A Stitch in Haste

The New York Times has a "woe is us" piece on how little colleges can do when faced with a student who either is, or may be, mentally disturbed to the point of being dangerous:

Federal privacy and antidiscrimination laws restrict how universities can deal with students who have mental health problems. For the most part, universities cannot tell parents about their children's problems without the student's consent.

Let's keep in mind that these students are almost always legal adults (i.e., over 18). So this is not exactly scandalous. I suppose one could make an argument that whoever pays the tuition (typically the parent, of course) has at least some right to access the student's records. But that's a side issue.

Universities can find themselves in a double bind. On the one hand, they may be liable if they fail to prevent a suicide or murder. ... On the other hand, universities may be held liable if they do take action to remove a potentially suicidal student.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't? Sounds like job for — politicians!

Seriously, think back to September 11. The first knee-jerk reactions were "Never again!" and "We must do everything possible to prevent this!" You don't want another 9/11, do you?

The result was the Patriot Act — and much more — which eventually morphed into the current "Terror v. Civil Liberties" morass we now find ourselves in. To the Bush Administration and its apologists, no cost to privacy is too high, no restriction on liberty too extreme. You don't want another 9/11, do you?

Meanwhile, it is almost certain that, before long, calls of "Never again!" and "We must do everything possible to prevent this!" will bellow from the halls of Congress. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

First step — curtail privacy rights:

Federal laws also restrict what universities can reveal. Generally, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, Ferpa, passed in 1974, makes it illegal to disclose a student's records to family members without the student's authorization. ... And the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act prohibits the release of medical records.

Of course! Privacy laws are to blame!

Care to wager how long it will be before some activist Member of Congress introduces bills to amend or even repeal FERPA's privacy protections? Or HIPAA? Or the ADA? Or any other statute that stands in the way of weeding out the "dangerous"?

Or how about funding restrictions, in the spirit of the Solomon Amendments, withholding all federal aid to colleges unless they obtain FERPA waivers from incoming students? You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

Indeed, why stop there? How about requiring colleges to implement mandatory psychological pre-screening, much as they require pre-admission physicals or proof of vaccination? Can't let the mentally disturbed have free rein on our bucolic campuses. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

Next, of course, will come the databases. Government loves databases. Databases for all students who ever see the school counselor. Databases for students who have run-ins with campus security. Databases for students referred to the Dean by creative writing instructors for "disturbing" essays. Databases for students who are taking prescription drugs (oops — already have something close to that). Databases for everything — all centralized and coordinated by Washington, of course. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

Depending on how paranoid the populace (and Congress) become, next up might be restrictions on foreign students. Remember, Cho Seung-Hui was a foreigner — well, sorta kinda. Maybe we should impose even greater restrictions on the admission of foreign students into the country and onto our campuses. Just to be safe. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

The massacre was perpetrated with guns. Maybe we should prevent anyone with a prior gun-related offense from attending college. (Remember, we have databases for that.) Or, for that matter, anyone who ever owned a gun. (We have databases for that too.) He might still have a weapon or two. Can't risk that. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

While we're on the subject, let's just ban anyone with any record of violent crime from entering college — a "no-study list." Can't be too careful. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

Also, why are we limiting ourselves to students? Let's expand the restrictions to faculty and staff.

And the curriculum too. Reading, say, Slaughterhouse Five or A Clockwork Orange might be the trigger that causes a student to snap. Better start censoring the reading list. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you?

And academic freedom isn't the only way that the First Amendment interferes in the quest for campus safety:

A University of Colorado student pleaded not guilty Wednesday to making comments that classmates deemed sympathetic toward the gunman blamed for killing 32 students and himself at Virginia Tech, authorities said.
...
His father, Michael Karson, told the Camera newspaper that the comments may have been misinterpreted and questioned whether his son's free speech rights had been violated. "I would have hoped that state officials would know their First Amendment better than they seem to," he said.

We should probably rethink free speech on campus anyway. You don't want another Blacksburg, do you? (And don't forget blogs.)

Some of this is already happening. Some may happen in the future. Some may never happen.

How much of each depends on how many of us are willing, with controlled passions and functioning brains, to stand athwart and say "Stop!"

You don't want another Patriot Act, do you?

---

UPDATE #1: And so it begins —

Thursday's congressional hearing was one of the first to directly address the massacre at Virginia Tech. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Joseph Lieberman, I-Ct., also plans a Monday hearing on how to best protect college campuses.

No doubt Congress will have no shortage of ideas on the subject.

UPDATE #2: And now the Psychiatrist-in-Chief weighs in.