GSE prof cleared in free speech lawsuit

The actions of a University Education professor who vocally opposed the opening of a mental-health facility in his Bucks County neighborhood were protected by the First Amendment, a federal judge ruled last week. Paul McDermott, the chairperson of the Psychology in Education division of the Graduate School of Education, was sued in 1996 by Salisbury House Inc., a for-profit company that owns and operates about 60 mental-health facilities in Pennsylvania. Salisbury House planned to open a "crisis home" -- the company's second -- in McDermott's neighborhood in Chalfont. Such a home is designed to provide several days of counseling and housing for people having a short-term mental-health episode not serious enough to require hospitalization. The facility encountered vehement resistance, led by McDermott -- a member of the GSE faculty since 1977 -- and his wife, Andrea. The company eventually scrapped the plan. Salisbury House sued the couple in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia in October 1996, accusing them of violating the federal Fair Housing Amendments Act by discriminating against the mentally handicapped. Despite ruling in McDermott's favor March 24, U.S. District Judge Franklin Van Antwerpen sharply criticized some of McDermott's behavior. "Although these views reflect an ill-advised, distasteful form of 'not-in-my-backyard'-ism, the defendants have the right under the First Amendment to express themselves without fear of prosecution," Van Antwerpen wrote in the decision. Thomas York, the McDermotts' attorney, said the decision represented "the acknowledgment of the First Amendment rights that we're all guaranteed." Van Antwerpen's "unnecessary side comments" were his "personal opinion" with no basis in law, York said. But Salisbury House attorney Edmond Tiryak said that while his clients were "disappointed [the judge] didn't rule in our favor," they were "pleased that the judge pretty much lambasted [McDermott] for his behavior, which was pretty repugnant." Tiryak said he has not ruled out the possibility of an appeal. The battle over the facility began in July 1996, when privately-held Salisbury House bought a 3.5-acre property across the street from the McDermotts. The company planned to use the house as a second place for temporary mental-health patients. According to the decision, Salisbury House decided to consult the neighborhood before moving in, which they had not done in the past. They distributed brochures and invited select neighbors to visit the Allentown facility. The McDermotts say the company only consulted a few of the property's immediate neighbors -- but not them. The McDermotts distributed fliers and pamphlets urging neighbors to oppose the facility and to speak out against it at a county zoning meeting. York said that while McDermott is "very sympathetic to the mentally ill," Salisbury House wanted to bring in patients who posed safety threats to the population. "If you knew [the McDermotts], and talked to them, and knew their motivations here, I think you would put this in a completely different perspective," he said. Tiryak, however, said it was hypocritical for a psychology professor to criticize the mentally ill, comparing it to "the chairman of the black studies program saying he didn't 'want any niggers in his neighborhood.' " Salisbury House officials say they then received bomb threats. The original owners of the property were also receiving threatening phone calls. In August 1996, the company backed out of the purchase, noting the "vicious, mean-spirited and factually incorrect" rumors being spread throughout the neighborhood. According to Tiryak, Salisbury House filed the suit on principle, because "people shouldn't be able to get away with doing this." The Allentown, Pa., company was seeking about $11,000 in damages. On March 27, Tiryak wrote a letter to University President Judith Rodin, saying McDermott's conduct was "too much for me to stomach" and asking her to take unspecified disciplinary action against him. York said that while McDermott was "concerned" about the letter, he expected Rodin to "consider the source of the letter and discard it." Jennifer Baldino, Rodin's staff assistant, said Rodin received the letter and "generally responds to every letter she receives," but would not comment further.