<p>IMO, schools overstate the “therapeutic” value of removing students in many cases. If the true worry is legal liability or other student safety, they should really just own up to that, IMO.</p>
<p>To the OP, you haven’t actually been out of school that long, if I understand your post: you left school in Sept, began therapy in Oct, and by March were reapplying already. That wasn’t even 6 full months of therapy, and just 6 months out of school. I do think the school was correct in recommending you give yourself more time. You may feel like you have been away from school for a while, but in reality, it hasn’t been that long!</p>
<p>It would seem the institution is in a no-win situation. It cannot deny readmission on the basis of disability (and mental illness is a recognized disability) yet given the doctor’s comments, has a very real concern that the student could be a danger to herself. The accommodations recommended (allowing the student to be semi-independent and enforce a behavioral contract) are not reasonable for it to provide.</p>
<p>^
Well-said. That why I think it would be in the OP’s best interests to simply remain out of school for another semester, at least to address whatever issues are necessitating the safety contract. The time and cost of fighting the university on this probably aren’t worth it.</p>
<p>To all, could the statement be that she can live “semi-independently” a way of saying she meets the required threshold to return to school and that the idea of a “behavioral contract” be a way of assuring the school she will be kept in the system and has agreed to occasionally “check in” with health services to make sure everything is ok?</p>
<p>If I were the OP, I would have my doctor contact the school and their people directly. It may be a misunderstanding of a type of form letter or misunderstanding of the behavioral contract. It seems to me the behavioral contract is above and beyond what is required, but she and her doctor may have agreed to put that in there to assure the school she is ready to return-- and to be accountable for her actions. That should be a plus not a minus.</p>
<p>There are many students that wouldn’t even admit in the first place they were suffering with anxiety and depression. She did and her doctor says she is ready to go back to school, but the school is sending the message she shouldn’t have told them the truth. She could have said she needed time off for family issues or something, but she was honest. Does that count?</p>
<p>Redey, no, it does not count to be honest, in the way you are thinking. It counts in that the school may now have info, and it does have some experience in this area, as to whether or not the student is indeed ready to return. </p>
<p>Mental illness is a big issue and a big gray area for disabled rights and provisions. The very concept of going away to school means that the student is able to do so. That the student can be independent. When some sort of contract and checking up on the student is recommended, does this mean the school is legally required to provide that as an accommodation, or is this sort of thing a requirement needed to go to the school? An attorney versed in disability law may be needed to tell you one way or the other, or if it is in gray territory. </p>
<p>Alot of times the wording of the the doctor or any notes is very important. You can get disability claims, insurance claims, payments, things denied for having the wrong keywords or not containing the right one. It’s important to know exactly what wording should be avoided and what should be included. If the problem is that the OP’s situation is such that the school does not want him back, and if his rights are being infringed upon by that policy, he may have to check out whether he has legal grounds to force the issue.</p>
<p>But, no being honest is expected, and does not count. You don’t usually get rewarded for this sort of thing. It’s possible but don’t expect it.</p>
<p>Colleges are not allowed to discriminate against people with diagnosed mental or physical illnesses or impairments under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Please read about your rights under this act and/or speak to a lawyer.</p>
<p>I don’t believe the OP is being discriminated against. The college has asked for one more semester’s leave so the OP gets a clean bill of health before returning. Based on an ambiguous letter from the medical team, their own interpretation yielded a different result than the one the OP wanted.</p>
<p>Where is the discrimination here? And what rights are being trampled? The rights of a student to return who is not yet cleared for independent living in communal housing?</p>
<p>What is meant by a behavioral contract? If a student is required to go see his / her own counseling (let’s say) once a week and check in with the student health services physician (let’s say) once a month as a condition of being let back, is that a behavioral contract? Or is it meant much more finite-ly about very specific behaviors, and if so, how enforced?</p>
<p>^^^Usually a behavioral contract in this context (for safety, per OP) includes clauses such as agreeing to call the therapist prior to committing any acts of self-harm.</p>
<p>Law suits like the MIT Shinn case have contributed to universities and colleges being more cautious in my opinion That is typically what happens…organizations become more focused on details to prevent making mistakes that caused the original law suits.</p>
<p>My assumption upon reading that was semi-independently referred to how most college students are living – maybe the OP isn’t ready to support herself through college, but most college students aren’t and that a behavioral contract is something that exists a lot in therapy that the school shouldn’t have to be involved in. If that is the case, though, I don’t think the therapist and the school are speaking the same language.</p>
<p>I am not a doctor or psychologist, but what I have read is that the college hasn’t turned you down, but rather asked you to reapply next semester, that is differnt from rejecting your admissions re-application. I honestly have no idea what the expression [she can live “semi-independently”] means, but sounds to me like the experts doing the evaluation are saying you would need some sort of assistance. My impression is that college students (in the 18-22 yr range) are able to live ‘independently’. Who exactly at the college would be responsible to provide that assistance?</p>
<p>I am sending my D to college this year and concerned about this very issue, due to a history of family vulnerability to illness. </p>
<p>I see that the posts mostly focus on the well-being of the student and the safety / liability concerns of the school but I wonder if money has anything to do with the re-admit policy - does she still owe money to the school or did she borrow to attend the college? If the student borrowed, the situation could become very bad as the student may have debt and no degree - and still be recovering from the illness. </p>
<p>In my short experience finances seem to drive school more than ever, so I really wonder if it is related.</p>
<p>1966Parent, I have never seen the presence of loans factor into a school’s decision to allow a student on medical leave to return. After all, whether the student took out loans or paid in cash, the school was fully paid.</p>
<p>One of my kids attends a top lac in a remote area. The students’ mental health is a big focus: there are therapy dogs brought in during the winter, the dorm windows are suicide-proof and the school gives several kids a year medical leave. This is not a school that’s considered cut-throat on these boards but it, like all the top schools, is difficult and is full of kids who are used to earning good grades. Anyway, I do know of one case in which they sent a kid home forcibly before the semester was done. The kid had no chance of passing and the school was concerned about the kid’s mental health. The school literally sent the kid home before finals and packed the kid’s bags for the kid, shipping them later. It was a difficult situation.</p>