Virginia Tech - Counselling documents

[rootX]

Could his counseling be improved?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8211289.stm

Cho met counsellor Sherry Lynch in December 2005 after he was detained in a mental hospital overnight because he had expressed thoughts of suicide.

"He denies suicidal and/or homicidal thoughts. Said the comment he made was a joke. Says he has not reason to harm self and would never do it," Ms Conrad wrote in her evaluation.

She urged him to return for counselling the following term. He was not seen again by the centre.

In above, they assumed that he did not intend to kill himself because he said so. But, I think it is quite obvious that anyone would say that to avoid mental hospital.

But some survivors, and families of the victims, say they are more concerned about the treatment Cho received at the counselling centre.

While most of the survivors and relatives of the victims accepted an $11m (£6.6m) settlement from the state in April 2008, two families earlier this year took out a civil suit against the state, the school and its counselling centre.

 

[junglebeast]

Could his counseling be improved?

Who knows? The article makes no specific mention of how he was treated or what transpired in counseling, beyond the cursory fact that he went to counseling, assured staff he was no suicidal and was released the next day. This is meaningless without further context.

Honestly this article seems little more than a media tactic to suck a few remaining dollars out of a dead story in the absence of real news.

 

[chroot]

I agree, junglebeast. We're supposed to make conclusions about Cho, or the quality of his counseling, based on a single-sentence quote?

- Warren

 

[russ_watters]

And highlighting the problematic nature of interpreting that...

In above, they assumed that he did not intend to kill himself because he said so.

Where, exactly, are you seeing that? From what I see, they make no specific judgement on that, but do recommend further treatment due to depression.

 

[rootX]

And highlighting the problematic nature of interpreting that...
Where, exactly, are you seeing that? From what I see, they make no specific judgement on that, but do recommend further treatment due to depression.

I agree I interpreted it bit wrong.

I was looking

The records indicate the therapists found Cho depressed and anxious but saw no evidence he would commit violence.

where I thought

"He denies suicidal and/or homicidal thoughts. Said the comment he made was a joke. Says he has not reason to harm self and would never do it," Ms Conrad wrote in her evaluation.

is that evidence.

And,

two families earlier this year took out a civil suit against the state, the school and its counselling centre.

for concluding that his treatment might not be good.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

In above, they assumed that he did not intend to kill himself because he said so. But, I think it is quite obvious that anyone would say that to avoid mental hospital.

You can not simply hold someone against their will. You have to have damn good reason to do so. Whether or not a person saying "I am not going to kill myself" is good enough to release them is legally irrelevant. Whether or not they had evidence that was good enough to continue holding him is the only real determining factor.

 

[russ_watters]

II was looking

where I thought

is that evidence.

Well who knows? You might be right that that's where it came from. In that case, the reporter read too far into it! (though the statement by the reporter isn't all that strong*). Who says reporters are smart?

*And then:

You can not simply hold someone against their will. You have to have damn good reason to do so.

Right, so the statement that they found no evidence might only be saying that they have no justification for holding him and not have anything to do with whether the counselor actually believes he is or isn't suicidal. That kind of wording is probably very precisely chosen - the counselor really doesn't have the latitude to express much of an opinion there. There are guidelines for how they can act and what conclusions they are allowed to draw.