Katie Meyer's Parents Sue Stanford
(11-11-2022, 09:50 PM)winflop Wrote:(11-11-2022, 07:56 PM)TrumpCard Wrote: It’s not just Stanford. Other schools are having problems with student mental health as well. Here’s Yale struggling:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/..._p001_f006
It's everywhere. One of my boys is at Santa Clara. They had 3 students commit suicide last year in fall quarter and took some major steps to improve things - the kinds of things Stanford SHOULD have done like more than doubling the counseling staff. They seem to be working. Stanford seems to have an increasing frequency of doing things the wrong way.
Not to quibble, but I think one of the three died in an accidental fall.
Santa Clara University students demand better mental health resources in wake of recent deaths (ktvu.com)
Some mental health resources, for what it's worth:
Mental Health Resources for the South Bay and Peninsula
24-hour Suicide and Crisis Line (Santa Clara County) 650-494-8420 or 408-279-3312
Uplift (EMQ) Crisis Team (Santa Clara County) 408-379-9085 or 877-412-7474
Star Vista Crisis Line (San Mateo County): 650-579-0350
NAMI Santa Clara Warm line: 408-435-0400, option 1
NAMI San Mateo Warm line: 650-638-0800
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-TALK (8255) Suicide prevention telephone hotline funded by the U.S. government. Provides free, 24-hour assistance.
Rape Crisis Hot Line (24 hour): 650.493.7273
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(11-11-2022, 09:50 PM)winflop Wrote:(11-11-2022, 07:56 PM)TrumpCard Wrote: It’s not just Stanford. Other schools are having problems with student mental health as well. Here’s Yale struggling:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/..._p001_f006
It's everywhere. One of my boys is at Santa Clara. They had 3 students commit suicide last year in fall quarter and took some major steps to improve things - the kinds of things Stanford SHOULD have done like more than doubling the counseling staff. They seem to be working. Stanford seems to have an increasing frequency of doing things the wrong way.
Not to quibble, but I think one of the three died in an accidental fall.
Santa Clara University students demand better mental health resources in wake of recent deaths (ktvu.com)
Some mental health resources, for what it's worth:
Mental Health Resources for the South Bay and Peninsula
24-hour Suicide and Crisis Line (Santa Clara County) 650-494-8420 or 408-279-3312
Uplift (EMQ) Crisis Team (Santa Clara County) 408-379-9085 or 877-412-7474
Star Vista Crisis Line (San Mateo County): 650-579-0350
NAMI Santa Clara Warm line: 408-435-0400, option 1
NAMI San Mateo Warm line: 650-638-0800
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-TALK (8255) Suicide prevention telephone hotline funded by the U.S. government. Provides free, 24-hour assistance.
Rape Crisis Hot Line (24 hour): 650.493.7273
Audaces fortuna iuvat
11-24-2022, 08:14 AM
Any legal experts on this board have a guess of how much compensation her family may be seeking?
11-24-2022, 08:37 AM
Make this a new thread, please.
USA Today has a fuller account of the complaint:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...766400002/
Notably, the complaint alleges that Meyer spilled coffee on Stanford football player accused of sexual assault.
The article implies—or, rather, gives space for a Stanford spokeswoman to imply — that the football player was accused of kissing a Stanford soccer player without permission.
Anyway, the football player isn’t being sued, with the legal claims arising from how the university treated Meyer in its investigation of her behavior and most specifically—but not exclusively— the way it notified her that she faced a disciplinary hearing.
My own take is that there probably aren’t universal best practices for this sort of notification, so that part of the case would be a serious uphill battle.
USA Today has a fuller account of the complaint:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...766400002/
Notably, the complaint alleges that Meyer spilled coffee on Stanford football player accused of sexual assault.
The article implies—or, rather, gives space for a Stanford spokeswoman to imply — that the football player was accused of kissing a Stanford soccer player without permission.
Quote:The lawsuit says Stanford failed to initiate any meaningful Title IX or OCS disciplinary process for the football player even though the school was required to dismiss the player from the team under its own policies pledging zero tolerance for sexual violence.
Mostofi also addressed a matter involving a Stanford football player, though she did not confirm it was the player involved in the disciplinary charge against Meyer. The Stanford spokesperson said the "allegation that Stanford failed to address a claim that a football player kissed one of Katie’s soccer teammates without her permission is inaccurate.
