<p>The theoretical profile of Cho was interesting reading.</p>
<p>It was interesting reading. His SAT scores weren't nearly as high as earlier reports suggested. He was not 'brilliant'. He was also severely ill for more than a decade before entering VTech. The severity of his symptoms at such a young age is noteworthy. Oftentimes, severe mental illness does not present until late adolescence.</p>
<p>Though the guidance counselor suggested a smaller school, Cho's family allowed him to apply to VTech under false pretenses and then they agreed to pay the tuition. They are responsible for those decisions. Those were dangerous decisions, in retrospect.</p>
<p>However, it was interesting to note the parents continuing lack of English skills. I have several close Korean friends and one Korean client. Two speak English very well but one is very halting in his speech--even after twenty years. However, he understands everything that is said.</p>
<p>The family dynamic should be viewed through a 'Korean' framework, but still, IMO, this case is a case of 'mainstreaming' and 'tolerance' gone terribly wrong. This was a severely damaged individual who was not functioning anywhere near the norm. The parents knew it. The schoools knew it. His guidance counselor knew it. His peers knew it. Yet he was continually promoted into increasingly difficult and challenging situations. </p>
<p>The parents paid that tuition, those credit card bills. They 'hoped' he would survive VTech. They 'hoped' he would recover. </p>
<p>Their 'hope' killed their son and many other students.</p>
<p>This case is only one of the reasons I caution those posters who champion huge expectations for the mentally ill--on the basis of those few brilliant individuals who achieve great social heights despite severe mental illness. The majority of severely ill patients should NOT be pressured into extremely ambitious challenges. They should be encouraged to find happiness and stability and acceptance.</p>
<p>With all due respect, Cheers, I think that in order to remove some of the stigma attached to mental illness, instead of referring to Seung Hui Cho as a severely damaged individual, perhaps severely ill would be more appropriate? I also think it is very important to note that there is a wide degree of variation in mental illness and that to dispel hope for all mentally ill individuals is presumptuous. To make a blanket statement that a mentally ill person isnt capable of achieving a measure of success or making a contribution to society can be misleading depending on the severity of the illness. </p>
<p>I dont think it was the parents hope that killed their son or the other children I think it was denial.</p>
<p>Reading the section on privacy laws was, in the words of one of my law professors "eyeball twirrrling." I taught special education in Virginia public schools before going to law school and I had no idea that kids could go through elementary, middle and high school getting services for the emotionally disturbed, and not one mention of it would go to a college. I guess the thought is that parents won't seek help or even allow as much help if it follows the kid to college, but it can result in delivering a time bomb to a college. If there is a box on the transcript transmittal labeled "Special Education" that the school perceives cannot be checked because of privacy laws, then why is it there? It seems that the presence of it without a check indicates no special services, not "we can't say." Since Virginia Tech doesn't require a recommendation from guidance, there wasn't even the chance for the guidance counselor to recommend admission, but only with accomodations. In fact the counselors advised strongly against him going to such a large school because of his emotional problems, yet they didn't feel there was anything they could do to let Virginia Tech know. I certainly don't have any answers, but I'm amazed he lasted as long as he did without hurting himself or others.</p>
<p>Quite right, 1955. Cho was apparently physically and mentally damaged as a toddler by invasive medical procedures. One wonders if he had actual brain damage during that cath procedure. I don't suggest that all mentally ill patients are 'damaged'. Many are damaged by others or themselves, but many are simply unable to cope with their particular brain chemistry.</p>
<p>I disagree with you about denial. When they decided to let him apply to and attend VTech, the Chos were not in denial. They sought help to the best of their ability. However, when they agreed to allow their son to apply to VTech and when they agreed to pay the tuition, that was a vivid symbol of their 'hope' that he would overcome his illnesses and take his place in society alongside his brilliant sister.</p>
<p>Apparently the Chos tried to bandaid that mistake and justify their hope by visiting him every weekend during his freshman year. Did they stop visiting when they realized that he was not getting healthier? Did they lose hope--but continue to pay that tuition? If so, then at that point they movedinto denial. But it was not denial that pormpted them to initially pay the app fee and the tuition. It was hope.</p>
