Posts Tagged ‘schools’

“Laws Limit Options When a Student is Mentally Ill”

WashingtonPost.com’s “Think Tank Town” feature has a symposium on the policy implications of the Virginia Tech massacre, including contributions from Ted on fear of litigation and from me on the legal constraints on universities faced with problem students, as well as from Jim Copland (Point of Law, Manhattan Institute) on gun control.

This morning’s New York Times (Apr. 19) includes a must-read article by Tamar Lewin spelling out in more detail the problems I refer to in my short commentary. Writes Lewin:

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. They cannot release any information in a student’s medical record without consent. And they cannot put students on involuntary medical leave, just because they develop a serious mental illness….

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. After the death in 2000 of Elizabeth H. Shin, a student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who had written several suicide notes and used the university counseling service before setting herself on fire, the Massachusetts Superior Court allowed her parents, who had not been told of her deterioration, to sue administrators for $27.7 million. The case was settled for an undisclosed amount.

On the other hand, universities may be held liable if they do take action to remove a potentially suicidal student. In August, the City University of New York agreed to pay $65,000 to a student who sued after being barred from her dormitory room at Hunter College because she was hospitalized after a suicide attempt.

Also last year, George Washington University reached a confidential settlement in a case charging that it had violated antidiscrimination laws by suspending Jordan Nott, a student who had sought hospitalization for depression….

Last month, Virginia passed a law, the first in the nation, prohibiting public colleges and universities from expelling or punishing students solely for attempting suicide or seeking mental-health treatment for suicidal thoughts.

The article also refers to the role of the Buckley Amendment (FERPA), the HIPAA medical-privacy law, and disabled-rights law, which prohibits universities from inquiring of applicants whether they suffer serious mental illness or have been prescribed psychotropic drugs. Incidentally, the Allegheny College case, in which a Pennsylvania college came under fire for not notifying parents about their son’s suicidal thoughts, was discussed in a W$J article last month: Elizabeth Bernstein, “After a Suicide, Privacy on Trial”, Mar. 24. And Mary Johnson suspects that HIPAA will turn out to have played a role in the calamitous dropping of the ball regarding Cho’s behavior (Apr. 18). More: Raja Mishra and Marcella Bombardieri, “School says its options were few despite his troubling behavior”, Boston Globe, Apr. 19; Ribstein.

And: How well did privacy laws/policies work? Why, just perfectly:

Ms. Norris, who taught Mr. Cho in a 10-student creative writing workshop last fall, was disturbed enough by his writings that she contacted the associate dean of students, Mary Ann Lewis. Ms. Norris said the faculty was instructed to report problem students to Ms. Lewis.

“You go to her to find out if there are any other complaints about a student,” Ms. Norris said, adding that Ms. Lewis had said she had no record of any problem with Mr. Cho despite his long and troubled history at the university.

“I do not know why she would not have that information,” she said. “I just know that she did not have it.”

(Shaila Dewan and Marc Santora, “University Says It Wasn’t Involved in Gunman’s Treatment”, New York Times, Apr. 19). And Barbara Oakley, a professor at Oakland University in Michigan, has an op-ed in today’s Times, recounting her experience with a disturbing student: “It must have seemed far more likely that Rick could sue for being thrown out of school, than that I — or anyone else — could ever be hurt.” (“The Killer in the Lecture Hall”, Apr. 19). The tease-quote from the Times’s editors: “Do universities fear lawsuits more than violent students?”

Quote of the day

“She said she notified authorities about Cho, but said she was told that there would be too many legal hurdles to intervene.” — Lucinda Roy, a writing professor who’d noticed the disturbed personality of the Virginia Tech killer-to-be and tried to take an interest in his case, quoted in an ABC News report. (Ned Potter, David Schoetz, Richard Esposito, Pierre Thomas, and staff, “Killer’s Note: You Caused Me To Do This”, Apr. 17). More: Apr. 19.

Kindergarten cop

What were you doing in early 1984? I was finishing up middle school, and I’m sure there were some people there with whom I did not get along. What I didn’t realize was that it wasn’t too late for me to get even with them… by finding someone with much deeper pockets than them, and filing a lawsuit.

