There is, predictably, lots of talk about whether the massacre at Virginia Tech could have been handled differently or even prevented: if the university should have moved more quickly to alert students after the morning shooting, if campus security protocols were adequate, and so on. One of the more interesting (and more troubling) strains of conversation focuses on Cho Seung-Hui, the gunman. Except for the fact that nothing in a tragedy like this is funny, it's almost laughable how predictably he's being described as a troubled loner who kept to himself. The more specific details, though, are worth pausing over. Cho was accused of stalking two women in 2005, was referred to mental health services for suicidal behavior, and wrote a play that is nothing but warning signs. He wasn't out in normal public life, and wasn't a normal private citizen. He was a college student. So what, exactly, was the responsibility of his community? During an interesting discussion moderated by Gwen Ifill on PBS, Allen Bova, the director of risk management and insurance at Cornell University, discussed whether not Cho should have been caught by the sytem.
GWEN IFILL: When you say "risk management," aren't one of the risks what the mood is of a troubled student? We now know that this student had warning signs. Is part of your managing risk tracking those warning signs?
ALLEN BOVA: Well, those warning signs are very, very difficult to really determine in a lot of cases. And I think what you're really talking about is profiling, and I'm not sure profiling usually works.
Certainly, I think that Virginia Tech, in this particular case, did identify the student. They did take the appropriate action by referring the student to counseling, but this was an extremely troubled individual. And I think too much is placed sometimes on what college campuses did, and not enough really is placed towards the actual person that committed this heinous crime.
Is that true? Would this have been profiling? That's a buzzword, profiling, but only because it's usually discussed in terms of racial or ethnic profiling, which raises issues of racism and ethnic discrimination. But profiling on its own seems like an absolute necessity when it comes to predicting crimes. Otherwise, law enforcement becomes entirely reactive. Should all kids who fit the stereotype of the troubled, violent loner be subject to increased scrutiny? What would be the problem if they were? A little later in the discussion, Stephen Joel Trachtenberg, the president of George Washington University, gave a longer but still somewhat wobbly answer.
STEPHEN JOEL TRACHTENBERG: No institution is going to be perfect on [dealing with troubled students]. And it's a delicate balance, as has been indicated, between the rights of individuals, both their legal rights and concerns under the ADA, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and also the obligations of the university to the larger community.
If you have somebody who you think is a danger to himself or herself or to others, you obviously have some duty to act. And if it turns out you have inadvertently overacted, that's a lot easier to fix than having been too cautious. And so my attitude is, you'd want to protect all of your students, and you want to do it in a macro way, as well in an individual way.
Is psychotic behavior considered a disability? Do students who live in college dorms and attend college classes have the same status as freely circulating adults? Are they truly private citizens in the same way? How would additional scrutiny -- more questions, closer watch, not less freedom but more care -- interfere with their legal rights? Obviously, crimes continue to happen, all across society, at all levels, despite the best efforts of law enforcement officials and private citizens. But in a closed (albeit large) community like a university setting, should there be less fear about balancing legal rights and the needs of the community? After all, college students aren't entirely finished becoming adults yet. That's one of the reasons they're in college. Troubled kids are a sad business if they are only hurting themselves. They're a horrible, painful business if they're hurting other people. None of this is to say that Virginia Tech did anything wrong. I don't know enough about how Cho's past behavior was handled. But is there a better way to talk about this issue than one of profiling?
(Brief promotional announcement: Mr. Greenman's acclaimed new book of fiction is about to be published.)
Greenman's Blog Roll
Featured Bloggers
 | Ada Calhoun |
 | Ben Greenman |
 | Dinesh D'Souza |
 | Jeff Hoard |
 | Mo Rocca |
 | Young Turks |
RSS Feeds
Resources
Could Anything Have Been Done?
"Something Extraordinary"
From the author of Superbad and Superworse, a new collection of stories about giving, wanting, and the wonders of love. Get the details
Top Tags
Most Popular Stories
Most Commented On News Bloggers
Recent Comments
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Ryan Anderson on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- madking on Is it Okay to Hate McMansions Now?