<p>Too much 'hope' is dangerous for severely ill patients. It's perfectly normal to cling to hope, but when it ovewhelms acceptance and tolerance, hope is damaging. Too much emphasis on ambitious achievements over simple happiness and health is damaging for severely ill patients. I count early childhood diagnosis and extreme mutism as 'severe'.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Virginia Tech does not require an essay or letters
of recommendation in the freshman
application package and does not conduct personal
interviews. Acceptance decisions at Virginia
Tech are based primarily on grades and
SAT scores, though demographics, interests,
and some intangibles are also considered.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>IMHO this also played a factor. I mean no letters of recommendation?? Why in the world would you accept someone without asking for at least that? I don't know how many schools have such policies but that needs to be changed.</p>
<p>Is not asking for recommendations standard at other big schools? My D is only looking at small schools in an audition only major so recommendations are crucial. It seems that in the section to be filled out by the guidance counselor, they could at least give the counselor the opportunity to mention relevant info. The report suggests that after admission, anyone with relevant info should provide it. So they're saying that after Tech admitted him, Fairfax County should call up and say "FYI - in middle school, this guy mentioned that he would like to re-create Columbine and he has been receiving services for being emotionally disturbed for many years."</p>
<p>It's a large state school. Many don't ask for letters of recommendation. Heck, some states have guaranteed admission programs based on high school record. Even if they did ask for letters it's doubtful that info would have been included. There's always someone who will write a nice but generic letter and senior year at one of the largest schools in a large county, it's pretty safe to say he could have found a teacher who would have just thought he was a quiet kid who performed adequately. You know how easy it is to cover up a record, particularly if you have money? Murder and assualt have occurred at even the top schools. Tech is safer than UVA and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themself. There were NO murders in Blacksburg the previous year. That's just the way it is. That's not true in CVille and likely never will be.</p>
<p>We should all be concerned about the mixture of flawed mental health treatment and privacy laws within the adult court system that IMO largely led to this. It could happen anywhere. It happened in one of the least likely settings but that's how life goes. At the beginning of last year I heard a quote that the biggest troubles in life blindside you on some idle Tuesday. For me, it was a Monday, but you never expect something like this to happen. I feel there was really little the university could do with the situation they were put in, short of predict the future. Had they been able to predict the future, I guess they would have been okay. But they couldn't, and no one could. The system they were working with under the laws of the commonwealth was (is, I guess, who are we kidding) deeply flawed.</p>
<p>I noticed some very interesting things in the part about privacy laws and Cho's mental health. Apparently the privacy laws are poorly understood. </p>
<p>Here is a specific document re FERPA rights for post-secondary students:</p>
<p>His parents could have been notified at several junctures along the way of his tragic journey at VT. And they said in the 3-hour interview that if they had known, they would have taken him home for treatment. </p>
<p>I thought it was interesting that many of Cho's records at the Cook Counseling Center at VT were missing. ??? Did someone go in and sweep the file clean before anyone could come looking? The panel should have had access to those records.</p>
<p>The VT Care Team did not coordinate its efforts very well, and never put together all the pieces of the puzzle.</p>
<p>Any actual changes in admissions information that this state's universities choose to make will be interesting to see. In going to five college admissions presentations over the last few months, it was obvious that there is a wide variety of information that is required to apply to a school. Like Princedog acknowledged, we have seen everything from two large state schools offering "provisional acceptance" based solely on board scores and reported GPA to ones who require at least two letters of teacher recommendation in addition to a counselor's recommendation. I guess when you have 11 staff members assigned to 19,000 apps (what we were told at VT) there is no way of asking for multiple letters of rec, but I do feel that the guidance counselor from his hs should have had an opportunity to talk about this student. One of the schools that my s is applying to did not require letters of rec from his teachers, but did have a guidance counselor form to send in with the official transcript. (She complained of it not having much room to say much, so she had to add another letter, but at least giving them a bit of room to elaborate on the personality traits- very worrisome ones in Cho's case- of an individual candidate would be better than nothing). I am curious, and cartera45 you may be able to answer this, if given the chance,legally how much could a guidance counselor have said regarding this student's mental makeup? When a student like Cho exhibits "red flags" regarding his psychological makeup, would the gc have been prevented from mentioning them to VT?</p>