In 1984, Fatima Bowles was in kindergarten in Brooklyn, when a boy named “Frank A” threw a block at her from across the room. It hit her in the eye, and from the sound of things, she was legitimately injured: she had to have surgery for a lacerated cornea. Of course, it’s unlikely that kindergartner Frank A had any money, which is probably why Bowles sued… the city of New York.

The complaint? That Bowles’ kindergarten teacher was negligent. She had left the room for a moment to check up on two students who had gone to the bathroom, and a few seconds after she did so, the evil Frank A launched the block. Ms. Zimmerman should have known that because Frank had previously pushed Bowles on the playground and pulled her hair, there was a danger he would injure her.

“The city was on notice about his belligerent behavior and allowed the teacher to go out, leaving the kids alone,” Weinbaum said.

So why are we talking about this now? Apparently Bowles (well, Bowles’ mother; Bowles was only 7) actually filed the lawsuit back in 1985, but her lawyers died somewhere along the way, and nobody noticed.

Although the delay is highly unusual, Bowles said she and her family trusted their lawyers and never asked why the case was moving so slowly.

Ordinarily, failure to prosecute a lawsuit is grounds for dismissal. Unfortunately for taxpayers, the lawyers for the city were negligent in failing to get the case dismissed, and eventually another attorney in Bowles’ old lawyers’ law firm noticed that the file was still active (loosely speaking), and he revived it in 2003. And last week, a judge in New York rejected the city’s motion to dismiss the case, holding that a jury could find that the school was on notice about Frank’s behavior, and hence that the school was negligent in allowing this to happen. Because we all know that schools can prevent kindergartners from roughhousing.

You know, I complain about the slow pace of justice, but I think 23 years may actually be a record. (In all seriousness, note that however much work was done on the case back in the 1980s — probably not much, since Bowles wasn’t deposed until 2006 — it has taken at least four years since Weinbaum started working on it again, and all we’ve established is that the case won’t be dismissed before trial. (Given that the city doesn’t seem to be able to produce Ms. Zimmerman, I suspect they’ll be settling the case shortly — but there are no guarantees, and this could drag on even longer.))

Supreme Court to review disabled-ed case

As we’ve been noting for a long time (Mar. 24, 2006, etc.), it’s increasingly common for parents of kids with disability diagnoses, after deciding that the public schools are not doing a good job of educating their kids, to enroll the kids in private school programs and stick public school taxpayers with the resulting high bill, citing federal disabled-ed law. (Parents of non-disabled offspring, needless to say, do not enjoy legal options of this sort if they believe the public schools are failing their kids.) Now the Supreme Court has accepted for review a case in which, according to the New York Times’s account, a former chief executive of Viacom did not even give a public school program a try before enrolling his son in a private school and demanding that New York City pick up much of the resulting bill. The New York Times’s account is distinctly unsympathetic toward the parent, and quotes Julie Wright Halbert, legislative counsel for the Council of the Great City Schools, as saying: “Many wealthy, well-educated people are gaming the system in New York City and around the country.” (Joseph Berger, “Fighting Over When Public Should Pay Private Tuition for Disabled”, Mar. 21; Amity Shlaes, “After Viacom, Freston Makes Case for Special Ed”, Bloomberg, Mar. 16; Mary Ellen Egan, “A Costly Education”, Forbes, Apr. 9 (sub)).

To the Moon, Alice

Great moments in school discipline, Clearwater, Florida, edition:

I don’t know if I can possibly do justice to this story. In February, an 18-year old Florida high school senior named Tyler Tillung was upset at his teacher because she wouldn’t let him into the auditorium to see the high school talent show (the “annual Lip Sync show,” so perhaps “talent” is an overstatement) because the auditorium was full. So… no, I don’t think I can type this without laughing, so I’ll just cut and paste from the story:

After she declined, he mooned the teacher. The lawsuit concedes that he made the act worse “by spreading his buttocks for an instant.”

