpatient services and place limits on the number of outpatient visits. Colleges should be cognizant of this reality and work to assist students without coverage and advocate for expanded coverage.
Finally, colleges can ensure that students will not be penalized or suffer negative consequences for seeking help. Institutions must guarantee that each student will be treated on a case-by-case basis. In limited circumstances, when individualized assessment suggests that even with accommodation a student cannot safely remain on campus, the student can be placed on leave. Such individually tailored practices ensure that if students are asked to take leave, it will only be due to dangerousness, not discrimination.
The Bazelon Center has done important legal work to remove the stigma and punitive cloud surrounding campus mental health. Clearly, in the coming weeks many students at Virginia Tech and other schools will suffer the emotional repercussions of having lost their friends and peers. Like the plaintiffs at George Washington and Hunter, they will need help and will need to know that it is safe for them to ask for it.
Universities need to be at the forefront of this effort, ensuring that counseling centers get the support and staffing they need to do their jobs effectively and removing all of the barriers that now keep students from getting help. They must afford students ready access to appropriate resources, provide confidentiality, remove stigma, and adopt policies that make help-seeking safe. Disciplinary measures or automatic suspensions have no place in campus health care.
When I suggested just the same — http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2007/04/20/socol — I was blasted by some university counselors for telling students that there could be negative consequences for seeking help on campus. You have responded more effectively than I did. Thank you.
The issues of confidentiality and support stretch beyond forms and policies. As I said on April 20th, counseling offices are no place for undergraduate employees, those services must be offered in discreet places, and students seeking help should not worry about being tossed off campus for being honest.
Too many university counseling centers do more than provide minimal or poor services, their structures and policies actually discourage students from seeking help. I can not imagine how that can be good for anyone.
Ira Socol, Michigan State University, at 1:45 pm EDT on May 1, 2007
I’m confused. What did Virginia Tech do to Cho that causes you to be upset? Didn’t they treat him the way you are recommending here? Aren’t the tragic failure of their soft-pedaled treatment the reason why people are demanding change?
Stalking behavior alone should have warranted Cho’s removal from campus, mental illness or no. It shouldn’t have taken the coeds to press charges, either. Once I got a cryptic note from a guy I’d dated three weeks, inserted into my mailbox, describing funerals in Japan and asking how I wanted to be remembered. It was just “creepy.” I ended up asking my pastor about it who didn’t hesitate: call the police. What do you know, two judges later and the law slapped the maximum penalty restraining order on the guy. All the while I questioned whether or not it was really that serious. Read up on stalkers. It IS that serious, especially if they’re writing about it.
The mental health field not only pushes people not to take responsibility for their own health, but disempowers potential victims from seeing themselves as targets of real potential violence. Nobody wants to accuse someone of being that wacko, just for the reasons you cite here. But if it was encouraged to take it seriously, would 32 people be dead?
Confused, at 7:20 pm EDT on May 2, 2007
It is, alas, inapporpriate for an atty to writnaive e about mental illness. It perpetuates the conflation of legal & clinical expertise.
It is plausible that Cho was not ‘depressed’ at all. His isolation and virtual mutism since childhood suggest a more ominous illness. If his ‘quiet’ was incompetently assessed as Depression when he was seen- involuntarily — at a mental health clinic, he may have been prescribed an antidepressant. This could have caused a worsening to paranoid delusion & murderous rage — an iatrogenic catastrophe.
Assessing imminent danger requires much skill, a sound history, and more than a check list. The legal pressure NOT to hold him longer encouraged an inadequate assessment.
The best lesson: when in doubt- hold.
No fancy policy change needed; just good clinical judgment by a diligent professional.
Sara hartley, MD, M.D. psychiatrist at UCB, at 9:45 pm EDT on May 2, 2007
Dr. Hartley, Your conclusion of “when in doubt-hold” raises a number of legal issues. Since you say that it is “inappropriate” for a lawyer to write about clinical issues, I, as a lawyer, say that it is appropriate for a doctor to write about legal issues.
