Lack of Mental Health Awareness Concerns the DC
The increase of mental health awareness around campus has prompted the Discipline Committee (DC) to discuss the lack of consideration given to mental health during the discipline process, as well as the efficacy of punitive consequences.
The Discipline Review Committee (DRC), which consists solely of faculty, is discussing reevaluating its process to include factors such as mental health and Restorative Justice. So far, the members of the DRC have met only once with the DC to discuss possible courses of action.
“Even if there are underlying problems and [the student is] already meeting with a counselor, we cannot consider that unless students present it to us,” Quinto said. “A lot of times when students have acted due to mental health concerns, we have no option but to give them a punitive response.”
The DC is comprised of eight students and nine faculty members that assesses cases of student misconduct as defined by the E Book. Currently, the DC process does not account for mental health unless the student believes that their mental health played a factor in their misdemeanor and chooses to disclose their history to the board.
DC Chair Matthew Hartnett explained that the committee is currently reviewing the discipline system with regard to students’ health. “It is fair to say that the committee has acknowledged that we should investigate how mental and physical health issues intersect with the discipline process and make recommendations for changes if they seem advisable,” Hartnett said.
English Instructor and DC member Jane Cadwell said that mental health can play a significant role in a student’s actions. “We do not look at health records. That’s confidential,” Cadwell said. “We’re supposed to be looking at someone’s actions and their response to it and how it affected others. However, I think that often health issues play a part in students’ infractions.”
“Mental health can’t not be part of the process. It’s always part of the process and is inextricably woven in,” Health Counselor Christopher Thurber said. However, he believes that it should be up to the student to explicitly include their mental health history in their discipline case and that the current DC process should remain as it is.
Currently, health counselors are not permitted to be present at or contribute to a DC case due to patient confidentiality.
Additionally, DC is obligated to only consider the facts that are presented to them, according to senior and DC member Gillian Quinto. “Even if there are underlying problems and [the student is] already meeting with a counselor, we cannot consider that unless students present it to us,” Quinto said. “A lot of times when students have acted due to mental health concerns, we have no option but to give them a punitive response.”
However, if mental health is considered beforehand, it could change the outcome of a case, changing the ascribed intentions of the student. “More often than not, the cases we sit in on are not mean-spirited—they occur when the student has messed up,” Quinto said. “When the case is not mean-spirited, I think mental health should be a factor considered in the case. When it’s mean spirited, that’s when the committee is less lenient.”
The committee also proposed a method of reconciliation called Restorative Justice, which seeks to negotiate a compromise for all parties involved, according to Director of Student Well-Being Christina Palmer. “Restorative Justice is a value based approach to conflict, harm and building community. The most essential value is respect,” Palmer said. “Restorative Justice is a flexible set of practices that are adaptable to many purposes, enabling those involved to bring forward their best self.”
Although some DC members are not convinced of the efficacy of Restorative Justice, senior and DC member Yaseen Ahmed remains hopeful, explaining that the process is “a more ‘Harkness’ way to address disciplinary issues.”
Palmer added that Restorative Justice will help foster a healthy community. “Right now the Academy, through the Discipline Review Committee, is in the explorative/consideration stage of looking at restorative justice practice, I hope we might see restorative justice has the potential to build a stronger community by including the positive resolution of wrongdoing and by using conflict as an opportunity to strengthen positive relationships,” Palmer said.
These revisions are possible, according to upper and DC member Tise Okeremi. Because of the trust between the faculty and students, changes in discipline policy are discussed openly. “We’re kind of like the student council for disciplinary decisions,” Okeremi said. “Faculty are really transparent with us.”
Quinto concluded that while the Discipline Process has flaws, it is committed to improvement. “I think everyone on the committee acknowledges that it’s not a perfect system,” she said. “I don’t know that we’ll ever reach a system that is absolutely perfect. I think we’re just trying to keep ourselves in check and fix everything we can.”