- Blayze on Is it Okay to Hate McMansions Now?
- susan on Is it Okay to Hate McMansions Now?
Top News Headlines
Ada Calhoun |
Ben Greenman |
Dinesh D'Souza |
Jeff Hoard |
Mo Rocca |
The Young Turks |
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 7)
1. I have some issues with your article, first, the notion that college students haven't finished becoming adults - what about people who don't go to college? Do they never finish, or is there some other milestone they pass to have their ticket punched? College students are adults in the sense that they are responsible for their actions. They don't get sent to juvenille detention centeres when they break the law, they go to jail.
Now, onto the question at hand: what could have been done? The answer, sadly, is nothing. Nothing could be done in a free society. Maybe in China or some other totallitarian state, they can lock you up for your thoughts and feelings, but not here. Here, the law is reactionary because that is how you maintain a free society. You do something bad, you get punished. You don't get punished for you you may do.
The only thing that might have influenced the outcome would be arming staff members, but teachers and professors are likely not very interested in being trained as armed guards..
What you have here is the result of a sick individual taking extreme action in a free society. This has happened before here and abroad, and will happen again. Humans are not perfect, there are flaws - flaws in individuals (mental and physiological diseases), flaws in society, etc. One flaw may be freedom - certainly if you lock everyone in a cell, and ensure they are not armed, you cut down on the chances they will kill a large number of their neighbors. But what kind of life is that?
Also, we need to be cautious about this profiling.. profiling treads very dangerously on the flag of freedom. "you wrote a disturbing play, we need to lock you up now, Mr. Carpenter" We risk crushing the creativity and diversity of our society there (even more than censorship has already done).
Your point on focusing on the individual is good. Dead or alive, he is accountable for his acts. Let's not turn our society inside out in an effort to be safer.. "those who sacrifice liberty for safety deserve and will have neither"
gary at 12:36PM on Apr 18th 2007
2. It is a very sad state of affairs (these murders at schools). I believe we, as a nation, have become so desensitized by the odd behaviours of so many we continue to explain away that we do not see the dangers that are put in front of us. This killer showed so many signs of being a time bomb. No one took it really seriously. Although suggestions were made, no one followed through with mandates. He did not belong in this school, or any other. His acting out clearly indicated his future destructive behaviour. Why he did this is not of interest to me, it is why he was allowed to continue to function in this setting that is the real mystery. Leaders, educators, doctors, wake up! This is not the world that many of us knew 40, 60 years ago. Charlotte
Charlotte at 12:53PM on Apr 18th 2007
3. Yes, i strongly believe something could have been done in this tragedy. After the first shootings, students should have been quickly informed not by e-mail but by alarm,to evacuate away from the campus as quickly as possible. If e-mail was the so called correct way to inform students, the e-mails should have read that there was an emergency and students to evacuate promptly! My thoughts and prayers go out to VT, victims and families.
Ruby Grado at 1:00PM on Apr 18th 2007
4. My reply is from experience. After being incarcerated in prison camps during WWII with my family for being of Japanese descent, we moved to a southern state because we had nowhere to return to in California. There I was enrolled into the High School. After living amongst an all Japanese American community in these prison camps, it was very difficult to adjust to being the only Japanese-American amongst a community of WHITE ANGLO-SAXONS, most of whom had never seen or known an Asian-American. I felt like an oddity among these people, because they wanted to know where I came from, did I speak English, etc., etc. and it made me very uncomfortable. There were a few students who were courteous and kind, but I could never become very close to anyone of them. They would always keep their distance, and I was never invited to join their organizations, parties, get-togethers, etc. outside of school, unintentionally or intentionally.
I am not trying to compare my experience with this student, but in a sea of nothing but "white" people and you are the ONLY asian or oriental, it can become very lonely. My experience was immediately after WW II. Of course, it is a whole different world now and the people are much more worldly.
I have no idea if this may have been Cho's experience, but having lived in a Southern state during my high school years, I could almost relate to his experience.