Anyway, the football player isn’t being sued, with the legal claims arising from how the university treated Meyer in its investigation of her behavior and most specifically—but not exclusively— the way it notified her that she faced a disciplinary hearing.
My own take is that there probably aren’t universal best practices for this sort of notification, so that part of the case would be a serious uphill battle.
Make this a new thread, please.
USA Today has a fuller account of the complaint:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...766400002/
Notably, the complaint alleges that Meyer spilled coffee on Stanford football player accused of sexual assault.
The article implies—or, rather, gives space for a Stanford spokeswoman to imply — that the football player was accused of kissing a Stanford soccer player without permission.
Anyway, the football player isn’t being sued, with the legal claims arising from how the university treated Meyer in its investigation of her behavior and most specifically—but not exclusively— the way it notified her that she faced a disciplinary hearing.
My own take is that there probably aren’t universal best practices for this sort of notification, so that part of the case would be a serious uphill battle.
USA Today has a fuller account of the complaint:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...766400002/
Notably, the complaint alleges that Meyer spilled coffee on Stanford football player accused of sexual assault.
The article implies—or, rather, gives space for a Stanford spokeswoman to imply — that the football player was accused of kissing a Stanford soccer player without permission.
Quote:The lawsuit says Stanford failed to initiate any meaningful Title IX or OCS disciplinary process for the football player even though the school was required to dismiss the player from the team under its own policies pledging zero tolerance for sexual violence.
Mostofi also addressed a matter involving a Stanford football player, though she did not confirm it was the player involved in the disciplinary charge against Meyer. The Stanford spokesperson said the "allegation that Stanford failed to address a claim that a football player kissed one of Katie’s soccer teammates without her permission is inaccurate.
Anyway, the football player isn’t being sued, with the legal claims arising from how the university treated Meyer in its investigation of her behavior and most specifically—but not exclusively— the way it notified her that she faced a disciplinary hearing.
My own take is that there probably aren’t universal best practices for this sort of notification, so that part of the case would be a serious uphill battle.
I am not an attorney and I sympathize with the parents, but this suit seems silly, for want of a better word. If she got an email notice that she was expelled or something, ok, maybe, maybe, maybe. This was just to tell her that there would be a hearing. A hearing means nothing has been decided. She might well win her case. She might lose her case but the punishment might be minor. She had a ton of options, like call her parents, ask friends for support, etc., etc. She was an adult, a senior in college. She chose to impulsively end her own life. That is heartbreaking, but that's on her.
I am not an attorney and I sympathize with the parents, but this suit seems silly, for want of a better word. If she got an email notice that she was expelled or something, ok, maybe, maybe, maybe. This was just to tell her that there would be a hearing. A hearing means nothing has been decided. She might well win her case. She might lose her case but the punishment might be minor. She had a ton of options, like call her parents, ask friends for support, etc., etc. She was an adult, a senior in college. She chose to impulsively end her own life. That is heartbreaking, but that's on her.
11-24-2022, 10:06 AM
I am very sympathetic to Meyer's parents, and lord knows the university's disciplinary investigations and hearing procedures are deeply flawed and in need of a near-total overhaul.
All that said, the allegation that this notice negligently caused Meyer's suicide -- and that university officials should have been aware of that -- is, well, not very persuasive. And it makes me wonder whether there had been any kind of warning signs about Meyer's mental health prior to her suicide, because such a response in a mentally sound person would seem pretty disproportionate to the nature of the issue at hand. I can't help but feel like there's more to the story than has been made public.
All that said, the allegation that this notice negligently caused Meyer's suicide -- and that university officials should have been aware of that -- is, well, not very persuasive. And it makes me wonder whether there had been any kind of warning signs about Meyer's mental health prior to her suicide, because such a response in a mentally sound person would seem pretty disproportionate to the nature of the issue at hand. I can't help but feel like there's more to the story than has been made public.
I am very sympathetic to Meyer's parents, and lord knows the university's disciplinary investigations and hearing procedures are deeply flawed and in need of a near-total overhaul.
All that said, the allegation that this notice negligently caused Meyer's suicide -- and that university officials should have been aware of that -- is, well, not very persuasive. And it makes me wonder whether there had been any kind of warning signs about Meyer's mental health prior to her suicide, because such a response in a mentally sound person would seem pretty disproportionate to the nature of the issue at hand. I can't help but feel like there's more to the story than has been made public.
