Medical Leave Proposal Disrespectful and Intrusive

It was with great concern that I read the latest attempt by Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 to "improve" the quality of student life on campus, i.e. the recently penned Leave of Absence for Medical Reasons policy. This policy allows the Dean of the College to place a student on leave if a student's behavior "poses a direct threat to the health or safety of the student or others" and "the student's behavior or threatening state is the result of a medical condition." While it is true that "[i]n making this determination, the Dean of the College will consult with the student's Resident Dean, and with the office of the Director of the University Health Services," it is also true that the decision rests ultimately in the Dean's hands. A student may only appeal the "facts" of the case, not the actual determination of the Dean, to the Administrative Board.

This policy is a bad idea for three reasons. First of all, it gives the Dean of the College, a position that has no medical knowledge or experience as a prerequisite, sole responsibility and power to determine the seriousness of a student's medical condition. An administrative entity (e.g. the Dean of the College or a Resident Dean), a being whose job it is to smooth the operations of a bureaucracy, is not in a position to sort through the complexities of a student's personal life that may make a student eligible for a medical (including mental health) leave of absence. A person who has no familiarity with the student in question and/or who has not had the medical background necessary to more fully understand the issues with which a student may be struggling, is in no position to say what is best for any particular student.

Second, not only is an unqualified person invested with medical authority, this person also has the power to make a potentially life-threatening miscalculation. For many students with mental health concerns, school is a stabilizing influence in their lives. To go home to an abusive family, or to leave the support structure of friends that they have established in their House, would be disastrous. Thus, in a misguided and paternalistic attempt to somehow improve a student's life, the College could very well misstep and send someone "over the edge."

Third, because there is no real appeals process established by this policy and because ultimate decision-making authority lies with one person with this policy, students with medical conditions that may be embarrassing to the College are potentially subject to poorly informed and/or political decisions about the danger that their condition presents to themselves or others. For example, a student who is HIV-positive could be told to leave the College because of their supposed ability to pass the virus to other users of their dining hall. Perhaps this situation sounds far-fetched right now, but looking back a decade, when the level of ignorance concerning HIV was very high, it is not hard to imagine a dean considering placing such an HIV-positive student on medical leave.

With this policy the College has again demonstrated its general disrespect for students' maturity and self-knowledge. Without any valid justification, a student can be forced to defend his health record in front of one omnipotent administrator. This is an unwarranted intrusion on students' privacy. --Jeff Redding '96, for the Executive Board of the Civil Liberties Union of Harvard