Yes, you read that right. The word “lawsuit” was in there. Tillung proceeded to metaphorically moon the rest of us by following this up with a lawsuit. For some inexplicable reason, the school decided to punish him for what he calls a “childish joke.” They suspended him for six days, and then transferred him to a school across town. So of course he’s suing.

A lawsuit filed Tuesday in Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Court alleges the transfer was unreasonably harsh because it denies him the once-in-a-lifetime chance to graduate next month with his class, participate in senior activities leading up to graduation and play his final season on Palm Harbor’s varsity baseball team.

But don’t worry: we have it on good authority (from Tillung’s lawyer) that the lawsuit has merit:

To those who say the family is taking the issue too far, Tillung’s lawyer, B. Edwin Johnson, said “they don’t know the facts.” He added: “We’re talking about his graduation. That’s an important event in a guy’s life. … This kid deserves a break.”

As do the rest of us. And especially Clearwater taxpayers.

(Some of you kind-hearted folks may be tempted to give him the benefit of the doubt. You may think that while it’s frivolous to argue that the chance to graduate with one’s friends is an injury which the courts should consider, the chance to play with his team is more important, because it could affect his college chances. Don’t think that. First, he already has his acceptance. Second, there are only six games left on the school’s schedule, all but the last within the next two weeks; he wouldn’t get back on the team in time even if he won.)

That’ll teach her

A schoolteacher in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana would take about 30 1/2 years in the classroom to earn $1.4 million dollars, at the district’s average salary of approximately $46,000 per year. Or, such a teacher could convince a jury to award that much money for “mental anguish” by claiming that her employer harassed her after she gave Ds and Fs to 70% of the students she taught.

Turnitin suit

Four high school students from Arizona and Virginia are suing the anti-plagiarism service Turnitin, iParadigms LLC, under the copyright laws for archiving copies of their papers in its database. [WaPo] There are entrepreneurs who come up with good ideas for services and products, and entrepreneurs who come up with good ideas for lawsuits against the first group.

Update, March 31: Lots of commenters disagree with me, so it’s encouraging to see Eugene Volokh on my side. Turnitin’s own analysis (pdf) is public.

Bong hits 4 shakedown?

Dana Milbank (WaPo) on yesterday’s Bong Hits 4 Jesus Supreme Court oral argument (h/t LL):

“…Mertz, arguing for the student, fared even worse than Starr and Kneedler. He got out only one sentence — “This is a case about free speech; it is not a case about drugs” — before Roberts interrupted.

“It’s a case about money,” the chief justice said.

“Would you waive damages against this principal, who has devoted her life to this school?” asked Kennedy. “You’re seeking damages from her for this sophomoric sign that was held up.”

She gets an A+ in Litigation

Reader and huge fan Richard Nieporent passes along a story of a West Virginia High School student with a 4.5 GPA suing her teacher and the school board because she didn’t like the grade she received in biology. She was on a school trip on the date a big project was due, and failed to turn it in on time; the teacher failed her on the project because it was late. Naturally, litigation has followed:

“It was the intent of the defendant, Jane Schultz, to punish the minor plaintiff for being in student council by intentionally ruining her ‘A’ average,” the lawsuit says.

The student’s parents are seeking an injunction, punitive damages, and damages for “emotional stress, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of scholarship potential.”

If causing emotional stress to high school students by giving them bad grades is actionable, I think an awful lot of teachers will be in trouble.

Bill McGinley, legal counsel for the West Virginia Education Association, said the union would be watching the lawsuit closely.

“We’re very interested in this,” he said. “Especially in the notion of protecting the integrity of teacher’s grading, as well as student responsibility.

“It’s a terrible thing that people want to clog up the courts with students and their leaf projects,” he said. “The court has so much more important stuff to deal with.”

McGinley said he agrees with Withrow, the county school board’s attorney, that students need to learn responsibility.

“When they fail to meet a deadline and they start suing over leaf collections, it’s not really teaching them important life lessons,” McGinley said.

Maybe it’s teaching them the important life lesson that every disappointment in life is grounds for a lawsuit.