April 18, 2007

Cho's Violent Potential Recognized In 2005

Interesting. I thought they told us that they had no idea who he was, and that campus police had never had any dealings with him. Could Virginia Tech have been lying to us? Or were they merely incompetent?

Campus authorities were aware 17 months ago of the troubled mental state of the student who shot and killed 32 people at Virginia Tech on Monday, an imbalance graphically on display in vengeful videos and a manifesto he mailed to NBC News in the time between the two sets of shootings.

* * *

The hostility in the videos was foreshadowed in 2005, when Mr. ChoÂ’s sullen and aggressive behavior culminated in an unsuccessful effort by the campus police to have him involuntarily committed to a mental institution in December.

For all the interventions by the police and faculty members, Mr. Cho was allowed to remain on campus and live with other students. There is no evidence that the police monitored him and no indication that the authorities or fellow students were aware of any incident that pushed him to his rampage.

Despite Mr. ChoÂ’s time in the mental health system, when an English professor was disturbed by his writings last fall and contacted the associate dean of students, the dean told the professor that there was no record of any problems and that nothing could be done, said the instructor, Lisa Norris.

The quest to have him committed, documented in court papers, was made after a female student complained of unwelcome telephone calls and in-person communication from Mr. Cho on Nov. 27, 2005. The woman declined to press charges, and the campus police referred the case to the disciplinary system of the university, Chief Wendell Flinchum said.

Mr. ChoÂ’s disciplinary record was not released because of privacy laws. The associate vice president for student affairs, Edward F. D. Spencer, said it would not be unusual if no disciplinary action had been taken in such a case. On Dec. 12, a second woman asked the police to put a stop to Mr. ChoÂ’s instant messages to her. She, too, declined to press charges.

The police said Mr. Cho did not threaten the women, who described the efforts at contact as “annoying.” But later on the day of the second complaint, an unidentified acquaintance of Mr. Cho notified the police that he might be suicidal.

Mr. Cho went voluntarily to the Police Department, which referred him to a mental health agency off campus, Chief Flinchum said. A counselor recommended involuntary commitment, and a judge signed an order saying that he “presents an imminent danger to self or others” and sent him to Carilion St. Albans Psychiatric Hospital in Radford for an evaluation.

“Affect is flat and mood is depressed,” a doctor there wrote. “He denies suicidal ideations. He does not acknowledge symptoms of a thought disorder. His insight and judgment are sound.”

The doctor determined that Mr. Cho was mentally ill, but not an imminent danger, and the judge declined to commit him, instead ordering outpatient treatment.

Officials said they did not know whether Mr. Cho had received subsequent counseling.

Which raises a different issue -- our society does not generally allow for the forcible treatment of metal illness, and has not done so since the compassionate liberal reforms of the 1960s threw open the gates of the nation's insane asylums and mental hospitals. Individual autonomy has been the rule for four decades, and the right to refuse treatment for mental illness has been viewed (quite properly, might I add) as a basic right of every citizen, just as it is for virtually any other medical condition. Unfortunately, that leaves a gaping hole through which the truly dangerous like Cho can walk.

And then there is federal and state education law, which further restricts what colleges and universities (not to mention public schools like the ones where I teach) can do when faced with a mentally ill student. They are liable if they don't act to protect the student and others from a mentally ill student's behavior -- but are also liable if they take any action deemed "discriminatory" against that same student. Small wonder, then, that Cho was allowed to remain at Virginia Tech.

Posted by: Greg at 10:37 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 714 words, total size 5 kb.

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
8kb generated in CPU 0.0036, elapsed 0.0108 seconds.
19 queries taking 0.0079 seconds, 28 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]