Virginia Tech: A Different Opinion

By

William D. Dannenmaier

Crying and moaning makes money for newspapers and television stations, but I’m not aware that it has ever solved any problems.  Several years ago Tennessee lost several young people, teen-agers, in a series of automobile accidents in a short period of time.  The newspapers were full of sad stories, the television ran tapes of high school students clinging to one another, to counselors and to teachers in sobbing sessions.  It was a time of regret and remorse.

In an unpopular essay I wrote that if the principals of the high schools had told their assembled students that the reason their friends were dead was because they had broken the law they would have done more good.  If the dead teens (with their parents help or acceptance) had not broken the Tennessee driving laws, they would have been alive.  While such a talk would not have sold newspapers or kept those who enjoy grieving from being glued to their television sets, it might have saved lives, because it was true. 

This may appear harsh on my part, perhaps it is because of my background.  Several months of combat in Korea taught me to watch how others got killed in order to avoid the same experience.  On Outpost Harry in 1953, for example, it was a mistake for two men to stop outside of the command bunker for a brief conversation even though it appeared to be a safe spot.  We scouts warned new troops of the problem, but people were still killed standing there.  The Chinese mortar men only needed a minute to send a shell their way.  That doesn’t mean we didn’t grieve for a particular friend, but that was private business: it could not be permitted to interfere with learning from experience and living. 

I feel the same way about this massacre at Virginia Tech.  Television news furnished picture after picture of grieving students, candlelight vigils; amateur analyses of the murderer’s state of mind and interviews with survivors.  Why?  It’s over!  What is the relevance of the murderer’s state of mind, what good are pictures of him holding weapons?  How is that going to prevent another such incident? 

I would like to see interview after interview with university officials, beginning with the president who punished a young man who – legally – carried a weapon on campus and led a campaign which convinced the Virginia legislature to prohibit ALL guns on campus.  This only, as he now knows, kept the LEGAL guns off campus.  Or an interview with the administrator who said the campus was completely safe; students had no need for self protection.  Incidentally, this meant that students who lived off campus could not carry guns in their car for their safety while traveling too and from campus even if licensed to do so unless they parked off campus.

Why was there a failure to alert students on campus or coming to campus that a killer was running loose?  Officials knew there was danger, but no attempt was made to warn faculty or students until following the tragedy. The feeble excuse that they have too many students is a travesty.  I’ll bet that if their football team or basketball team won some important game or a championship it would be broadcast across campus and on local radio stations in a minute!

Isn’t now a proper time to ask about student rights of privacy and the restraints placed on communicating within the campus or to family concerning students in trouble?  The Tennessee Tech killer was known to be a problem.  He had been in court, he had been expelled from a class for his behavior towards women and he had been in a mental hospital.  Yet no responsible official was paying attention.  Why not? 

One of my sons had extraordinary problems following a very successful first year in college.  Briefly; almost blind without his glasses, he broke them.  The nearest place he could go to replace them was some fifteen miles from campus and he had no transportation.  Simultaneously, he came down with a severe case of bronchitis.  Over a period of a couple of months, following weekly telephone calls, we had him go to the Student Affairs Dean, the Student Counselor, and the campus doctor.  He also asked permission of his chemistry and zoology professors to go to the board to read their notes as he couldn’t see them from his seat.  Only the zoology professor helped, none of the others did.  Apparently, no one of them communicated with anyone else concerning his problems.  Neither did any authority he went to for help do a follow-up to see if he still needed help.  His grades plunged and he was seriously unhappy by the end of the term.  I wrote the college president about this.  He never replied. 

I have been told that privacy laws prevent the communication of facts about a student to his parents, or parental authority and between offices on college campuses.  This may be true.  I know that as a teacher in a slum school and then as a professor I was always concerned about my students.  Early in my career if I found a student behaving oddly I could go to the dean or registrar to discuss the problem.  After the seventies, when I tried to do that I was told I couldn’t do that, confidentiality laws prohibited my knowing a student’s background even though I was trying to help that student.  That is absurd.  If the law prevents the communication of a student’s mental health problems among responsible campus personnel, which should include his professors, or with parental figures, that law needs to be changed.

Rather than having flags lowered to half mast I’d rather have the President appoint a commission to study the legalities of the situation.  This tragedy, and it is a tragedy, at Virginia Tech could be used as a springboard to prevent future problems.  

Perhaps now you will understand my dislike of the moaning and groaning.  It accomplishes nothing.  A review of administrator conduct and the laws which inhibit the assistance or protection of students would be much more useful.  Hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are spent each year on college administrators.  We have a gaggle of administrators on college campuses: presidents, assistant presidents, academic deans, deans of students, counselors, affirmative action deans, Black Studies deans: deans about every conceivable element of campus life – it would be nice to know that they are doing things other than attending football games and drawing their salaries.  Who is responsible and who is accountable?   A focus on grief detracts from an analysis of responsibility.