They’re coddling students. They’re overreacting to a Presidential election result that displeases them. And some, I assume, are good people.
I’m talking, of course, about the administrators at the UALR Bowen School of Law.
Are you a budding legal scholar distraught over the prospect of President-elect Donald Trump? Well, Bowen School of Law has on-campus counseling available for that.
Bowen Dean Michael Schwartz notified students today that “this election season was the most upsetting, most painful, most disturbing election season of my lifetime” and that “extra on-campus counseling services” would be available for those who “feel upset.”
Schwartz’s email says:
This election season was the most upsetting, most painful, most disturbing election season of my lifetime. And, as you know, I am old.
…
For those of you who feel upset, we have arranged extra on-campus counseling services today. We will be offering 30-minute appointments between 2:30-6:00pm. If students do not sign up for all appointment times and/or do not use all of their allotted 30 minutes, walk-in appointments may be available on a first come, first served basis. Counseling will be located in room 423 – the office next to the Faculty Library on the 4th floor. If there are no more appointment times available and you wish to speak with a counselor, please sign up for a counseling appointment here.
No matter how you are feeling, the most important thing for you is to focus on your studies. If your goal, in attending law school, is to make a difference in your community, the first step has to be getting through law school and passing the bar. Please do not lose sight of that goal.
Most of all, I want every member of our community to feel welcome and supported here. Our diversity is a strength and a goal that we need to cultivate in every way we can. Everyone deserves a safe, supportive, collegial learning environment. In fact, the research shows that learning from and with those who are different from us makes us smarter, more thoughtful, more tolerant, and happier. Please reach out to your peers and let them know they are valued. And, if you witness someone being mistreated because of his or her politics, religious beliefs, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender, please do not sit silently by.
I called Schwartz in order to better understand the reasoning behind this action, but he hasn’t called me back. A law school spokeswoman also did not return my request for comment. However, I’m going to go out on a limb and say there would’ve been no “counseling services” at Bowen if Hillary had won. Conservative students probably would’ve just had to work through the grieving process of no border wall being built by the incoming Clinton Administration on their own. I think it is fair to call the law school’s decision an extraordinary failure of judgment — implying, as it does, that a taxpayer-funded school should pick sides institutionally, and react to elections with Republican outcomes by supplying grief counseling and perhaps, later, provide a kind of imprimatur to other electoral outcomes.
Robert Steinbuch, a law professor at Bowen who has previously defended Trump at our humble blog, said in an interview that — in his over ten years of employment at Bowen — the only times he can recall counseling being offered to law students was after a student had committed suicide.
Steinbuch said those instances were “obviously tragic situations” where on-campus counseling was justified. However, Steinbuch doesn’t believe the tragedy of a student committing suicide is the equivalent of a Republican being elected to the Presidency.
Steinbuch said:
It’s a question of teaching people to be mature and modeling maturity. If you tell people every time they lose they’re entitled to counseling, you elevate the perceived level of wrong beyond what it is. Most assuredly, Democrats are disappointed a Republican won. I recall when the Democratic Party won the Presidency twice each of the previous two elections. I knew plenty of people who were disappointed at that time, but I didn’t know anybody that needed grief counseling. I think when we tell people that they need some form of grief counseling we are normalizing hysteria and suggesting there’s something immoral or wrong about our democratic process.
Basically, law schools offering students counseling sessions after their preferred candidate comes up short isn’t “teaching people to be mature.” It’s also not good preparation for a legal career. In most cases, there are winning attorneys and there are losing attorneys. Sometimes a judge or jury isn’t going to agree with your arguments.
At those times, after you’ve left the ivory tower of Bowen School of Law, no grief counseling will be around to calm you.
Our tax dollars at work.Isn’t this the ‘higher education system that Asa Hutchinson said he was going to give even more tax money to?
I am student at Bowen. This counseling isn’t all about the election. This week is our last week before finals and our annual stress-less fest. The Election was just a little bit of extra stress that none of us needed right now- it was certainly not the sum total of our stress.
This counseling was not meant to further divide us.
