The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

Honor to review policy on psychological evaluations

The Honor Committee is revising their psychological evaluation process because of concerns about delays and inefficiency.

At the start of an honor case investigation, honor investigators ask the student suspected of the violation if "any mental or medical conditions affected the situation in question."

If the student answers yes, the investigator provides them with the procedure for psychological hearings on honor offenses.

Students who feel they may have had a contributory mental disorder when they committed the honor offense or now lack the mental capacity to stand trial can ask for an evaluation.

Students must obtain a letter from a psychiatrist describing the nature of their illness and make a written request to the Committee's vice chair for trials.

When these criteria are met, the vice chair for trials forwards the request to the Office of the Dean of Students. At this point, the case is out of the Honor Committee's hands.

"From our point of view, the case is dropped because we never see it again," Vice Chairwoman for Trials Terra Weirich said.

If the student is judged to have had a contributory mental disorder at the time or now lacks the capacity to stand trial, the panel will adjudicate the case and notify the student of the outcome.

The student may undergo behavioral treatment or be suspended if they are considered a "significant risk" to the University community.

Pat Lampkin, associate vice president for student affairs, who chairs many of the panels, said the University closely evaluates most students who go through the psychological evaluation process.

"Most likely, they would be reigned in very tightly," Lampkin said. "The ones I'm familiar with are closely watched."

If the student does not meet the criteria stipulated by the psychological evaluation guidelines, they are referred back to the Honor Committee and a trial is held.

However, some individuals involved with the process have complained it is lengthy and subject to abuse.

Some students request a psychological evaluation but delay by not following through with a letter from a psychiatrist, Weirich said. "It can be frustrating."

Sarah Guyton, honor counsel and fourth-year College student, said she has been disappointed by how the psychological evaluation process works.

"I think it's a way for students to get off" of honor charges, Guyton said.

She said she has been involved with two cases that went to psychological evaluation panels.

"I have tried to follow up on two cases, but never heard back on either of them," she added.

Assoc. Biology Prof. Claire Cronmiller said she experienced similar difficulties with a case involving a student who wanted a psychological evaluation.

Cronmiller said she filed an honor case against a student after catching her cheating on two exams.

The student, whom she described as a "chronic cheater," was accused at the Investigation Panel phase and then opted for a psychological evaluation.

The panel allowed the student to stay in school, she said.

"I wasn't too impressed" with the process, she added.

But most Committee members said they are pleased with how the process works.

"I think it serves its purpose fairly well," Vice Chairman for Investigations Carter Williams said. "I don't think it can be abused; the administrators who serve on panels take it very seriously."

Committee members said they are trying to address these concerns by adding a non-voting member of the Honor Committee to observe psychological evaluation hearings.

This would allow the Committee to retain contact with the process until its completion, Weirich said.

The Committee also plans to allow for investigated students to file for psychological evaluations before they are accused at the I-Panel stage.

By allowing the psychological evaluation before the I-Panel, students and the Committee can avoid going through an extra stage of the honor process before the student is evaluated, Weirich said.

The Committee also is in the process of imposing additional deadlines on evaluations to avoid delays.

Now the accused student must apply for a psychological evaluation within 10 days of being assigned a counsel.

Other possible guidelines would limit the maximum time limits for processing the case with and without the possibility of an appeal.

"Cases have taken quite a while, but I think we've made some procedural changes so we will avoid these problems in the future," Committee Chairman Hunter Ferguson said.

Seven cases went to psychological evaluations last year. Only two were returned to the Honor Committee.

Weirich said she hopes all of these changes will be passed by the Committee by the end of the semester.

Comments

Latest Podcast

The University’s Associate Vice Provost for Enrollment and Undergraduate Admission, Greg Roberts, provides listeners with an insight into how the University conducts admissions and the legal subtleties regarding the possible end to the consideration of legacy status.



https://open.spotify.com/episode/02ZWcF1RlqBj7CXLfA49xt