All that said, the allegation that this notice negligently caused Meyer's suicide -- and that university officials should have been aware of that -- is, well, not very persuasive. And it makes me wonder whether there had been any kind of warning signs about Meyer's mental health prior to her suicide, because such a response in a mentally sound person would seem pretty disproportionate to the nature of the issue at hand. I can't help but feel like there's more to the story than has been made public.
11-24-2022, 10:43 AM
I have no idea whether they will prevail. More likely a settlement. I hope they clean Stanford's clock. How Stanford handled not only this case but other mental health cases - especially afterwards - is utterly shameful and should get MTL and Drell fired for their failures, even though I know it won't.
I have no idea whether they will prevail. More likely a settlement. I hope they clean Stanford's clock. How Stanford handled not only this case but other mental health cases - especially afterwards - is utterly shameful and should get MTL and Drell fired for their failures, even though I know it won't.
11-24-2022, 11:41 AM
This is not an issue specific to Stanford, and as long as there is stigma around mental health, people will continue to give outward appearances that nothing is wrong. No idea whether that was the case here.
BC
BC
This is not an issue specific to Stanford, and as long as there is stigma around mental health, people will continue to give outward appearances that nothing is wrong. No idea whether that was the case here.
BC
BC
(11-24-2022, 10:06 AM)2006alum Wrote: I am very sympathetic to Meyer's parents, and lord knows the university's disciplinary investigations and hearing procedures are deeply flawed and in need of a near-total overhaul.
All that said, the allegation that this notice negligently caused Meyer's suicide -- and that university officials should have been aware of that -- is, well, not very persuasive. And it makes me wonder whether there had been any kind of warning signs about Meyer's mental health prior to her suicide, because such a response in a mentally sound person would seem pretty disproportionate to the nature of the issue at hand. I can't help but feel like there's more to the story than has been made public.
EDIT- Helps to read the article. If that truly is the basis of the suit, it’s thin. Unless there was prior knowledge of mental health issues.
As for damages, harder to calculate when it’s parents suing for loss of child. As generally it’s not support, as it would be for child/spouse suing for spouse/parents wrongful death. And there is no prior income to base an award on. Highly speculative.
(11-24-2022, 10:06 AM)2006alum Wrote: I am very sympathetic to Meyer's parents, and lord knows the university's disciplinary investigations and hearing procedures are deeply flawed and in need of a near-total overhaul.
All that said, the allegation that this notice negligently caused Meyer's suicide -- and that university officials should have been aware of that -- is, well, not very persuasive. And it makes me wonder whether there had been any kind of warning signs about Meyer's mental health prior to her suicide, because such a response in a mentally sound person would seem pretty disproportionate to the nature of the issue at hand. I can't help but feel like there's more to the story than has been made public.
EDIT- Helps to read the article. If that truly is the basis of the suit, it’s thin. Unless there was prior knowledge of mental health issues.
As for damages, harder to calculate when it’s parents suing for loss of child. As generally it’s not support, as it would be for child/spouse suing for spouse/parents wrongful death. And there is no prior income to base an award on. Highly speculative.
11-24-2022, 11:53 AM
(11-24-2022, 10:43 AM)winflop Wrote: I have no idea whether they will prevail. More likely a settlement. I hope they clean Stanford's clock. How Stanford handled not only this case but other mental health cases - especially afterwards - is utterly shameful and should get MTL and Drell fired for their failures, even though I know it won't.
Can you say more about:
(a) How Stanford should have known this was a "mental health case"? By all public accounts, Meyer had exhibited no signs or symptoms of mental health issues - even her own mother said that "her daughter was “excited” and had “a lot going on” in her life but didn’t show any warning signs that she was distraught. Why should Stanford have known there was any reason to think she was at an elevated risk of suicide?
(b) What more you think Stanford should have done here? From the USA Today article posted earlier in this thread:
Quote:Mostofi, the Stanford spokesperson, said the head of the Office of Community Standards (OCS) contacted Meyer "several days'' before the former goalkeeper received written notice of a possible violation of community standards.
"She gave Katie until that date to provide any further information for consideration,'' Mostofi said. "Katie provided no information and OCS informed her on the evening of February 28 that the matter would move to a hearing.''