<p>As a parent I feel so bad for his parents. I know the language barrier played into this, and without trying to sound judgemental, as an educator I feel they really needed to somehow notify this school about his problem and needs early on when he enrolled. I work in a large school system. If parents are proactive and make sure that critical information about their children is made known to their next teacher, school, etc., it becomes known. If not, you are taking a chance of information (especially of a written, documental type) not being read in a timely manner, getting overlooked, etc. </p>
<p>I know he was 18 and considered an adult, but as cheers said, they were paying his tuition and I assume he was still considered a dependent. I only wonder in hindsight, and I am sure they will angonize over this for the rest of their lives, if they had said more to Tech about his condition, could this horrible even have been avoided? I also know that special education services (i.e. IEPs) stop at the age of 18, so the state/college would not have had to offer him services. The family would have had to get help for him privately and/or would have had to go through their health care plan. There may also lie part of the problem. There are no right or wrong answers for this sad, sad, situation. It breaks my heart for all involved.</p>
<p>KandKsmom - the report didn't have a definitive answer to the question of informing a college about a student's disability. The panel couldn't even answer whether Fairfax was compelled under privacy laws to remove all mention of special education services in the app materials. Even if they had been able to include them , under federal law, Tech could not have made a pre-admission inquiry about any disability. If Cho had applied to Tech for accomodation, then it would have been incumbent on him to provide the background. He did not request this. There were a number of "perhaps" in the report concerning this issue. "Perhaps" the student should be required to provide info regarding a mental disability to the institution after admission and "perhaps" the institution should be required to keep this confidential unless a "threat assessment team" determines there is a threat. It doesn't say what would happen if the student failed to do this and if there would be any way for the schools to do it in that case. Another "perhaps" is that, once Tech knew there was an issue, they would have the right to inquire of the schools whether there were records and get them. This would only have meant that, after Cho's problems at Tech surfaced, Tech would have been able to access the high school and lower school records. Would things have been different - who knows, but they would have seen that he referenced Columbine in a paper in middle school so "perhaps." The report did query whether there should be some sort of "permanent record" with regard to this info. Even if Tech had the info, it could not have forced Cho to receive treatment so all this speculation may have accomplished little. Specific recomendations were not made, probably because there was plenty of info available to Tech after he got there and before the shootings that was not accessible or used in a meaningful way. However, I think that the panel would like to figure out a way for Tech to have had access to those middle school records where he did exhibit ideations of violence towards others.</p>
<p>cheers: I think your points are well taken. I do think unrealistic expectations are very destructive, and I don't think this is unfair labeling of those with some form of mental illness. A child with well managed bi-polar disorder may not need any lowering of expectations and may perform brilliantly, but that was not the case here. </p>
<p>I have seen first hand other cases in which parents just "hoping for the best" has had disasterous outcomes. One friend's daughter had a rupture of a massive brain aneurysm. The girl never recovered her original cognitive function, although she could have led a "normal" life. However, her mother was holding out for the "stellar" life the girl had been previously capable of. Through a series of tragic circumstances this beautiful young woman did not survive. Her mother blamed community at the funeral for not accepting her as the person she had been before, when it was the mother's lack of realistic expectations that produced this outcome.</p>
<p>This issue is more pronounced in the case of a severely ill person, but it is relevant to CC's as well. It was painful to watch my children accept that neither had the talent for professional dance in one case and an impressive music performance career in the other. Both were diligent, dedicated practitioners of their arts, but believe me, it wasn't going to happen. In one case physiology (dance is brutal) played a part; in the other talent and inherent drive. Both are now quite happy with career directions, and both still dance and play music. </p>
<p>I don't think cheers is being unsimpathetic; I think she is being truly compassionate. Human life is worthwhile, not only for high achievers.</p>
<p>(The list of things I could never do would fill this board.)</p>