<p>What upsets me about the newspaper story (if it's accurate, as of course it may well not be) is that the student was expelled and/or asked to withdraw rather than placed on some kind of medical leave. I understand the difficult position that colleges are in with regard to suicidally depressed students. Given that situation, it would have made very good sense for the university to require this student to take a leave of absence while obtaining treatment -- while also assuring him that his place in the school would still be there when he returned to health. But instead, not only did GWU kick him out, but if you read the whole article, it seems to have brought him up before the student judicial board on disciplinary charges for "endangering behavior." The "endangering behavior" in question seems to be that he sought help when he realized that his own mental state placed him in danger. That's nuts! </p>
<p>The whole orientation of the school's reaction seems to have been punitive rather than supportive. The effect of this will inevitably be to discourage other depressed students from seeking help. If I were a college student, I wouldn't go to a counselor or hospital and admit to depression if I thought it might get me kicked out of school! As a parent, I am really amazed and dismayed by the short-sightedness and plain cruelty that GWU displayed.</p>
<p>see that is what I don't understand
there has to be more to it.
why even have help available if you are going to expel students who ask for it?
If he was a danger to others, and * refused* treatment or treatment was not enough, I can see forcibly placing him on involuntary leave.
But to expel him just for trying to get emergency help?
Do they do the same thing for students who try and get help for their friends who are drinking/drugging?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Alcohol hospitalizations at GW nearly doubled last year, despite a 3.5 percent nationwide decrease in reported college binge drinking since 1997, according to the NIAAA. So does that make GW a drinking school?.........
in a sense, the rising hospitalization rate at GW is a positive figure because it signifies that students are growing more comfortable with calling for help.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So I am wondering are these students who are using drugs/alcohol so heavily that they need to be hospitalized, are they expelled?</p>
<p>
[quote]
The "endangering behavior" in question seems to be that he sought help when he realized that his own mental state placed him in danger. That's nuts!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree that it seems this way, but I think it is wise to withhold judgment. Cmon. Do you really think those folks, professionals who deal with student difficulties all the time, would simply say Hmm. We got a depressed guy on our hands. So lets just ditch him.? No way. They know the Washington Post would be all over it, just like they are. I strongly suspect we are dealing with only ONE side of this story. I also know that some people often cant take a hint when told what they should do. This guy may have bristled against the schools efforts to get him home. The final straw was probably his entering the hospital. Im not saying I KNOW any of this. I just think we dont have enough information to judge this school so harshly.</p>
<p>As far as I am concerned, GWU has done nothing wrong until I hear its side. If they were as calloused as it seems, then yeah they need to change their attitude. But lets see what the deal is.</p>
<p>although this case still has to be decided- it sounds like GWU policy of treating suicidal threats identically as threats against another student is to blame.
[quote]
That case has two critical issues: one, an allegation that the hospital and counseling breach student confidentiality. If this proves to be true, students should know about the policy, so they can get off-campus help if they so choose. And if the University is in the right and has not breached confidentiality, it needs to explain that clearly to students so that they wont avoid the counseling center unnecessarily.</p>
<p>Secondly, the issue involves GWs endangering behavior policy, which treats thoughts of suicide or a threat of suicide the same way as a threat against another student. If this policy remains in effect, it could continue to result in disciplinary sanctions against students during their most troubled and vulnerable times. Its my belief that as long as the University implores suicidal and depressed students to go to the University of help, it would only be fair to be open about any consequences of seeking that help. One of the questions I wanted to ask Dr. DePalma was whether, during her sessions with Jordan, she interrupted him whenever he brought up depression and suicide to remind him of the endangering behaivor policy. She chose to defer comment to Media Relations.
<p>CatherineFM, I agree with you. Obviously mental illness is a very difficult thing for schools to deal with and you don't want to endanger other students or faculty. If in fact this is what truly happened, I think the University could have delt with it better, in a less punitive manner.</p>
<p>Several profs have been killed by mentally ill students. I believe the rest is semantics. Once given a clean bill the student would be readmitted according to what I heard.</p>
<p>once the student was proved to be free of all symptoms which would be difficult to prove.
When someone has depression, it often is a chronic illness which can be managed, but has to be actively managed with medication/therapy, whatever the patient and the clinican work out.
A policy that requires the student to be symptom free for 6 months before he is allowed back- is unrealistic and is going to prevent other students from seeking necessary help.