In the university correspondence emailed to Meyer Feb. 28, Mostofi said, Meyer was "explicitly told that this was not a determination that she did anything wrong, and OCS offered to meet with her to discuss the matter if she wished.'' According to Mostofi, Meyer also was given a number to call for immediate support and was specifically told that this resource was available to her 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
"Shortly after receiving that email, Katie wrote OCS staff and received a reply within the hour,'' Mostofi said. "Katie asked for a meeting to discuss the matter, was offered several available times, and chose one three days later despite the availability of an earlier appointment.''
I get that the Stanford administration has come under much deserved criticism for its many sins, and I get that this is a truly lamentable situation, and there's a desire to find someone to blame for it. But nothing I've ever read about this case suggests that Stanford acted negligently and recklessly to the degree they should be on the hook for a wrongful death suit. But I'd welcome more insights that may change my view.
(11-24-2022, 10:43 AM)winflop Wrote: I have no idea whether they will prevail. More likely a settlement. I hope they clean Stanford's clock. How Stanford handled not only this case but other mental health cases - especially afterwards - is utterly shameful and should get MTL and Drell fired for their failures, even though I know it won't.
Can you say more about:
(a) How Stanford should have known this was a "mental health case"? By all public accounts, Meyer had exhibited no signs or symptoms of mental health issues - even her own mother said that "her daughter was “excited” and had “a lot going on” in her life but didn’t show any warning signs that she was distraught. Why should Stanford have known there was any reason to think she was at an elevated risk of suicide?
(b) What more you think Stanford should have done here? From the USA Today article posted earlier in this thread:
Quote:Mostofi, the Stanford spokesperson, said the head of the Office of Community Standards (OCS) contacted Meyer "several days'' before the former goalkeeper received written notice of a possible violation of community standards.
"She gave Katie until that date to provide any further information for consideration,'' Mostofi said. "Katie provided no information and OCS informed her on the evening of February 28 that the matter would move to a hearing.''
In the university correspondence emailed to Meyer Feb. 28, Mostofi said, Meyer was "explicitly told that this was not a determination that she did anything wrong, and OCS offered to meet with her to discuss the matter if she wished.'' According to Mostofi, Meyer also was given a number to call for immediate support and was specifically told that this resource was available to her 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
"Shortly after receiving that email, Katie wrote OCS staff and received a reply within the hour,'' Mostofi said. "Katie asked for a meeting to discuss the matter, was offered several available times, and chose one three days later despite the availability of an earlier appointment.''
I get that the Stanford administration has come under much deserved criticism for its many sins, and I get that this is a truly lamentable situation, and there's a desire to find someone to blame for it. But nothing I've ever read about this case suggests that Stanford acted negligently and recklessly to the degree they should be on the hook for a wrongful death suit. But I'd welcome more insights that may change my view.
Softball Fan
Unregistered
Unregistered
11-24-2022, 11:54 AM
A WVB player filed a lawsuit against Stanford blaming the university for her concussion not being diagnosed and handled properly. At first I thought Stanford would quickly settle to avoid adverse publicity. Just the opposite transpired. After four years the lawyers continue to battle it out. Legal websites say Stanford is playing hard ball and will likely appeal if they don't prevail on all counts.
This may be apples and oranges for reasons I don't know about.
This may be apples and oranges for reasons I don't know about.
A WVB player filed a lawsuit against Stanford blaming the university for her concussion not being diagnosed and handled properly. At first I thought Stanford would quickly settle to avoid adverse publicity. Just the opposite transpired. After four years the lawyers continue to battle it out. Legal websites say Stanford is playing hard ball and will likely appeal if they don't prevail on all counts.
This may be apples and oranges for reasons I don't know about.
This may be apples and oranges for reasons I don't know about.
11-24-2022, 12:09 PM
I think the sufficiency of the complaint is likely to be fairly irrelevant to the ultimate outcome as long as the complaint can survive a motion to dismiss and get to discovery.
If I had to make an educated guess based solely upon the various public statements including the groups advocating for the University to make genuine changes, I suspect Meyer’s parents want discovery and the ability to force the University to cough up a bunch of information about processes and procedures that they are presumably unwilling to voluntarily disclose..
It wouldn’t be surprising if the Meyer’s ultimate goal is to flesh out the problems and make them public. That’s probably where the Meyers have the most leverage.
If I had to make an educated guess based solely upon the various public statements including the groups advocating for the University to make genuine changes, I suspect Meyer’s parents want discovery and the ability to force the University to cough up a bunch of information about processes and procedures that they are presumably unwilling to voluntarily disclose..