Helen Takata at 1:11PM on Apr 18th 2007
5. When enough people think someone if abnormal, they're probably right. If these misfits were only deprived of their right to purchase, own and register firearms, I think much of this would be avoided.
Ken at 1:17PM on Apr 18th 2007
6. Upon hearing the warning signs displayed over the last two years. The stalking incidents with two female students. The violent writings. The professor who had him removed from her class under the threat that she would quit if he wasn't removed. The friend who reported him as suicidal. The fellow students who are admitting that it was considered he was a prime candidate for mass violence. He was referred to counselling. I feel strongly that the school should be held accountable for not removing him. He was obviously a threat not only to himself but to others. He should have been removed from school and not allowed to return until a responsible psychological professional could determine that he was no longer a threat to anyone. We put our children with the University. We should expect them to put their safety first.
Sandra Thibodeaux at 1:26PM on Apr 18th 2007
7. Could there have been something done? The point is there wasn't. I think we need to make some major change in our mental health system in the United States. Whenever there is someone with a mental health problem, or issue, everyone just wants to push it to the next person, nobody wants to deal with it. To say there was no "red flags" is absurd. The boy didnt talk for god sake, that's a "red flag" right there! Then when finally a teacher noticed something isn't right with this boy, and he's writing about carnage and killing, we say "Oh yeah, that could be a problem", HELLO!!! Nevermind the stalking. This teacher at VT seamed to be on her own with no help. God Bless You for trying. Maybe we can change the rules of the mental health system, so these people, wonderful people, who had bright futures ahead of them, didnt perish in vein. God Bless the victims families and friends and everyone at Virgina Tech.
Michelle at 1:52PM on Apr 18th 2007
8. Yes, this is a tragic incident - where are his parents? Have they had any comments regarding their son? I find it odd that there is such quiet on their end.
sue ann haesloop at 2:00PM on Apr 18th 2007
9. Somthing should have been done to prevent one of the saddest events in American History. With the reports and reccomendations for Cho to seek help, something should have been done. It's sad, but we to be extra-careful - better safe than sorry.
Although VT may not have done anything to prevent the initial incident, the others could have been avoided. The campus should have shut down immediatly - IRREGARDLESS TO WHAT THE 'CAMPUS' POLICE ASSUMED.
Debi at 2:05PM on Apr 18th 2007
10. As a mental health care provider, I am familiar with laws in California that give designated people (usually from the Dept. of Mental Health or the police department, or in various emergency departments) the ability to write a 72 hour hold on a person who is believed to be a danger to himself, danger to others, or gravely disabled. At that time, the person who has been determined to fit that criteria is placed in a locked psychiatric unit or facility. During that time the patient has to be evaluated by a psychiatrist and can be released or put on a 14 day hold. From there, the psychiatrist can apply to have the patient if he/she is unwilling to take medications, "Riesed". In other words, the patient can be made to take medications against their will. Typically that means they will be taking them via injection or liquid formulation. (This keeps them from spitting out the medication.) This doesn't last indefinitely, but there are provisions to keep this person away from society if he/she is unable to re-assimilate in an appropriate manner. There are additional holds (a second 14 day hold, a 30 day hold, and finally they can be sent to an IMD for long term care) that can be levied.
Like everyone out there, I am dismayed and disappointed that something wasn't done to prevent this obviously paranoid psychotic individual (who was likely having auditory hallucinations to kill others), away from guns and other people.
I'm guessing Virginia has a similar set of laws that could have been utilized, and should have...
j.w. at 2:10PM on Apr 18th 2007
11. Here we have an English major senior who refused to speak, had absolutely no friends, wrote hideously bizarre plays for homework assignments(using poor English), wrote his name as a question mark (?) on one get-acquainted form in class, frightened and/or stalked students, and oh yes, and he walked around like a zombie. Could no-one have taken the responsibility to act and remove this potential menace?