Better than they try and drink themselves to death apparently.</p>
<p>There might be more to this story than what is reported, but ... I agree that a medical leave might be warranted but certainly not an outright "expulsion". This is just one more example of the abhorrent way that today's society separates "medical" and "mental" health issues.</p>
<p>For instance ... if this student noticed enlarged lymph nodes, and was feeling fatigued and weak and checked himself inot the hospital only to have Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosed -- do you think any college in the country would then promptly expel him??</p>
<p>There are many effective psychological and pharmacological treatments for depression - this student needs help, not an outright rejection when he's feeling bad enough already.</p>
<p><strong><em>He faced possible suspension and expulsion from school, the letter said, unless he withdrew and deferred the charges while he got treatment.</em></strong></p>
<p>From what was originally posted - this young man was actually given a ''choice'' - OR face the ''possibility of'' suspension/expulsion. This is actually not that unusual for suicidal students in great distress - and actually is in their best interest of the school AND of the student. The school cannot be responsible for the care and treatment of suicidal students - this action gives the student the opportunity to seek appropriate treatment over a period of time.</p>
<p>Many schools actually have a policy in place regarding this - as the suicidal student is a danger to themselves and possibly to others as well. It is common for the policy to require that the student withdraw - seek treatment - become healthy - and return to school at a future time - usually at least 1 semester is the minimum time period.</p>
<p>I would not give the university a bad rap on this one - they did what needed to be done - in the best interest of the student.</p>
<p>the result may have been the same- but the language was too harsh.
first I dont' ahve enough information to indicate that he wouldnt have accepted a voluntary leave.
But to use the term expulsion instead of involuntary leave, seems too harsh for a student who was in danger of hurting no one but himself.
[quote]
The suit says that Nott was not suicidal and never threatened suicide, but that he did have general suicidal thoughts; aware that his roommate would be out of town for the weekend, he checked himself into GW Hospital in the early morning of Oct. 27, 2004, for mental health treatment. Later that day, while still in the hospital, he received a letter from Sawyer saying that he would not be permitted back into his dorm, under the residential hall psychological distress policy.</p>
<p>The next day, while still in the hospital, he received a letter from Donnels charging him with a violation of the Code of Conduct's endangering behavior policy, according to the suit. He was issued an immediate interim suspension, told not to return to his Francis Scott Key Hall room, barred from GW property and threatened with arrest if he returned to campus. Nott was informed that if he withdrew from the University, the charges would be deferred. The letter was carbon copied to several university administrators.</p>
<p>The suit says Nott left the hospital Nov. 1, 2004, and met with Gieseke, the assistant director of SJS. Nott says he was told if he withdrew from school voluntarily, his suspension would not be shown on his record; but if he fought the charges and lost, he could face suspension or expulsion, and the charges would go on his record. He ultimately withdrew from GW on Nov. 8; he permanently withdrew in April 2005 and transferred to the University of Maryland.</p>
<p>On Nov. 17, 2004, Donnels sent Nott a letter confirming the Code of Conduct charges and saying his suspension was deferred, but that he was still barred from campus. The letter said if he remained symptom-free for six months, he could request clearance to return to GW.
<p>Colleges/universities vary on their "leave" policies. Where I work, we do not have an involuntary medical withdrawal policy. I believe our students are better served (with less risk of discriminating against people who are mentally ill) by keeping the medical leave option as voluntary only. Given that stance, a student is not required to leave because of a medical or psychiatric diagnosis (or as a result of help seeking), but may face a judicial referral if he/she cannot manage the responsibilities of being a student without being disruptive to others. (e.g. A student who is psychotic may continue to attend classes; a student who persistently disrupts lectures with his (psychotic) rantings while refusing treatment to get such behaviors under control, would be encouraged to take a medical leave. If he refused, a judicial referral for disruptive behavior would occur, as would a hearing. One possible outcome might be expulsion.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
For instance ... if this student noticed enlarged lymph nodes, and was feeling fatigued and weak and checked himself inot the hospital only to have Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosed -- do you think any college in the country would then promptly expel him??
