A report released last month by the panel charged with investigating the Virginia Tech shootings sheds light on a blatant shortcoming on the part of the Virginia Tech's counseling services, which may provide guidelines for other universities to follow in the future.
A panel appointed by Gov. Timothy Kaine of Virginia made more than 90 recommendations to, among others, Virginia Tech, mental-health officials and legislators.
The report mainly discussed the slip-ups in mental health coverage and gun control laws that allowed Seung Hui Cho to murder 32 people.
According to the report, Cho sought psychological counseling on more than three occasions.
All three times he received only preliminary triage - never received a treatment session - and no one at Virginia Tech's counseling center followed through on his case.
Those weren't the only red flags. In more than five writing classes, Cho submitted shockingly violent work. Three times, his work was submitted to the dean, twice to the university's Care Team.
Nonetheless, Cho never received therapy, and no significant action was taken on behalf of the university to address his mental health.
In addition, the police department had opened multiple files on Cho for harassing females at the school. The third time, they sent him to a mental institution for an overnight evaluation.
Due to a loophole in Virginia law that was temporarily corrected by Kaine, neither Cho's mental evaluation from that institution nor his police record appeared in the database used by firearm venders to check the criminal and psychological backgrounds of their patrons.
In other words, when Cho purchased the weapons he would later use for the 32 killings, his dark record was squeaky clean.
The report grimly states that, although many different individuals knew about each incident, "No one knew all the information and no one connected all the dots."
Educators, police officers and campus counseling professionals alike, it seems, were concerned with violating privacy laws, including separate educational, state and federal regulations.
As it turns out, these were "incorrect interpretations," and, in fact, "federal laws and their state counterparts afford ample leeway to share information in potentially dangerous situations."
The report gives many careful recommendations to avoid such misinterpretation, but Steven Ager, professor in psychiatry at Temple University School of Medicine, warns such advice may lead to a slippery slope.
"We all value our privacy," he said, "and I think if people thought that if they went for counseling and that information was shared with third parties, they may not go in the first place."
Penn's Counseling and Psychological Service would not offer any statement on Penn's protocols for a similar situation or on the impact of the report on Penn's policies despite repeated requests for comment over the last week.