Of course, one can argue that some lawyers do know something about science and/or medicine (especially one at the Bazelon center), and some doctors know something about law. But, you don’t want to concede this. Therefore, I will simply say that your view that depriving people of their freedom because they might behave in ways that don’t comport with what you consider to be societal standards is not only unconstitutional (i.e. illegal) but bad policy.
You are, essentially arguing that if there is less than a 50% chance that someone is mentally ill they should be deprived of their freedom and held in a facility. This is, well, crazy.
Likewise, assuming that mental illness does exist, the fact that you advocating putting people in facilities against their will if there is a “doubt” as to whether they will behave dangerously will simply discourage people from seeking less invasive treatment. In the USA, most people don’t want to be put in asylums, and would probably like to have whatever problems they have cured on an outpatient basis if at all possible.
Larry, at 2:55 pm EDT on May 3, 2007
Excellent article Ms. Bower,
There is no question that the Virginia Tech tragedy should be the catalyst for comprehensive and compassionate mental health services for university students. Our culture places them under tremendous pressure to succeed in a very competitive society.
But (Maybe I shouldn’t use the word but.) However, there is a common tread with Virginia Tech, Columbine, Lancaster, and other massacres, “guns.” They are easier to obtain than anti-depressives. At a minimum, there should be a national information bank under the most strict privacy provisions which should bar the acquisition of firearms to prohibited individuals (felons, domestic abusers, individual that are a danger to self and other, etc.) without attaining professional clearance. There are lessons to be learned from Virginia Tech, better health care for the mentally ill, and gun control, are just two.
Marty
Martin C. Meltzer, at 11:35 am EDT on May 8, 2007
Unfortunately the problem begins long before college. Student records, other than GPA’s, class rank and test scores do not follow students to college. Secondary school faculty and high school counselors are not allowed to release information from confidential files to the receiving colleges. Colleges have no idea what demons a student may be struggling with. In my professional life, I have worked with hundreds of students, many of whom have serious mental illnesses. I worry about these kids as they go into the wide world. I worry if they will be able to deal with the pressures of college,if they will be able to make friends, if they will be able to find love in this world, if they may harm themselves, if they may harm others....
Michelle, Educational Therapist at Private Practice, at 7:30 am EDT on May 19, 2007
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Provide financial, academic, and personal counseling to Higher Education Opportunity Program (HEOP) students. Provide ... see job
Titan Schools, Inc. (TSi), the technical division of Corinthian Colleges, Inc., supports technical school and ... see job
Coordinate large-scale New Student Orientation segments; supervise vendor relationships and serve as the primary contact with ... see job
Campus Location: North Campus Position Type: Part-Time Support Staff Position ID: 867118 Grade: CT Salary $10.78-$25.16 FLSA: ... see job
Work as part of the Career Development Office (CDO) team to counsel students and alumni in career planning, job search ... see job
Position will provide support to students to obtain internships, REU’s (Research Experiences for Undergraduates) and other ... see job
Position Summary: This position provides counseling, prevention education, and multicultural clinical ... see job
Yale University offers exciting opportunities for achievement and growth in New Haven, Connecticut. Conveniently located ... see job
Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job
The Assistant Director will provide support and services to Maryland Operations Directors and staff by serving as the primary ... see job
Ms. Bower, Nice article. I should note that the law, as you know, differs from state to state on what information can be disclosed and when. Unfortunately, most counselors, unlike lawyers, take the widest possible view about what can be disclosed and to whom.
Unless and until these disclosure provisions are made clear to counselors (with the threat of large civil damages), I will continue telling people that want mental help to seek it on their own and pay cash. Strangely, of the people I have told to do that, not one of them had their private thoughts disclosed to the police or a school administration. Of course, these people never went on to harm others.
Just one other note: I don’t think that counselors should be *required* to inform anyone if a student only seeks to harm himself. If people are obtaining mental help to regain control of their lives, forcing unwanted outsiders into their lives won’t help matters.
Larry, at 10:10 am EDT on May 1, 2007