LETTERS: the dangers of articles on suicide attempts

To the Editor: Even without identifying the students by name, you are printing someone's personal story -- without their permission and in violation of their right to share personal information when and how they choose. You are printing a rumored version of someone's personal pain, which may lack little relation to reality -- and for what purpose? Satisfying the community's curiosity? I am also dismayed by the report that some Penn Police officers disclosed information about these incidents. If this is true, it is in direct violation of departmental policy regarding communications with the media and the confidentiality of sensitive information obtained by police officers in the course of performing their duties. Further, the article mischaracterizes the authority of police officers to involuntarily detain a person for psychiatric evaluation. This authority, under police emergency powers, is only available under extremely limited circumstances and does not allow, as your article states, police to "commit students to a mandatory three day hospitalization." The Pennsylvania Mental Health Procedures Act limits police power to detain and transport a person to a psychiatric facility for emergency evaluation to two kinds of situations: (1) where the court or county delegate has pre-approved the emergency evaluation, based on a written petition by a family member, friend or other responsible party that the person is mentally disabled and is dangerous to themselves or to others. Or, (2), the police officer or a physician actually witnesses the individual try to harm themselves or someone else. In either of these situations, the individual may be brought for an emergency psychiatric evaluation to determine the need for involuntary treatment. The person must, within two hours of arriving at the hospital, be certified by a psychiatrist as requiring involuntary admission for up to three days or be released. Police cannot "commit" anyone for three days of involuntary psychiatric treatment. Rather, authorized health professionals and the courts make decisions about involuntary treatment, limited by strict laws to a small percentage of those situations in which suicidal thoughts are present or suspected. Police, again limited by the law, can temporarily detain someone for a brief period until they are evaluated by a health professional. Why is this distinction important? Police are involved as helpers in many types of problem situations, including emotional disturbances. Misinformation about police authority may discourage vulnerable people from seeking help from officers for fear of being "locked up." In recognition of the range of sensitive problems that involve police intervention, Penn provides non-uniformed officers who are specially trained to respond to these situations, which may involve overt dangerousness but often do not. The Special Services Unit of Public Safety works closely with Counseling and Psychological Services, residence staff and the emergency services at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania to assist students in obtaining appropriate evaluation, treatment and support services. While I applaud your headline emphasizing the counseling services available to assist troubled students, I hope in the future you will consider the detrimental effects of printing misinformation about the mental health laws and unnecessary details of a private and painful story. Rather than serving the community, you run the risk of making people less likely to access the help available to them. Susan Hawkins Director of Special Services Division of Public Safety u To the Editor: Besides that I never spoke to either author of "Suicide attempts lead U. to stress counseling services" (DP, 4/24/98), the article is misleading in many ways. I did strongly state to two editors on your board that it was important not to use any names and to use facts only, if it has to be reported at all. To present details as if they were the facts when they are based on speculation is irresponsible to the whole Penn community, not just those individuals involved. The one message that you did seem to get from what I said to the editors was that help was available. Yet I am very concerned that the fear of ending up on the front page and/or having things said about you that aren't even correct may stop a student from getting the assistance they may even want. To all community members, the staff at Counseling and Psychological Services highly value confidentiality, and yes, help is available from counselors, administrators, religious leaders, police, residential staff and faculty. There are many students, faculty and staff who want to help and hopefully will interact with you in a responsive, caring and respectful way. I am personally sorry if this article, as well as any others, may lead you to believe differently. We all, including the DP staff, should be working together to continue to build a safe, caring and healthy academic environment for all. And to the person who wrote the letter to the editor regarding inadequate counseling services: I regret that you did not get the help you desired when you came to CAPS. I would appreciate if you contacted me so we can figure out what happened and make sure all students -- including you -- get the assistance they need. Ilene Rosenstein Director of Counseling and Psychological Services Recontextualized To the Editor: Talk about being out of context. I'm extremely appalled by the editorial "Out of Context" (DP, 4/23/98). As part of the Latino Coalition, I would like to say that the editorial board is anything but right. In actuality, any efforts made by the school have made no noticeable change. Latino admissions have dropped about 12 percent since last year and of those that are accepted only about half of them can actually come, if at all that many. One of the biggest reasons they don't come is that they don't have the money. Admittingly, I received a sizeable grant from the school, but my mother still has to pay a considerable amount. Others aren't as fortunate. They may not get as much grant money and they can't afford to pay the rest because they come from poor families so they end up taking loan after loan after loan until they are extremely in debt by the end of their first year at Penn. At the same time, Penn does not recruit well. Admissions officers only go to select schools where the number of Latinos is dismal. I went to a public high school, with a large population of Latinos, but Penn never came. Many of the students in my high school didn't even know that Penn existed, and those that did, did not know it was a part of the Ivy League. These are potential students that Penn completely overlooks. The number of Latino faculty at this school is also too low. There are only 23 faculty members and of those only two are tenured. Lastly, who ever said that we needed just one spokesperson? The Latino Coalition is made up of 14 groups on campus, and of these groups, everyone has a say as to what goes on and what is said. We all know the facts; we all pull together. If anyone were to come up to a member of the Latino Coalition, that person will give you all the information that he/she needs. As well, do not assume that we do not have a plan to speak to administrators or a plan of action because we do not disclose that information. We are getting things done on this campus and we are being heard. Sylvia Cardounell Latino Coalition College '00 You thought it was over To the Editor: I am writing this letter as a concerned graduate student to express my support for, and encourage others to support the local vendors who are seeking an injunction against, the administration's version of the vending ordinance (#980022). Oddly enough, it may be the City Council members' own comments that best prove their undue and inappropriate bias favoring the Penn administration. Also, consider that Penn, who is an obvious economic beneficiary, has only met one day to negotiate (consultation is not negotiation) this ordinance with other affected groups -- and next day broke over half of the agreements that were made. Finally, the legislated monopoly Penn is trying to build surely runs afoul of the spirit, if not the letter of Federal anti-trust laws. While my legal background is admittedly limited, I have no doubt any of these reasons alone would be ample grounds for an injunction preventing enforcement of the ordinance. Together I am optimistic they will prove entirely compelling, provided the judge isn't as swayed by Penn's influence as Council President John Street clearly was. Greg Huey SAS '99 u To the Editor: In the midst of the discussion over the vending issue, I feel a vital question has been ignored: who is Penn? Is Penn nothing more than a handful of administrators? Or is Penn the students, faculty and staff that give this university its character? I found it ironic that in a room where several members of the Penn community (students, faculty, staff and residents of University City) were protesting the vending ordinance, Council President John Street had the nerve to equate the administration's wishes with those of Penn as a whole. The vending issue has gone beyond the question of whether vendors should be allowed on the sidewalks. The controversy has revealed deeper issues that are quite troubling, and they need to be addressed. J.J. Ivaska College/Engineering '00