It wouldn’t be surprising if the Meyer’s ultimate goal is to flesh out the problems and make them public. That’s probably where the Meyers have the most leverage.
I think the sufficiency of the complaint is likely to be fairly irrelevant to the ultimate outcome as long as the complaint can survive a motion to dismiss and get to discovery.
If I had to make an educated guess based solely upon the various public statements including the groups advocating for the University to make genuine changes, I suspect Meyer’s parents want discovery and the ability to force the University to cough up a bunch of information about processes and procedures that they are presumably unwilling to voluntarily disclose..
It wouldn’t be surprising if the Meyer’s ultimate goal is to flesh out the problems and make them public. That’s probably where the Meyers have the most leverage.
If I had to make an educated guess based solely upon the various public statements including the groups advocating for the University to make genuine changes, I suspect Meyer’s parents want discovery and the ability to force the University to cough up a bunch of information about processes and procedures that they are presumably unwilling to voluntarily disclose..
It wouldn’t be surprising if the Meyer’s ultimate goal is to flesh out the problems and make them public. That’s probably where the Meyers have the most leverage.
imo notifying a student in the evening after 7pm is indeed bad practice. counseling and psychological services is closed. the university says someone was available 24/7, but doesn't say who that person might be. i am skeptical.
stanford is playing tricky in its response. the parents say the university failed to conduct any meaningful investigation of the football player. the university aggressively disagrees, saying they were the ones that initiated a title 9 investigation; the title 9 investigators didn't pursue. just how does that invalidate the parents' complaint?
i can confirm that stanford could do more to decrease that waiting time for mental health clinicians. students have insurance, so they can get treatment at caps or in the community. to increase the pool of available clinicians, i sought out the caps insurance liason 3 months ago and emailed her to ask to raise the compensation (stanford is self-insured and therefore controls reimbursement) of community psychiatrists who see students as it has been level for some years and is now well below other ppo's. no response whatsoever.
from my experience speaking with the university lawyers about a student concern, they are completely heartless. not a balance between humanity and fiscal responsibility. zero humanity.
stanford is playing tricky in its response. the parents say the university failed to conduct any meaningful investigation of the football player. the university aggressively disagrees, saying they were the ones that initiated a title 9 investigation; the title 9 investigators didn't pursue. just how does that invalidate the parents' complaint?
i can confirm that stanford could do more to decrease that waiting time for mental health clinicians. students have insurance, so they can get treatment at caps or in the community. to increase the pool of available clinicians, i sought out the caps insurance liason 3 months ago and emailed her to ask to raise the compensation (stanford is self-insured and therefore controls reimbursement) of community psychiatrists who see students as it has been level for some years and is now well below other ppo's. no response whatsoever.
from my experience speaking with the university lawyers about a student concern, they are completely heartless. not a balance between humanity and fiscal responsibility. zero humanity.
imo notifying a student in the evening after 7pm is indeed bad practice. counseling and psychological services is closed. the university says someone was available 24/7, but doesn't say who that person might be. i am skeptical.
stanford is playing tricky in its response. the parents say the university failed to conduct any meaningful investigation of the football player. the university aggressively disagrees, saying they were the ones that initiated a title 9 investigation; the title 9 investigators didn't pursue. just how does that invalidate the parents' complaint?
i can confirm that stanford could do more to decrease that waiting time for mental health clinicians. students have insurance, so they can get treatment at caps or in the community. to increase the pool of available clinicians, i sought out the caps insurance liason 3 months ago and emailed her to ask to raise the compensation (stanford is self-insured and therefore controls reimbursement) of community psychiatrists who see students as it has been level for some years and is now well below other ppo's. no response whatsoever.
from my experience speaking with the university lawyers about a student concern, they are completely heartless. not a balance between humanity and fiscal responsibility. zero humanity.
stanford is playing tricky in its response. the parents say the university failed to conduct any meaningful investigation of the football player. the university aggressively disagrees, saying they were the ones that initiated a title 9 investigation; the title 9 investigators didn't pursue. just how does that invalidate the parents' complaint?
i can confirm that stanford could do more to decrease that waiting time for mental health clinicians. students have insurance, so they can get treatment at caps or in the community. to increase the pool of available clinicians, i sought out the caps insurance liason 3 months ago and emailed her to ask to raise the compensation (stanford is self-insured and therefore controls reimbursement) of community psychiatrists who see students as it has been level for some years and is now well below other ppo's. no response whatsoever.
from my experience speaking with the university lawyers about a student concern, they are completely heartless. not a balance between humanity and fiscal responsibility. zero humanity.