Nicholas Macelletti at 2:13PM on Apr 18th 2007
12. Ben, I thought your take on this tragedy was interesting.
I'm shocked and horrified by this because I'd always felt like if kids like Dylan Kliebold, who were sad and lonely and often the victim of bullies, could just get out of high school, things would be better for them. Not to say by any means that college, or the "real world", are idyllic places where everyone's happy, but at least a person has a lot more freedom to determine what he/she is doing and who he/she associates with. Outside the walls of the high school, a lonely person has a better chance of finding kindred spirits.
I don't know what could have prevented this. In the case of high school shootings, I would like schools (and I hate to put the onus on teachers, because it's already such a difficult position) to try to do a better job of identifying troubled,lonely kids and helping them to get involved in activities they enjoy. But, in the VT case, it sounds like Cho's professors reached out to him and tried to get him help, and that his roommates really made the effort to include him in things and be friends to him, and rebuffed their efforts. He made the choice to remain a loner, rather than taking the help and friendship that was offered to him. I honestly don't know what we, or society, can do to help kids like that before they hurt themselves or others. Although restrictive, greater profiling of and intervention with troubled kids might be the only answer.
My prayers go out to the friends and families of all the victims, including Cho.
Philip at 2:18PM on Apr 18th 2007
13. Police officers at Virginia Tech and at Columbine did not take effective action once the sound of the guns were heard. They hunkered down behind trees, cars, buildings and walls, waiting for somebody to tell them to do something. We need a hero in these situations. The only way to stop a madman, once he has begun, is with effective force. That takes courage. That also takes training. We had neither courage nor effective training from the police officers who responded to this terrible situation.
allen schmidt at 2:20PM on Apr 18th 2007
14. Over 20 years ago, when I was in college, a kid in our "group" started talking about blowing up the campus or buildings on the campus or shooting everyone, etc. He wasn't a big talker. He would promise that he would warn us ahead of time so we wouldn't be there. He was, truthfully, a really nice kid. We really liked him. He was also a sad, angry, and isolated kid, who cut himself with razorblades. I told a math professor we both had a class with, and he went to the kid's dorm that afternoon and spoke with him at some length. He then followed the established protocol and recommended the young man for campus mental health evaluation/services. This young man was relieved. He knew he was dangerous. He was sent home (across the nation) and placed under some psychiatric services. Tragedy averted.
I understand that this same type of process was begun at VT regarding Cho, but he was allowed back at school, still acting in the same manner. Somewhere along the chain of responsibility, somebody decided to mitigate their actual, tough responsibilities and not take appropriate action. Yet, students and professors had all done the right thing (and the tough thing) and tried to get help. I think they were let down. Cho was horribly let down. And now, with the huge reaction people are going to have to this tragedy, a lot of young people who actually are just expanding their wings are going to be overreacted to and treated like threats.
This kid WAS AN OBVIOUS CASE. There were no gray areas here. He had been screaming for help for years. His classmates screamed for help. It is an attempt to abdigate personal responsibility, on the part of the officials involved in this kid's past, to blame anything but themselves for not making the hard decisions.
linnntob at 2:49PM on Apr 18th 2007
15. Philip, as a college professor, I can tell you that it is very hard to dismiss a student for being 'odd' or 'bizarre'. We have criteria for giving various grades, and that just isn't one of them. Any teacher who points a finger at a troubled kid is going to go to trial over it. This kid was clearly a threat to anyone who he deemed threatening. The student is given many appeals and will often be given face-to-face conferences with an instructor who calls them to question. It is much easier to pass a student and be done with them, than it is to go to the mat over it, and then risk having them come after you!
It isn't the teacher's decision that should come into question. It isn't the student's whisperings about this guy's behavior that should be scrutinized. They are not expected to know how to interpret this kind of behavior. The person who needs to be questioned are the mental health officials (the psychiatrists) who decided he was not a threat!
WHERE ARE THE PSYCHIATRISTS WHO DID NOTHING???
Yes we DO have measures to do this, and it is not called 'profiling' as the moderator and his guest suggest...we have laws to prevent this from happening and to keep dangerous and potentially violent people off the streets, and away from our kids.
What can be done?
We had the ability to do something.
j.w. at 3:01PM on Apr 18th 2007