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well now let's just think this through a bit. When was the last time lymphoma ever directly caused someone to kill anybody? Yeah, maybe lymphoma caused mental illness and the mental illness caused some messy events, but its the mental illness that is the public problem. I think this is why mental illness is treated a little differently.</p>
<p>But not really all that differently - all it will take is to tell someone you have Bird Flu or Ebola or AIDS and you'll see just how true this is.</p>
<p>But even in less tragic cases we see how true it is. Some people can't drive because they can't see well. Others have heart conditions that won't allow them to fly planes, etc., etc. If there is a public threat, then we will see different treatment.</p>
<p>But I need to say again that I'm not saying GWU was NOT wrong in what it did. I'm saying it just seems prudent to wait a bit before we get all weird about this school. I'd hate to judge this place harshly only to find out that there are serious facts missing from the story.</p>
<p>Bird,
Sounds like you've had very bad experiences.<br>
I see this from a different perspective. Most faculty and administrators I encounter try very hard to help the individual. However, often there is not a straightforward situation with a perfect solution. Sometimes students peice together just enough assistance to hang on, but are unable or unwilling to obtain enough assistance to get better. In so doing they endanger themselves and sometimes place an enormous burden on roommates and suitemates.</p>
<p>">> Telling someone who has a mental illness that they will be suspended or expelled for seeking treatment is just not appropriate.<<</p>
<p>Remember, we don't know the whole story. Under privacy rules, the university can't tell us. For all we know, the student was so seriously depressed that he checked into a hospital and then despite having severe symptoms, he may have checked himself out against medical advice and declined to seek further help. That kind of behavior is not at all unusual.</p>
<p>If a suicidal student declined to seek help, the university would have every right to do whatever necessary to protect him and others by expelling him. I doubt that explusion happened just because he got mental health treatment at GWU Hospital.</p>
<p>I would bet money that basically what we're hearing is the young man's side of the story, and the university's side is very different. Heck, when I was in college, I had a roommate who asked me if I would push her out of our 18th story dorm room if she asked me to. I told the dean, and my roommate became angry at me and told the dean that I had exaggerated.</p>
<p>My roommate didn't try to kill herself, but the next year another student did commit suicide by jumping out of the 18th floor of the dorm that I had lived in.</p>
<pre><code> Students who exhibit suicidal behaviors and/or are subject to emergency psychological intervention and/or are hospitalized must receive clearance from the Director of the University Counseling Center and the Assistant Dean of Students or designee prior to returning to the residential community. Immediate or eventual return to the residential community is at the sole discretion of University officials. Should any students�/residents� behaviors or actions related to illness or psychological distress disturb the peace of the residential community or require exaggerated or continuing intervention from hall and/or University staff, that resident may be charged under the Code, and if found in violation, be removed from the residence hall.*
</code></pre>
<p>Am I reading this right? From the GWU website it appears that the preventative hospitalization that Mr Nott voluntarily requested, is what resulted in his expulsion from school</p>
<p>Roughly 10% of the population experiences at least one episode of suicidal ideation during their teen years. Higher among whites. </p>
<p>Why doesn't GWU simply expel 15% of the student body now, and get it over with. I understand why they would do what they did. But, nowhere in the equation is it that they have actually increased the risk for the rest of student body by setting an example for what might happen if one seeks help.</p>
<p>NORTHSTARMOM - I agree with you - there is much missing in the information - this is not a one way street - there is much more to this story. This young man could well have had issues prior to his going to the hospital that came in to play in all of this.</p>
<p>I agree that the schools should not be totally ''blamed and flamed'' - yes - maybe the wording was harsh - but ..... the use of the words is the norm and have specific explanations if one looks at the student information of the school.</p>
<p>A very similar situation happened to my DD's best friend at school - tho she did not seek 'help' at the school - it was obvious enough that she was extremely depressed - to the point of high risk for suicide. She was removed from the school immediately - tho with much better understanding and actions by the school itself - and with the support of the school - her family and friends as well - during the process. She was not allowed to return to school for up to 8 months (this happened in the fall semester - she could only return to school the next fall semester - and only if ready and approved by several parties and processes). The process she would have had to go thru was quite extensive - she had to prove to the school that she was 'better' - could manage and handle being in that environment and that she was no danger to herself or to any one else - had to prove that she had received treatment and was considered under control - the documentation was very specific - and would be reviewed by the student health program and the dean as well. It is not an easy thing for students to do - tho many do get thru it.</p>
<p>At least one good thing came from this young man's story - he obviously was able to improve his situation and become healthier in order to attend another school. A much better ending than it could have been............................</p>
<p>One thing we can all agree upon is that it will be very interesting to see how this court case plays out.
A misconception that seems to be held by some parents (not CC parents, of course), students, and even health professionals is that a college can serve as a type of halfway house, standing apart from the stressors of the day-to-day world. As a result, students sometimes attend who would be much better off taking a few more months in their home community.
Students place incredible stress on themselves, eating poorly, sleeping too little (not to mention using alcohol and drugs). These can exacerbate pre-existing conditions. It's usually just not possible for a college to provide the degree of oversight required by these very vulnerable students.</p>
<p>Northstarmom and others have stated it more eloquently that I can - I agree we don't know the full story. I suspect the newspaper is drawing heavily from the complaint filed in the civil suit - and that GWU has not presented their side of things. </p>
<p>I can't really believe that a school would be out to get someone - they are out to help their students as best they can, maybe becoming bureaucratic sometimes, but if they are it's only to protect their interests. Not everyone files a lawsuit when they aren't happy with the way things have worked out. </p>