Thank you for your input, Cynthia. I find it less than persuasive, however, for two reasons. First, the opening sentence references only the election. If finals were part of the equation, wouldn’t that have been noted? Secondly, do you believe this email would have been considered necessary if Hillary had been elected? If you answer the second question, yes, then perhaps I can agree with you. If you answer, no, then I hope you’ll understand why so many of us might not agree with you.
Think it is time to put aside condescending remarks. Indeed, some people are literally grueving. Some are genuine Ely frightened. Millions, the 1st time in our history, are expressions g their opinions in the streets. Surely, it is not u be,ie able that a popular vote win for Clinon coupled with the nastiness of the campaign has some feeling left out and vulberable.
yes, it would have been equally appropriate if Dean Schwartz would have gotten word from students and faculty that there were upset, anxious, students after the results of the election. That was what he was responding to, as a Dean and an educator. if people were having struggles, it is the responsibility of the Dean to model, support and educate. These students are not graduates. they are students.
Why would anyone hire a lawyer who need counseling to address every “stress” in life? Grow up.
It is completely your decision choose not to hire someone because of their “excessive” use of counseling, but to be frank, its none of your damn business. This election was extremely polarizing and a lot of people are afraid of what this means for them and their loved ones. Hate crimes have grew after Trump’s elections. A student of color at UofA, less than 4 hours from Bowen, received a threatening letter, due to their color. These are trying times and who are you to judge what causes people stress. Stress due to this election has everything to do with racist, bigoted, and xenophobic statements made by our President-Elect. Say what you want, but unless you were someone who was the target of these awful comments, you probably wouldn’t understand the need for counseling.
Furthermore, no, the school wouldn’t have done this had Clinton won because Clinton was not spewing hatred and racism at marginalized groups or white people for that matter.
For the record, I am a Bowen student, I am not seeking any counseling services, but if I wanted to it is completely in my right and is completely warranted. And furthermore, its completely none of anyones business.
Thank you the Dean and administrators at Bowen who saw the stress in their students face and acted.
I would not want a lawyer that had to have counseling over this election! Someone that unstable and immature should not be advising other people.
I believe that is an ignorant remark.
1) i am confident you HAVE used a lawyer with worse problems, who refused to seek help
2) these are students who are still learning and growing. Of course a Dean needs to respond if he gets word that students are struggling. That is part of his mandate. Even if it is to model healthily coping, it is still appropriate!
3) I would love a lawyer who struggled with ideals as a student, sought council, and grew from that experience. Shaming professionals for seeking council is dangerous!
A responsible reporter of “news, policy, and politics” would not have published just extracts from an email to Bowen law students. A responsible reporter or “news” website would have published the entire message. Any reader of any “news” forum should seriously question the veracity and motivation of those who “go out on a limb” without bothering to check the facts.
Any fair-minded person who reads the entire message — rather than just portions taken out of context for motivations known only to the poster — will see that Dean Schwartz’s message was balanced and fair to every law student. Bowen law students have expressed legitimate and reasonable fears about the outcome of the election and what it means for their health insurance coverage, student loans, and even immigration status. Many students (regardless of how they voted in the election) are concerned that they will no longer be welcome at the Law School.. Had the election turned out differently, any law students who expressed concerns would have been offered exactly the same kind of support — and in fact, the law school administration offered counseling to ANY student, not just those who may have preferred a different outcome.
Bowen School of Law does not coddle its students – just ask our students! Responsible journalists, like responsible legal scholars, would have reported information fully and accurately, without one-sided “spin.”
Because this website chose to publish only a portion of the message that Dean Schwartz circulated Monday — for unknown reasons I cannot possibly comprehend — the ENTIRE message is included below. Fair-minded readers (who do not jump to speculative conclusions) will see that the message was fair, balanced, and inclusive – just as a public law school should be..
The law school community will continue to reach out to ALL of our students, just as Dean Schwartz did Monday morning, to encourage them that positive discourse and mutual understanding of our differences is the best path forward. Every responsible lawyer — and law student — hopes for a successful four years ahead. That is exactly what the Rule of Law is all about. Yet many law students — like everyone else in a deeply divided nation — are worried about the impact on their lives. They are citizens too, not just law students.
Please read the following message carefully with an open mind. Dean Schwartz cares deeply about every law student at Bowen, and a fair and COMPLETE reading of his message will reflect his genuine concern about building and maintaining a constructive learning community for ALL law students, no matter who they supported in the presidential election.
Many of your readers respect and admire Dean Schwartz for reaching out to every Bowen law student. That is what leadership is all about. I am deeply disappointed about one-sided reporting, no matter who engages in it, or why.
To those who support this forum: Please report ALL the facts, not just those that support someone’s unknown, negative agenda,
“Good morning.
“I write you this morning to share our support for each of you. I know many of you were very upset by the results of the election, and, of course, I know many of you were pleased. This election season was the most upsetting, most painful, most disturbing election season of my lifetime. And, as you know, I am old. I found the article at this link, http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/health/how-to-navigate-post-election-trnd/index.html, to be a helpful tool for thinking about how to deal with the future (and with family, if, like me, you have a relative whose politics you abhor).
“For those of you who feel upset, we have arranged extra on-campus counseling services today. We will be offering 30-minute appointments between 2:30-6:00pm. If students do not sign up for all appointment times and/or do not use all of their allotted 30 minutes, walk-in appointments may be available on a first come, first served basis. Counseling will be located in room 423 – the office next to the Faculty Library on the 4th floor. If there are no more appointment times available and you wish to speak with a counselor, please sign up for a counseling appointment here.
“No matter how you are feeling, the most important thing for you is to focus on your studies. If your goal, in attending law school, is to make a difference in your community, the first step has to be getting through law school and passing the bar. Please do not lose sight of that goal.
“Most of all, I want every member of our community to feel welcome and supported here. Our diversity is a strength and a goal that we need to cultivate in every way we can. Everyone deserves a safe, supportive, collegial learning environment. In fact, the research shows that learning from and with those who are different from us makes us smarter, more thoughtful, more tolerant, and happier. Please reach out to your peers and let them know they are valued. And, if you witness someone being mistreated because of his or her politics, religious beliefs, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender, please do not sit silently by. Here is a link to a helpful guide to dealing with harassment: http://www.themarysue.com/bystanders-harassment-guide/.
“This spring, the law school’s Committee on Diversity and Excellence will host a Forum on Difference to facilitate discussions with our student leaders on how to ensure that Bowen is a welcoming and nurturing environment for all our students. We hosted multiple such events last academic year. If you have a concern that you would like to raise for possible discussion at the next forum, please contact any member of the committee. Committee members are Dean Jessie Burchfield, Dean Rejena Grotjohn, Professor Ken Gallant, and Professor Sherrie Norwood.
“I thank you for your attention in reading this message.
“Warm regards,
“~Mike”
“Just the facts”…I quoted four entire paragraphs of the Dean’s letter. Yes, I cut some introductory fluff and the last paragraph about the Law School’s Committee on Diversity and Excellence because, frankly, it has nothing to do with the story’s subject of post-election counseling. Omitting portions of statements while still correctly representing the speaker’s point-of-view is a common journalistic practice. For example, I’ve interviewed Senators, Congressmen, state reps, Rotary Club treasurers, etc. and almost every time I haven’t reported the entirety of my conversations with them. I choose which quotes best explain their positions, ideas and actions. The four paragraphs I included in the story are accurate and represent his point-of-view. As I said in the story, I attempted to call both the Dean and I e-mailed the law school’s communications person. Neither responded back before I published this story. You don’t get to not respond to questions and then complain about a story being “one-sided” under an anonymous name.
I’m not sure the purpose of the nom de plume, but I do consider myself a fair and open minded individual who is balanced in my point of view. I read the email when I received it and had the exact same reaction as the author of this post, whom you imply was somehow negligent in his work.
One can not read this email without bias–period. No matter which side you come down on, your political leanings will influence your interpretation. But let’s try. Let’s look at this as say a court would look at a contract–this should be fun.
The email starts with talking about showing if support, immediately followed by acknowledging people are upset. Oops, the Dean can’t appear partisan so let’s throw in a nods to the victors. Then an article he found helpful. Then we an announcement for those who are upset that the school is offering additional counseling. (Here is where Ms Aikman’s remark loses all credibility in that if we were stressed because finals there wouldn’t be a need for additional counseling as they have been schedule for about a year. The election adding “more stress than we need” doesn’t hold water because it’s been scheduled for over 250 years). No, the use of the word “upset” in similar contexts leads to the notion that the counseling is due to the outcome of the election, not the election itself.
There is a fair argument to be made that the school would have offered the counseling sessions either way, but given the liberal proclivities of the Dean and the Faculty as a whole I will just have to take your word for it.
The inclusion of a plea harrassment and diversity in the same email is highly suspect that the entire purpose of the email and the counseling was a result of the outcome of the election.
And that is a fair and open minded view because I voted for Hillary Clinton.
Just the Facts, I agree completely. Bowen is an excellent school that challenges its students constantly. However, those challenges are put forward in an environment that fosters respectful discourse and the faculty members work hard to keep that environment going strong. Dean Schwartz should be commended for the work he does. He’s a busy man, but he puts his students first and we are blessed to have him.
Definitely leadership material.
Is the full version of the dean’s email any different?
This article is a joke, right? It reads like the reporter and the professor need some counseling to get over their prejudice against people asking for help when they are stressed.
Will the school also public funds to pay for my counseling when my grammy dies?
For your information, as far as I know, most institutions of higher education offer counseling services that are paid for in their tuition and fees. So actually, yes, if your grammy dies you can get counseling services at an institution of higher education.
Don’t show your stupidity.
That’s funny and liberal lies.
As a college graduate of 2 degrees (Accounting & Agribusiness) while a single mom of 2 & other life events & graduating with honors, I certainly never needed counseling for any final or exam. On the other hand, we lost my 24 yr old stepson to suicide in 2015 & 3 months later I was hit head on by a wreakless driver killing my 8yr old son & my 12 yr old son had to climb past his dead brother just to get to safety & out of the car. Now for that, we go to counseling, a person loosing a race is an absolutely ridiculous reason to seek counseling.
Grow up you are an adult now & life will not get any easier! Deal with it, be glad you are hear to see & live another day & get over yourselves!
The stress of law school is no comparison to the “stress” of getting an undergraduate degree, or two in your case.
I am so saddened by what you have been through! i also think it is overly simple to assume that council is only allowed if you have a horrific tragedy, Council is used in every major profession, whether it be psychological, advisory, etc. it is part of growth as a human being. Shame on those who judge students who use resources for their personal and professional growth
Actually this article is serious and its ignorance in shaming people who request mental health service is dangerous. Here are the stats:
Depression among law students is 8-9% prior to matriculation, 27% after one semester, 34% after 2 semesters, and 40% after 3 years.
Stress among law students is 96%, compared to 70% in med students and 43% in graduate students.
Entering law school, law students have a psychological profile similar to that of the general public. After law school, 20-40% have a psychological dysfunction.
When it comes down to it, law school is already a stressful situation. Add to that, people are going into finals while being subject to hate crimes and worried that their family/friends may loose their rights and/or deported certainly doesn’t help the situation.
People deal with stress in different ways. This reporter and professor irresponsibly shame people seeking mental health services and contribute to the stigma around mental health issues. Schools should be encouraged to provide mental health services to those who ask for it – as happened here. There are, quite literally, lives that depend on these services.
RS — It is pretty clear that you have read and responded to this article without ever thinking about it. There is no “irresponsible” “shaming” of people who seek mental health services in this article. This article is not a criticism of law students at all. It is a criticism of state government bureaucrats who are eager to pathologize certain political outcomes and who are eager to identify trauma where none exists. There is nothing wrong with seeking counseling; what is atrociously wrong is attempting to retroactively delegitimize certain voters by alleging that those who voted the “wrong way” have created trauma. This article never would have been written if Schwartz had announced every Monday that counseling was available — but his urging students to seek counseling in the light of an election result that he doesn’t like was an embarrassing abuse of his position.
Klar Ken: you are clueless and off base here.
This election was divisive to many. And, post election harassment has occurred. And, if you read the Deans email: he is responding to upset and concern among his students 9just as he would if the outcome were different, and he heard there were upset students).
Talking about abuse of power shows incomplete understanding of his email, and role as an educator.
I guess no one was upset after any previous election…ever, Sure.
Shelly – what is interesting to me is that you have not addressed anything I have said, but instead responded with insults and irrelevant facts.
1. There is nothing in the article about “shaming” people who need mental health assistance. You simply made this up.
2. All elections are inherently divisive, just as all adversarial legal proceedings are inherently divisive. Notably, however, the Dean has not announced counseling whenever something divisive happens.
3. Just because Republicans didn’t throw temper tantrums after Obama was elected, it doesn’t follow that there were not large numbers of people who were hurt or upset by the elections of 2008 or 2012. Notably, however, there were no announcements about counseling from the law school dean after those elections. You are just wrong when you predict his hypothetical actions, because the actual actions at the law school were far different.
In short, you decided to misrepresent the article with groundless claims about shaming, and you are desperately attempting to defend a misuse of public resources – an inartfully disguised editorializing and blaming of Republicans for creating trauma, cloaked as a call for respect and diversity of viewpoints. I am morally certain that this view is held by the top management of UALR, and that as a consequence they demanded Schwartz’s resignation.
P.S. Someone who understood his role as an educator would never talk about how he abhorred the politics of those he knew when he was calling for respect for diversity. Schwartz apparently understood his role as an educator as requiring the mouthing of cliches about diversity and respect for others’ views while never actually thinking about such concepts.
Actually this article is serious and its ignorance in shaming people who request mental health service is dangerous. Here are the stats:
Depression among law students is 8-9% prior to matriculation, 27% after one semester, 34% after 2 semesters, and 40% after 3 years.
Stress among law students is 96%, compared to 70% in med students and 43% in graduate students.
Entering law school, law students have a psychological profile similar to that of the general public. After law school, 20-40% have a psychological dysfunction.
Law school is already a stressful situation. Add to that, people are going into finals while being subject to hate crimes and worried that their family/friends may loose their rights and/or deported certainly doesn’t help the situation.
People deal with stress in different ways and unless you are a mental health expert, it’s not your place to comment on the merits of those who seek help.
This reporter and professor irresponsibly disparage people seeking mental health services and contribute to the stigma around mental health issues. Schools should be encouraged to provide mental health services to those who ask for it – as happened here.
Lawyers rank 5th in incidence of suicide by occupation. Lives depend on these services.
The law school shouldn’t be in the business of providing on taxpayer’s backs mental health services for the results of a democratic election.
#NotMyTaxDollars
What’s Happened To The University?: A sociological exploration of its infantilisation
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1138212938/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=lawproblo-20&camp=1789&creative=9325&linkCode=as2&creativeASIN=1138212938&linkId=522871a3ce30cec07b2e5a2772c47720
Judith Shapiro, former faculty member and provost at Bryn Mawr College and former president of Barnard College, wrote the following in Inside Higher Education.
It should not be controversial to believe that growing up involves becoming stronger, becoming better able to withstand whatever slings and arrows life throws at us and to pursue our goals even against difficult challenges. Surely the college years can and should play an important role in that growing-up process.
And yet, too often colleges treat their students like hatchlings not yet ready to leave the nest, as opposed to preparing and encouraging them to fly.
There are a variety of policies and practices that give students what most of them seem to want, but not necessarily what they most need. Speech codes and trigger warnings are two over-protecting initiatives that have received considerable attention in the higher education press and beyond.
So much has been written about the problems with speech codes that there is no need to belabor the subject at this point. Aside from the legal problems they can present with regard to free speech issues, especially in public higher education, they presume that students cannot withstand, much less respond with vigor to, speech they find objectionable. They also serve as an example of how formal codes and policies are no substitute for shared norms and values concerning how people should behave with one another.
The trigger warning movement, which has offered another field day for those on the lookout for opportunities to ridicule colleges and universities, advocates alerting students in advance to anything potentially upsetting in materials required for a course. Above and beyond being forewarned, some students would presumably be allowed to avoid an encounter with such materials altogether. Aside from this being an insult to the intelligence and good sense of students and faculty members alike, it also threatens to spoil the thrill of discovery. After all, would all first-time readers of Anna Karenina really want to be told ahead of time that [SPOILER ALERT!!] Anna commits suicide by throwing herself under a train at the end of the novel.
And then there is the rash of speaker cancellations due to student unwillingness to be exposed to “objectionable” views from a guest to the campus. Part of this particular problem might be addressed by recognizing that an essentially ritual occasion like a graduation ceremony may not be the best venue for a controversial, as opposed to celebratory, message. That issue taken care of, it should be easier to push back on other occasions against students who are being overly selective in their defense of free speech.
Student reactions to displays of racial insensitivity and prejudice can be considered in this context. The persistence of racism in our society and on our campuses is most certainly disturbing and unacceptable. At the same time, while a couple of students hanging a Confederate flag in their dormitory window or some students sending anonymous offensive tweets should not go without some critical response, incidents like these do not seem sufficient to put an entire campus into a state of turmoil. Surely, that is attributing too much power to the offenders and displaying too much vulnerability on the part of those they would offend.
It is important to consider which institutional customs may be at odds with the task at hand. There is, for example, the practice that has become common of designating certain areas of campus as “safe spaces” for certain kinds of activities and identities. Such language goes above and beyond the informal establishing of preferred comfortable gathering spaces. The implication is that certain students, depending on their identities or preferred activities, are “unsafe” on other areas of campus. This magnifies the sense of personal danger out of all proportion and interferes with students’ appreciation of what it means to be in real peril. It is an obstacle to the development of authentic courage.
The exponential growth of professional student services staff – which, to be sure, has had its positive side – has played into a tendency toward what we might see as self-infantilization on the part of students, who are now in the habit of seeking formal institutional support and approval for the kinds of activities they used to be capable of managing themselves. The most unusual example of this in my own years as a college president occurred when a student came to me seeking institutional recognition for the group she represented, which, as it happened, was composed of students favoring safe, consensual S&M sex. I inquired as to why it was not sufficient that her group was not being interfered with by the administration. That was apparently not good enough for her: she wanted a blessing from those in authority. I declined to provide the blessing, preferring to encourage her to see that she could manage without it.
This support-seeking seems to be of a piece with the prolonged umbilical role that many students maintain with their parents into their college years, calling them several times a day on their cellphones. The parents, for their part, remain overly involved with their children – at least those parents whose life circumstances allow them to do so. And so we have socialization in reverse: rather than helping their offspring achieve adulthood, those who should be the grown-ups are living the lives of their children along with them. Parental over-involvement can make the institutional exercise of authority all the more challenging when it rises to (or descends into) litigiousness.
So — whose responsibility is it to address this and other aspects of campus culture that stand in the way of students developing the kind of resilience and strength that they need in life? First and foremost, this job, like so many other tough and often thankless tasks, falls to college and university presidents. A job far easier to assign than to fulfill.
Those of us who have moved on to less complicated lives must at least have the good grace to feel their pain. The task, however, must be taken up if the undergraduate experience is to be what it should be. Where presidents lead, staff will follow – and so even will the faculty, if a persuasively argued connection is made to the essential purposes of the institution.
Here, then, are the questions that must frame a president’s response when one of those increasingly common eruptions breaks out on campus: How high does this measure on the Richter scale of crises? How can I respond in a way that plays to my students’ strengths as opposed to their weaknesses? How can this serve as an occasion to increase their wisdom and self-confidence? How will I help them to grow up?
To invoke the timelessly wise words of the Rolling Stones: If students can’t always get what they want, if we try sometimes, we might just find they get what they need.