Thursday, April 19, 2007

It's Harder Than It Looks

A few thoughts about the tragedy at Virginia Tech and its aftermath:

  • Perhaps it is natural to seek some rational explanation, or to want to place blame, even for what ultimately is a completely irrational act. So it is not surprising to hear so much about what could have been done or what should have been done to prevent Cho Seung-Hei's murderous rampage. But it is depressing nonetheless to see so much written and spoken about how Virginia Tech failed to protect students, didn't warn them quickly enough, should have thrown Cho out of school, yada, yada, yada. Because it all misses the point. Here is what you are not reading or hearing about as part of the saturation coverage: You cannot predict future dangerousness with even a reasonable degree of certainty, and no reputable psychiatrist will claim otherwise. Keep that in mind as you read and listen to what is being said about this incident, especially criticism of what Virginia Tech administrators did and did not do. As former Indianapolis Colts' coach Jim Mora once said in another, obviously less important, context: "You think you know. But you don't know."
  • An article on the front page of today's New York Times is particularly appalling. In late 2005, Cho was found to be a danger to himself or others (the standard that must be met before someone can be involuntarily committed), was briefly hospitalized, and ordered to undergo out-patient treatment. Based on this, the Times writes: "For all the intervention by the police and faculty members, Mr. Cho was allowed to remain on campus and live with other students." What??? Let's discuss just a few of the several problems raised by this article and its implications that "warning signs" were ignored. First, lots of people are found to be a danger to themselves or others and are involuntarily committed. You probably know some, although you may not be aware of it, since it is not something that people usually advertise. There is a reason why, for example, well more than a billion dollars a year in Pennsylvania alone is spent on public and private mental health services. Very, very few people with mental illness are violent toward others, and a microscopically small number of such persons do the sort of thing that Cho did. Second, much has been made of the two incidents in which women complained about Cho's behavior toward them. But even the Times admits that one woman described Cho's actions as "annoying," and neither of the women decided to press charges. If those are warning signs, they were blurry ones indeed. Third, a lot also has been made of Cho's work in creative writing and other classes, much of which has been described as disturbing and violent. I do not dispute that such writings can be a sign of psychological problems, and Cho's teachers seemed to have acted appropriately in expressing concern, urging him to get help, etc. But such writing is neither a predictor of future violence (good news for Quentin Tarantino's neighbors and friends) nor sufficient by itself to expel someone from college. Finally, don't we want college students (and everyone else, of course) to seek counselling and treatment when mental health problems arise? What could be more of a deterrent to such treatment than students knowing that they face suspension, expulsion, or other stigmatization by seeking such treatment? There is a second article in today's Times that expresses this very point. Someone needs to show that article to the authors and editors who worked on the other piece.
  • Someone needs to tell all the talking heads that "loner" is neither a medical term nor a helpful description of Cho or what happened here. I have known several "loners." None killed anyone.
  • Congress needs to pass a law banning the use of "profilers" to explain crimes and those who commit them. They have been on cable this week more often than "Law and Order" episodes. I have seen a number of them, all of whom used their specialized training and years of experience to determine that Cho was deeply disturbed and dangerous. Someone needs to explain to these profilers that they would be a lot more impressive if they had said something about Cho's problems before he killed all those people. I did a little research and learned that the word "profiler" comes from the Latin term meaning "guess a lot and every so often get one right."
  • A final point: No reasonable person could dispute that our system for providing persons with mental health treatment should be improved. And if enough people care enough, it will be improved. But the answer is not to draw fast and easy conclusions based on a highly unusual incident, one that tells us next to nothing about the daily lives of nearly all other seriously mentally ill persons. I see "scary" behavior many days just walking the streets of Philadelphia. I would bet that not one of the hundreds of murders that have occurred in this City in the past two years has been committed by the persons I see.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home