In suspending Mr. Loughner, the college told him he could not return without a mental health evaluation certifying he didn't pose a danger; it's a common procedure used in higher education to encourage people to get help. But - here's where the second-guessing begins - officials did not take steps to make that happen. It doesn't appear that Mr. Loughner sought or received treatment on his own. Should the college have initiated an involuntary mental evaluation, a process easier in Arizona than many states? Did it do enough to engage the parents, who professed in a statement, "We don't understand why this happened"?
In suspending Mr. Loughner, the college told him he could not return without a mental health evaluation certifying he didn't pose a danger; it's a common procedure used in higher education to encourage people to get help. But - here's where the second-guessing begins - officials did not take steps to make that happen. It doesn't appear that Mr. Loughner sought or received treatment on his own. Should the college have initiated an involuntary mental evaluation, a process easier in Arizona than many states? Did it do enough to engage the parents, who professed in a statement, "We don't understand why this happened"? (See full article at WaPo)
No comments:
Post a Comment