11-24-2022, 12:54 PM
(11-24-2022, 12:23 PM)jonnyss Wrote: imo notifying a student in the evening after 7pm is indeed bad practice. counseling and psychological services is closed.
Fair, but the article indicates that Meyer had already been notified of an investigation about a possible violation several days before the written notice. So this didn't come out of nowhere. And I guess I am struggling to think that the mere emailing of a notice of a hearing is such an adverse event that the university must provision the availability of psychological services at the same moment of the notice.
(11-24-2022, 12:23 PM)jonnyss Wrote: stanford is playing tricky in its response. the parents say the university failed to conduct any meaningful investigation of the football player. the university aggressively disagrees, saying they were the ones that initiated a title 9 investigation; the title 9 investigators didn't pursue. just how does that invalidate the parents' complaint?
Well, I'd put it the other way: what does the university's investigation of the football player have to do with whether Meyer herself violated the honor code? Is the idea that she was justified in throwing hot coffee on him because the university wouldn't investigate him? I'm afraid I'm not seeing any relevance here as to whether Stanford's written notice was sufficiently reckless - absent a whole lot more - to warrant liability for wrongful death.
(11-24-2022, 12:23 PM)jonnyss Wrote: imo notifying a student in the evening after 7pm is indeed bad practice. counseling and psychological services is closed.
Fair, but the article indicates that Meyer had already been notified of an investigation about a possible violation several days before the written notice. So this didn't come out of nowhere. And I guess I am struggling to think that the mere emailing of a notice of a hearing is such an adverse event that the university must provision the availability of psychological services at the same moment of the notice.
(11-24-2022, 12:23 PM)jonnyss Wrote: stanford is playing tricky in its response. the parents say the university failed to conduct any meaningful investigation of the football player. the university aggressively disagrees, saying they were the ones that initiated a title 9 investigation; the title 9 investigators didn't pursue. just how does that invalidate the parents' complaint?
Well, I'd put it the other way: what does the university's investigation of the football player have to do with whether Meyer herself violated the honor code? Is the idea that she was justified in throwing hot coffee on him because the university wouldn't investigate him? I'm afraid I'm not seeing any relevance here as to whether Stanford's written notice was sufficiently reckless - absent a whole lot more - to warrant liability for wrongful death.
11-24-2022, 01:07 PM
(11-24-2022, 12:23 PM)jonnyss Wrote: imo notifying a student in the evening after 7pm is indeed bad practice. counseling and psychological services is closed. the university says someone was available 24/7, but doesn't say who that person might be. i am skeptical.
Please, read things as they are written. I'm assuming you read the article. If not, please read the original (as best we have) source.
The article indicates the complaint says Meyer RECEIVED the "letter" (apparently, email) after 7PM. You say "notifying a student after 7pm". For all we know, Stanford could have notified her at 8AM or 6PM but she didn't read it until 7PM. I would imagine that if the email wasn't sent until 7PM, the complaint would have pointed that out and the reporter would have used a more accurate description.
The university did not say only that "someone was available". The university indicated "Meyer also was given a number to call for immediate support and was specifically told that this resource was available to her 24 hours a day, seven days a week." That's a lot more specific than just than after the fact saying someone was available. (It isn't clear to me whether that number was provided in the notification of a hearing, or in the response ("within the hour") to Meyer's response to that notice.)
(11-24-2022, 12:23 PM)jonnyss Wrote: imo notifying a student in the evening after 7pm is indeed bad practice. counseling and psychological services is closed. the university says someone was available 24/7, but doesn't say who that person might be. i am skeptical.
Please, read things as they are written. I'm assuming you read the article. If not, please read the original (as best we have) source.
The article indicates the complaint says Meyer RECEIVED the "letter" (apparently, email) after 7PM. You say "notifying a student after 7pm". For all we know, Stanford could have notified her at 8AM or 6PM but she didn't read it until 7PM. I would imagine that if the email wasn't sent until 7PM, the complaint would have pointed that out and the reporter would have used a more accurate description.
