Violence on College Campuses Virginia Tech could probably have avoided the terrible massacre of 2007 had its officials taken more timely and effective action with Seung Hui Cho. He had a very long record of mental illness dating back to middle school, including fantasies of violence and murder, and he had received psychiatric treatment in the past. His behavior at Virginia Tech was so disturbing to students and faculty that a court ordered him to undergo a psychiatric evaluation in 2005, although he refused all counseling. University officials did not discuss his case with each other or even with his parents for fear of violating state and federal confidentiality laws, although their interpretation of these was mostly incorrect. Even though medical and psychiatric records are confidential by law, there is an exception for students like Cho who are deemed a danger to themselves and others. Not only did he receive no psychiatric care, but he was also able to purchase two handguns in Virginia in violation of federal law. Since the tragedy at Virginia Tech, though, other universities have revised their policies and procedures so that they can identity potentially dangerous or mentally unstable students like Cho, and have them suspended, expelled or ordered into mandatory psychiatric treatment. This is exactly what colleges and universities should be doing, since the safety and security of the larger community must override privacy and confidentiality concerns in these cases.

The Massacre at Virginia Tech and the Failures of the University Administration

Seung Hui Cho fatally shot thirty-two students and faculty at Virginia Tech in 2007, and wounded seventeen before killing himself. He had a long history of mental illness dating back to middle school, and the university was aware of this, yet its officials also believed that federal and state privacy laws prevented them from discussing or disclosing this information. Cho had received psychiatric...

In Virginia he was able to buy two guns in violation of federal law because the state failed to report his history of mental health problems to the federal database. Even though the police did intervene effectively once the shooting spree began, the Virginia Tech police failed to warn the entire campus of the danger. Moreover, the state as a whole had inadequate provisions for mental health care, both on an outpatient and inpatient basis, or for involuntary commitment. Indeed, if Cho had been committed to a mental institution at some point, these shootings would have been avoided (Mass Shootings at Virginia Tech 2007).
Nor did the counseling center at Virginia Tech intervene effectively, even though a court had ruled him a danger to himself and others in 2005. Cho's behavior at Virginia Tech provided numerous warnings that he was a danger to himself and others, but the university failed completely to take corrective action. Two female students complained that he was stalking him, and many others were disturbed enough by his behavior that they refused to attend classes with him. An English instructor was so unnerved by his violent poetry that she threatened to quit unless he was removed from her class (Burlin and Gammage 2007). University officials believed that they could not force him into counseling despite the 2005 court order that he should undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

Social work and the legal, medical and mental health care professions all operate under strict ethical and legal guidelines about the protection of client confidentiality. Without an atmosphere or trust and confidentiality, these professions that gather the most sensitive kind of personal information simply cannot function at all. Among these are the 1996 Health Insurance…