# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 1-LEGAL AND ETHICAL GUIDE TO SUICIDAL STUDENTS

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 1-LEGAL AND ETHICAL GUIDE TO SUICIDAL STUDENTS

# data[].attributes.body
Purpose and Audience

This guide was created as a resource for teachers and counselors with the intention to inform them of the laws and ethical principles that dictate how to proceed when a student attempts to and/or commits suicide.

Professional Perspective

I am a high school teacher currently pursuing a Master's degree in School Guidance and Counseling. I have worked with adolescents for a decade, and throughout this time I have come across several students who have demonstrated suicidal tendencies. It is important that as educators we know how to recognize these behaviors, know how to proceed, and be aware of the consequences if we do not act promptly.

# data[].attributes.body
To learn more about Suicidal tendencies among adolescent students, I interviewed Mrs. Angelica Gonzalez, school counselor at Trinidad Garza Early College High School.

Gonzalez has been a school counselor at the middle school and high school level for over a decade. During this time she has worked in schools that service inner city students. Recently, Gonzalez has seen an increasing concern from parents who worry that their children may be causing harm to themselves. Therefore, she believes that school counselors should adopt tools that help them better assess suicide risk in their students (A. Gonzalez, personal communication, November 9, 2021).
Best practices

According to A. Gonzalez (personal communication, November 9, 2021), the following are important in preventing suicide:

Provide training for all stakeholders, including teachers, staff, and students that help recognize warning signs and how to help a student that exhibits these signs.

Document risk assessment and notify parents.

Utilize district and community resources to refer students to obtain help.

Emerging Issue

Social media use among teenagers has led to cyber bullying in some instances. This issue has been so severe that some students have taken their own life. To prevent suicide due to cyber-bullying, Texas passed David's Law (SB 179) in 2017 which allows schools to investigate bullying after school hours.

References

David's Law, S.B. 179, 85th Texas Legislature (Tx, 2017). https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/85R/billtext/pdf/SB00179F.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 3- Model School District Policy  on Suicide Prevention:   Model Language, Commentary, and Resources 

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 3- Model School District Policy  on Suicide Prevention:   Model Language, Commentary, and Resources 

# data[].attributes.body
This document outlines model policies and best practices for school districts to follow to protect the health and safety of all students by having procedures in place.

This resource is informative because not only does it include best practices for prevention, intervention, and postvention, but it also includes referral resources for all students and LGBTQ Youth.

This resource also includes relevant state laws and district liability. Schools have been sued over more complex issues, such as school climate and failure to reduce bullying, that were claimed to contribute to the suicide of a student.

References
American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, American School Counselor Association, National Association of School Psychologists & The Trevor Project (2019). Model School District Policy on Suicide Prevention: Model Language, Commentary, and Resources. https://www.schoolcounselor.org/getmedia/9b28c170-607a-428f-9dae-619850fa531b/Model-School-District-Policy-Suicide-Prevention.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 4- Top court in Massachusetts finds colleges and professors have duty to prevent student suicides

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 4- Top court in Massachusetts finds colleges and professors have duty to prevent student suicides

# data[].attributes.body
In 2009 an MIT graduate student committed suicide after a professor told him that an email that he had sent was rude and unprofessional.

The lawsuit that was filed by the student's father came to an end almost a decade later. The Supreme Court of Massachusetts found that the university could not be held liable.

The court found that the obligation to act to prevent a possible suicide is limited to circumstances where employees have "actual knowledge" of a previous suicide attempt while a student was enrolled, or shortly before enrolling, or a student has communicated their plans or intentions to commit suicide (Jaschik, 2018).

References

Jaschik, S. (2018, May 8). The duty to prevent suicide. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/05/08/top-court-massachusetts-finds-colleges-and-professors-have-duty-prevent-student

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts on Monday found that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and some of its professors and officials, could not be sued for the suicide in 2009 of a graduate student who jumped off a building and killed himself. He did so shortly after being told by a faculty member that an email he had sent was unprofessional and rude.

While the unanimous ruling is a legal victory for MIT, the court also found that colleges have an obligation in some cases to prevent suicides and may be sued for failing to do so. Significantly, the finding extends beyond those on campuses with expertise in mental health. There are situations, the court found, where professors and others could be sued for failing to do so.

That is crucial in part because many students who attempt suicide have never used campus mental health services.

The ruling stresses that college students are not all alike -- in this case the student was an adult, living off campus and seeking treatment outside MIT. But even in such cases, the court found, there can be legal obligations for a college and its professors.

"Moral blameworthiness on the part of a university in failing to act to intervene to save a young person's life, when it was within the university's knowledge and power to do so, is understood and accepted by our society," said the decision.

Even if MIT and other universities have missions that are primarily academic, their role extends into many aspects of student life, the court said. "Universities are clearly not bystanders or strangers in regards to their students."

While the ruling is by a Massachusetts court, the decision comes at a time of rising pressure on colleges to protect students in cases that some college leaders say may be unrealistic, or may discourage colleges from enrolling students with mental health issues. In March, the California Supreme Court found that public colleges in the state must warn and shield their students from potential violent acts.

The Massachusetts ruling is particularly notable for its findings about "non-clinicians" such as professors and deans who are not trained in mental health issues and do not work in campus counseling centers

For professors and others in this category, the court found, the obligation to act to prevent a possible suicide is limited to circumstances where they have "actual knowledge" of a previous suicide attempt while a student was enrolled, or shortly before enrolling, or a student has communicated "stated plans or intentions to commit suicide."

The faculty member or other "non-clinician" has the obligation of "initiating the university's suicide prevention protocol." If there is not one, the obligation is to inform someone, such as a trained medical professional, who can review the situation and intervene if necessary. If medical care is refused, the college employee has an obligation to notify the student's emergency contact, the court found. The ruling notes that students' mental health is subject to change, and these obligations relate to current or recent events, not a professor's knowledge about something that happened many years prior.

"This limited duty takes a number of the complex and competing considerations discussed above into account," the ruling said. "First, it respects the privacy and autonomy of adult students in most circumstances, relying in all but emergency situations on the student's own capacity and desire to seek professional help to address his or her mental health issues."

The decision continued: "Second it recognizes that non-clinicians cannot be expected to probe or discern suicidal intentions that are not expressly evident. It also acknowledges the scope of the suicide risk on campus and seeks to impose realistic duties and responsibilities on the universities, allowing them to respond with their own suicide prevention protocols ... Finally, this limited duty is consistent with the modern university relationship with its students, which is no longer in loco parentis but rather provides for the students' independence and self-determination."

The lawsuit that led to Monday's ruling was filed by the father of Han Duy Nguyen, the graduate student who ended his life in 2009. The court found that the none of the situations outlined for institutional and individual responsibility to prevent suicide applied in Nguyen's case, even though some faculty members were aware in general that he was struggling with mental health issues.

The court ruling noted that Nguyen "repeatedly made clear" that he wanted to separate his mental health issues from his academic work. Further, he was being treated outside MIT for those issues.

Nguyen tried to kill himself twice prior to 2009 -- once in 2002 and once in 2005. But the ruling noted that these incidents were well before he enrolled at MIT, and said there was no evidence that faculty members knew of these suicide attempts.

Jeffrey S. Beeler, the lawyer for the Nguyen family, told The Boston Globe that he was disappointed that the court had not held MIT responsible in this case. But Beeler said that the ruling would help other students.

"There can be little doubt that the rule of the Nguyen case will save student lives going forward,'' he said. "Contrary to the position of [higher education institutions] ... the court has explicitly found that they do owe a duty of care to their students at risk of suicide."

Many colleges in Massachusetts filed briefs in the case, backing MIT and urging the court to reject the lawsuit.

MIT released a statement after the ruling that said in part, "The well-being of our students is of paramount importance to the Institute: MIT already offers a robust network of student support resources and services, including comprehensive mental health counseling, and continually considers ways to enhance those resources."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top court in Massachusetts finds colleges and professors have duty to prevent student suicides

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts on Monday found that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and some of its professors and officials, could not be sued for the suicide in 2009 of a graduate student who jumped off a building and killed himself.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 5- Students Can Now Miss School for a "Mental Health Day"

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 5- Students Can Now Miss School for a "Mental Health Day"

# data[].attributes.body
In 2019, Oregon legislature passed a bill that allows students five excusable mental health days in a three-month period. Similarly, in Utah, permissible illnesses were expanded in 2018 to include mental illnesses in addition to physical illnesses (Fleming, 2019).

According to mental health advocates, the changes in school policy have been big steps in reducing the stigma around youth mental health and suicide. However, the new legislature has received some pushback from both parents and educators who questioned the necessity of spelling out “mental health” as a reason for a sick day (Fleming, 2019).

References

Fleming, N. (2019, August 9).

Students Can Now Miss School for a ‘Mental Health Day’. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/students-can-now-miss-school-mental-health-day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Mental health days" now join the flu, stomachache, and common cold as excusable absences in schools in Oregon and Utah.

Legislation passed this summer in Oregon will allow students five excusable mental health days in a three-month period. In Utah, permissible illnesses were expanded in 2018 to include mental illnesses in addition to physical illnesses-reports The New York Times and the Associated Press (AP).

The data shows that a sizable number of U.S. students could benefit if other states pass similar laws. A 2017 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that nearly a third of all high school students had experienced significant periods of sadness and hopelessness within the previous year, and 17 percent had contemplated suicide-both percentages represented a significant increase in the last decade. Since 1999, the suicide rate has increased nationally by 30 percent, and is particularly high for girls, children living in rural areas, and students during the school year, according to a study published in the medical journal Pediatrics.

According to mental health advocates, the changes in school policy-along with other efforts-have been big steps in reducing the stigma around youth mental health and suicide, which have long been shrouded in shame. "The first step to confront this crisis is to reduce the stigma around it. We need to say it's just as OK to take care for mental health reasons as it is to care for a broken bone or physical illness," Debbie Plotnick, a vice president at Mental Health America, told the AP.

The parents of Chloe Wilson, who died by suicide in 2018, told the AP that their 14-year-old daughter could have been helped if she were allowed to take mental health days. Chloe, who faced bullying at school after coming out as bisexual, often pretended to be sick in order to stay home. "Because she lied to get her absences excused, we didn't get to have those mental health conversations that could have saved her life," her mother, Roxanne Wilson, said.

The new legislation in Oregon and Utah follows on the heels of other recent state efforts that push schools to ramp up supports and resources for student wellness. Virginia and New York both now require mental health education in schools, and a law passed in 2016 in California mandates that all grades 7-12 schools develop suicide prevention policies.

The changes reflect a growing interest in fostering students' social and emotional as well as academic development, recognizing that students often need more than high-quality instruction to succeed. Mindfulness and meditation programs, along with other strategies for building student resilience and coping with stress, have all come into vogue in recent years. Increasingly, research validates those efforts, concluding that non-academic supports are critical to a child's development and lifelong outcomes.

But some have questioned just how much responsibility educators should bear for student mental health and well-being-highlighting a longstanding tug-of-war over what topics should be addressed in school versus at home.

In Oregon, the new legislation encountered some pushback from both parents and educators who questioned the necessity of spelling out "mental health" as a reason for a sick day, and wondered whether it would encourage students to game the system, reports the Associated Press.

To the Oregon students who helped advocate for the new law, though, the legislation is a critical layer of support for students who struggle. "Being open to adults about our mental health promotes positive dialogue that could help kids get the help they need," Hailey Hardcastle, a rising college student who lobbied for the legislation, told the AP.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Students Can Now Miss School for a 'Mental Health Day'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Mental health days" now join the flu, stomachache, and common cold as excusable absences in schools in Oregon and Utah. Legislation passed this summer in Oregon will allow students five excusable mental health days in a three-month period.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 6- H.R. 586- STANDUP ACT of 2021- Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 6- H.R. 586- STANDUP ACT of 2021- Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.body
This bill requires state, tribal, and local educational agencies that receive grant funding for priority mental-health needs, including through the Project AWARE State Education Agency Grant Program, to establish and implement evidence-based suicide awareness and prevention training policies.

Administration, in coordination with the Department of Education and Bureau of Indian Education, must provide educational agencies with best practices for these trainings.

References

H.R. 586, STANDUP Act of 2021, 117th Congress (2021). https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/586?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Suicide+and+Threat+Assessment+Nationally+Dedicated+to+Universal+Prevention+Act%22%5D%7D&r=3&s=3

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 7- Eisel v. Board of Education of Montgomery (1991)- Judicial Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 7- Eisel v. Board of Education of Montgomery (1991)- Judicial Law

# data[].attributes.body
In Eisel vs. Board of Education of Montgomery County (1991), a 13-year-old female student died in an apparent murder-suicide pact with another student. Her father sued the school district and two of its school counselors, arguing that their special relationship with his daughter imposed a duty on them to report her suicidal ideations to him and his wife.
The trial court dismissed the father’s lawsuit. On appeal, however, Maryland’s highest court sent it back to the lower court for a trial. The appellate court listed foreseeability of harm as the leading factor in determining whether school employees had a duty to warn the student’s parents. Ultimately, the jury in the lower court determined that the school counselors were not liable for the student’s death.

References

Eisel v. Board of Education of Montgomery, 324 Md. 376 (Md. 1991) https://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=40858V&loc=68&detailLoc=ODYCIVIL

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Maryland Judiciary Case Search Disclaimer

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 8- 34 C.F.R. § 300.34- Administrative Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 8- 34 C.F.R. § 300.34- Administrative Law

# data[].attributes.body
Counseling Services (34 CFR 300.34(c)(2))

Counseling services means services provided by qualified social workers, psychologists, guidance counselors, or other qualified personnel.

Psychological Services (34 CFR 300.34(c)(10))

Psychological services includes:

(i) Administering psychological and educational tests, and other assessment procedures;
(ii) Interpreting assessment results;
(iii) Obtaining, integrating, and interpreting information about child behavior and conditions relating to learning;
(iv) Consulting with other staff members in planning school programs to meet the special educational needs of children as indicated by psychological tests, interviews, direct observation, and behavioral evaluations;
(v) Planning and managing a program of psychological services, including psychological counseling for children and parents; and
(vi) Assisting in developing positive behavioral intervention strategies.

References

Related Services, C.F.R 34 § 300.34 (2021) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-III/part-300/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR0ec59c730ac278e/section-300.34

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Office of the Federal Register publishes documents on behalf of Federal agencies but does not have any authority over their programs. We recommend you directly contact the agency responsible for the content in question.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 9- U.S. Constitution Fifth Amendment- Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 9- U.S. Constitution Fifth Amendment- Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.body
'No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury... nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies to educators who may be accused of negligence due to a student committing suicide.

References

U.S. Const. amend. V, § 4

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 10- Local Administrative Law on Suicide Awareness

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 10- Local Administrative Law on Suicide Awareness

# data[].attributes.body
As part of their prevention system, Dallas ISD created a mental health services department that provides help to students and provides referrals when needed.

Yearly training is provided to educators that helps them recognize, respond and refer students. Dallas ISD advices that while it is acceptable to show concern, teachers should avoid providing counseling.

Dallas ISD also has a policy that clearly states that only licensed professionals can communicate with students after hours. If a school counselor is not available, then Dallas dispatch phone number should be dialed to receive help.

References

Psychological & Social Services. (2015). Suicide Sensitivity & Training Responsibilities. Dallas ISD. https://www.dallasisd.org/cms/lib/TX01001475/Centricity/Domain/13649/PSS_Suicide%20Sensitivity%20%20Responsibilities%202015-2016%20FINAL%20pdf_10_26_2015.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
Section A.9 of the ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors (ASCA, 2016) outlines the duties of school counselors in case of serious and foreseeable harm to self and others.  This section explicitly informs that:

1. School counselors should inform parents/guardians of their child's intent.

2. Conduct a risk assessment and include an intervention plan.

3. Do not release students who are in danger or could be a danger to others.

This information is important because it clearly explains the expectations of how a counselor should act when a student has expressed verbally or non-verbally of their actions.

References

American School Counselor Association. (2016). ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors. https://www.schoolcounselor.org/getmedia/f041cbd0-7004-47a5-ba01-3a5d657c6743/Ethical-Standards.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
As a student, stress is an inevitable part of the education journey. Sometimes the stress can be due to school, peer interactions or juggling both while also working. For some students, stress can lead to suicidal thoughts.

Application

Reviewing the laws and policies in place allowed me to better understand how a school counselor should proceed when dealing with a student who is in danger of committing suicide.

1. Schools should provide psychological services to students and provide an intervention plan.
2. Although educators have a duty of care while at school, they cannot be held liable for a student's suicide if they are not aware of their existing mental problems.
3. Educators cannot be deprived of their liberty without due process of law. Tort should be proven in the court of law to hold an educator liable of negligence.

Feelings

Learning about the new bills that provide for mental health days for students makes me hopeful that education is moving in the right direction and focusing on other aspects other than academics.

During my counseling practicum I was present during a meeting with the parent of a student who had written in her diary that she did not want to live. I believe that it is important that counselors check-in with students more often and provide parents with proper training so they know how to act immediately.

We must take every word that a student says seriously even if they may say they are joking. If a student threatens to kill themselves and we ignore it, we are liable for their death.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Training should be provided to educators in K-12 education as well as those in higher education.

2. Schools districts should have a policy that clearly define the procedures to prevent, intervene and help students transition back to school after the attempt.

3. Bullying can lead to suicide attempt. It is important that schools investigate cyberbullying and investigate any attempts that occur after school hours.

4. Mental health services need to be available for all students.

5. School counselors and educators act in loco parentis and have a duty of care for students. Any student that exhibits suicidal behavior cannot be released until a risk assessment is conducted.

6. In higher education settings, if medical care is refused, the college employee must notify the student's emergency contact.