The university did not say only that "someone was available". The university indicated "Meyer also was given a number to call for immediate support and was specifically told that this resource was available to her 24 hours a day, seven days a week." That's a lot more specific than just than after the fact saying someone was available. (It isn't clear to me whether that number was provided in the notification of a hearing, or in the response ("within the hour") to Meyer's response to that notice.)
11-24-2022, 05:42 PM
(11-24-2022, 09:56 AM)chimera Wrote: I am not an attorney and I sympathize with the parents, but this suit seems silly, for want of a better word. If she got an email notice that she was expelled or something, ok, maybe, maybe, maybe. This was just to tell her that there would be a hearing. A hearing means nothing has been decided. She might well win her case. She might lose her case but the punishment might be minor. She had a ton of options, like call her parents, ask friends for support, etc., etc. She was an adult, a senior in college. She chose to impulsively end her own life. That is heartbreaking, but that's on her.
Do you have a daughter, or perhaps a son? Do you have any comprehension how hard the last few years have been for kids? How about for student-athletes? Do you have any idea what she has been dealing with or what's been going through her mind?
"That's on her"? Good Lord, could someone be more callous and dare I say ignorant?
As a dad of an aspiring D1 athlete, the last couple years have been really tough. Really really tough. The shit she's had to deal with has been unbelievable. On Thanksgiving, I'm grateful she's still with us. I can't imagine what Katie may have gone through, and especially, the heartbreak Katie's family is going through.
"That's on her?" Bull shit.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
(11-24-2022, 09:56 AM)chimera Wrote: I am not an attorney and I sympathize with the parents, but this suit seems silly, for want of a better word. If she got an email notice that she was expelled or something, ok, maybe, maybe, maybe. This was just to tell her that there would be a hearing. A hearing means nothing has been decided. She might well win her case. She might lose her case but the punishment might be minor. She had a ton of options, like call her parents, ask friends for support, etc., etc. She was an adult, a senior in college. She chose to impulsively end her own life. That is heartbreaking, but that's on her.
Do you have a daughter, or perhaps a son? Do you have any comprehension how hard the last few years have been for kids? How about for student-athletes? Do you have any idea what she has been dealing with or what's been going through her mind?
"That's on her"? Good Lord, could someone be more callous and dare I say ignorant?
As a dad of an aspiring D1 athlete, the last couple years have been really tough. Really really tough. The shit she's had to deal with has been unbelievable. On Thanksgiving, I'm grateful she's still with us. I can't imagine what Katie may have gone through, and especially, the heartbreak Katie's family is going through.
"That's on her?" Bull shit.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
11-24-2022, 07:00 PM
(11-24-2022, 09:56 AM)chimera Wrote: I am not an attorney and I sympathize with the parents, but this suit seems silly, for want of a better word. If she got an email notice that she was expelled or something, ok, maybe, maybe, maybe. This was just to tell her that there would be a hearing. A hearing means nothing has been decided. She might well win her case. She might lose her case but the punishment might be minor. She had a ton of options, like call her parents, ask friends for support, etc., etc. She was an adult, a senior in college. She chose to impulsively end her own life. That is heartbreaking, but that's on her.
That is a rather thoughtless comment. Anyone with children or who works with kids knows how difficult the last couple years have been. Unless you have been exposed to the anxiety experienced by young people as a result of the pandemic, I believe it best if you keep your thoughts to yourself.
“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt”.
(11-24-2022, 09:56 AM)chimera Wrote: I am not an attorney and I sympathize with the parents, but this suit seems silly, for want of a better word. If she got an email notice that she was expelled or something, ok, maybe, maybe, maybe. This was just to tell her that there would be a hearing. A hearing means nothing has been decided. She might well win her case. She might lose her case but the punishment might be minor. She had a ton of options, like call her parents, ask friends for support, etc., etc. She was an adult, a senior in college. She chose to impulsively end her own life. That is heartbreaking, but that's on her.
That is a rather thoughtless comment. Anyone with children or who works with kids knows how difficult the last couple years have been. Unless you have been exposed to the anxiety experienced by young people as a result of the pandemic, I believe it best if you keep your thoughts to yourself.
“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt”.
11-24-2022, 07:06 PM
All, please see this post:
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=23686
I'm closing this thread.
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=23686
I'm closing this thread.
All, please see this post:
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=23686
I'm closing this thread.
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=23686
I'm closing this thread.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »