John Cleese and Andrew Graham Dixon

Galaxy

I hate the way suicide is used in these discussions. With no evidence and frequently in direct opposition to guidelines on suicide. I could say I wonder if non platforming has caused many suicides but I try my best not to use suicide as some sort of bargaining tool.

I agree but stating the fact that suicide in universities has declined in the last 5 years and that a more caring and considerate attitude has been brought in including the protection of non-platforming isn't using it as a bargaining tool. It is drawing attention to the fact that progress is being made. If you ignore that simply because you don't agree with a policy I wonder why you do so?

This may sound harsh, but I'm not sure why the fact that someone is not going to get better from MH issues has to do with it, if indeed it is the case (again - not all MH issues are the same, and some can be mitigated or cured).

As with all health matters, some measures can help, and a lot of time and effort goes into helping people with Dyslexia, Autism, ADHD and other neurodiversity issues. Physical problems can be alleviated by the use of ramps, hearing loops and so on. Similarly, people with some MH issues can be helped to study on the same terms as other students. The point of all of the above is to create as level a playing field as possible, for all students.

University study is not based on equality. Entrance depends on success in A levels, and in some cases on interviews. Is it 'fair' that some people do better in exams than others? Lots of people are rejected because they are not academic enough to get in, and that is not going to get better either. The stress of the thought of not getting first class degrees can send some students into a decline. Should they be given the marks so that this doesn't happen? I'm not suggesting that anyone on this thread has said that they should, but that is the logical progression of the idea that MH issues have to be catered to at all costs.

Expecting courses or extra-curricular activities to be diluted so that people who can't take the fact that not everyone's views are the same as theirs can not be the way forward, unless we are to accept a fall in standards for everyone. And I repeat - many people with MH issues would not want that to happen at all.

Smileless2012 thank you so much for your support, it’s very much appreciated
Glorianny I withdraw my wanting to believe you weren’t deliberately misunderstanding my post, I find your responses offensive and deliberately so. Perhaps you’d care to apologise for the offence? If I thought for one nanosecond that ML was apologising in absolute good faith having realised the error of his ways would be one thing, an apology grounded in covering his pitiful arse out of fear of cancellation is something else and not worth the time he took to tweet it. Clear enough for you?

‘But some people live with mental health problems their whole lives. It isn’t going to get better’
A;ologies if I didn’t make clear in my post, the distinction between enduring mental and physical health problems and feelings or a common cold - for example

And there you have an exact explanation of why mental health is still regarded as shameful and not to be spoken of. Because if you have a physical disability and need wheelchair access or an amanuensis you will get every consideration and adjustment. But if you have mental health issues well just go home!

That is not what I said ?.

People with the sort of mental health issues (and they are varied) who are unable to give a presentation should not join a course where this is a method of assessment. It's all very well to say that assessment methods should be changed, but if the course is, for example, one that trains teachers, it is dishonest to graduate if you can't stand in front of a group and disseminate information. It is also unfair to give someone who has been assessed differently the same certificate as another student who did do the presentation, despite their nerves. There are many courses which are assessed differently, eg the OU, which offers a wide range of courses that can be studied online and may be more appropriate for people who do not feel able to join in with extra-curricular activities such as listening to speakers in the SU (or other groups of students).

Who said that MH should not be spoken about? Or that it is shameful? Certainly not me, as that is not what I think.

Of course it is patronising to say that people with MH issues should not have their opinions challenged. That assumes that all MH issues are the same, and that people who do suffer from them expect to be protected and treated as children.

Thank goodness most people working in universities don't think like this. It is a disability like any other and it needs to be catered for, not to do so is a breech of the law.
How do you know how 'most people working in universities' think?

Do you think that it is fair that people who are experts in their field should also become experts in mental health? Or that there should be different standards of assessment for some students? How would you answer a student who is very nervous about an exam or a presentation, and comes to you to say that it is unfair that her flatmate is being excused it because she has a sick note saying that she has anxiety? Do you lower the standards of the course for all, or allow some people to qualify without meeting all the requirements?

There are lots of MH disabilities that can be catered for, and universities do, on the whole, do as much as possible to do so. Students who are agoraphobic can often learn from home, or bring in a trusted person to sit with them and walk between classes. Separate rooms can be provided for anxious students to sit exams so that nobody can see them. People who need lots of time off to deal with issues can have work sent home or do it online, and so on. They are just a small part of a much wider range of measures that can, and do, help people with MH issues to study.

I'm all in favour of all of that, but not allowing anyone to hear challenging views in case it upsets someone with fragile MH is several steps too far. It is also unfair to blame a university (which is, after all, just an institution made up of individual people) for being unable to cater for the needs of someone who has not declared those needs, or whose needs place them outside of the parameters of what can be catered for without diluting the experience for others.

I hate the way suicide is used in these discussions. With no evidence and frequently in direct opposition to guidelines on suicide. I could say I wonder if non platforming has caused many suicides but I try my best not to use suicide as some sort of bargaining tool.

Iam64

No it isn’t about mental health being shameful. It’s about all of us taking responsibility for our physical, emotional and mental health.
If we are not seriously mentally ill, ie psychotic , or suicidal to be blunt with the hope I won’t offend someone. Ok we had a miscarriage, a termination, our mother/other loved one has a terrifying diagnosis, we may feel we won’t be functioning at the top of our ability. Most / many employers/every university would accept a week self certification sick leave. It’s the responsible thing to do. If we need more time off, we need a certificate from our GP

It isn’t about shaming m.h. It’s about recognising if we break a leg, sprain an ankle, get a chest infection, we can’t work. Mental health and physical health - some of its management is down to the I fividual

But some people live with mental health problems their whole lives. It isn't going to get better. It isn't a matter of needing time off. It may be controlled with medication, but it can still make life difficult particularly at times of stress. That's why students need support. They don't need to be told they shouldn't be there or that they need to take some time off.

Galaxy

And deciding that people with mental health issues cant cope with challenging opinions is deeply patronising. There is no evidence that the people who demand no platforming ( usually a very small percentage of the student body) have mental health issues. They may or they may not but you cant assume that they do.

I wouldn't say that not-platforming is all about people with mental health difficulties. I would say it was about protecting the vulnerable and this may include those with mental health difficulties. So I'm not assuming anything. I said if it prevented one suicide I would support it. Not all suicides have mental health problems.

And deciding that people with mental health issues cant cope with challenging opinions is deeply patronising. There is no evidence that the people who demand no platforming ( usually a very small percentage of the student body) have mental health issues. They may or they may not but you cant assume that they do.

No it isn’t about mental health being shameful. It’s about all of us taking responsibility for our physical, emotional and mental health.
If we are not seriously mentally ill, ie psychotic , or suicidal to be blunt with the hope I won’t offend someone. Ok we had a miscarriage, a termination, our mother/other loved one has a terrifying diagnosis, we may feel we won’t be functioning at the top of our ability. Most / many employers/every university would accept a week self certification sick leave. It’s the responsible thing to do. If we need more time off, we need a certificate from our GP

It isn’t about shaming m.h. It’s about recognising if we break a leg, sprain an ankle, get a chest infection, we can’t work. Mental health and physical health - some of its management is down to the I fividual

Doodledog

This is off topic somewhat, and possibly controversial, but I do think that students (and where they are very young their parents) should take some responsibility when it comes to MH issues. If someone knows that their MH is fragile, or that they are ‘unable’ to fulfil the requirements of a course of study, they should consider choosing a different course or living at home whilst studying. It is unreasonable to expect to get special treatment (eg being absolved from the sorts of assessment that stresses them) when others getting the same qualification are expected to comply.

And there you have an exact explanation of why mental health is still regarded as shameful and not to be spoken of. Because if you have a physical disability and need wheelchair access or an amanuensis you will get every consideration and adjustment. But if you have mental health issues well just go home!
Thank goodness most people working in universities don't think like this. It is a disability like any other and it needs to be catered for, not to do so is a breech of the law.

I agree Doodledog. Going to university, leaving home for the first time and having to fend for yourself, for many, for the first time in their lives is very stressful.

A great deal of thought needs to be given and it isn't for everyone. For some, studying where they can continue to live at home is a much better and safer option.

This is off topic somewhat, and possibly controversial, but I do think that students (and where they are very young their parents) should take some responsibility when it comes to MH issues. If someone knows that their MH is fragile, or that they are ‘unable’ to fulfil the requirements of a course of study, they should consider choosing a different course or living at home whilst studying. It is unreasonable to expect to get special treatment (eg being absolved from the sorts of assessment that stresses them) when others getting the same qualification are expected to comply.

Never been able to stand watching him TBH Galaxy let alone listen to anything he has to say.

Nobody takes Matt Lucas apologies and general behaviour on Twitter seriously do they?

Really Glorianny!! It was perfectly obvious to me what Rosie meant by her original post and even though she has just given an explanation, you seem to be determined to allow your post which you now know has caused upset and offence, to have credibility.

I’ll assume you didn’t deliberately misunderstand my post ..... Glorianny

Never assume anything, Rosie51

I find this attitude towards students, that either they can't have mental health problems, if they do have them they shouldn't be at University, and the I know one who is tough enough suggestion very upsetting. I find the lengths to which some people will go to prove there is no case for protecting vulnerable students upsetting as well

I DID NOT SAY THAT.

Do not keep twisting what I said.

I'M OUT.

Oooh how wonderful Rosie, you must be so excited. Have a great time with your family.

Well I'm sorry but if someone apologises for something and specifically names something in that apology and you then question that apology what else can I gather from that except that you feel he had nothing to apologise for? Otherwise wouldn't you simply accept the apology?
Thankyou for your post Rosie51 I'm now left wondering why you wouldn't want someone to apologise for being offensive.

Smileless2012

why do you think Rosie's post means she approves of blacking up Glorianny. She's referring to Matt Lucas changing his mind about what is and isn't acceptable, not giving her own opinion either way.

Thank you for getting my post Smileless2012
Glorianny I’ll assume you didn’t deliberately misunderstand my post, but I found your assumption upsetting and highly offensive.
Blacking up has been offensive for donkey’s years and certainly when ML was doing it so his denial of the criticism he received at the time showed his indifference to hurt feelings. I suspect it was fear of being cancelled that suddenly made him so aware prompting the apology.
I find drag very offensive and the equivalent of blackface to women. I hope one day that it too will be seen in the same light.
It was lucky I had one last look at this thread as I’m flying to see my family for the first time in 3 years tomorrow, and would hate your insult to stand unchallenged.

Yes I know that Glorianny but in response to her post you posted "I take it this means you approve of blacking up then", so I'm asking why you think she does?

This thread has demonstrated the absolute impossibility of discussing complex subjects without offending people.

Smileless2012

why do you think Rosie's post means she approves of blacking up Glorianny. She's referring to Matt Lucas changing his mind about what is and isn't acceptable, not giving her own opinion either way.

Matt Lucas specifically referred to the blacking up in his apology

Callistemon21

Please don't use the case of Natasha Abrahart to try to prove your point.

It's offensive and upsetting.

I'm sorry if you are offended Callistemon21 but there seemed to be some doubt on here about mental health levels amongst students and a University"s responsibilities to their students. It was an attempt to illustrate the problem.

I find this attitude towards students, that either they can't have mental health problems, if they do have them they shouldn't be at University, and the I know one who is tough enough suggestion very upsetting. I find the lengths to which some people will go to prove there is no case for protecting vulnerable students upsetting as well.

As I said the suicide rate at Universities has dropped in the last five years and if one potential suicide was prevented by no-platforming I think it is a price worth paying. And I know it won't be the only factor but I can't see exposing anyone to speech you are aware will upset some people has any value at all when you know some of those people are vulnerable