These proposals for intervention mechanisms for students who are potentially dangerous or have been violent are based on the following concepts.

Given the campus concern over this issue, thresholds for preventative intervention should be low. Initially, setting low thresholds for interventions will result in excess numbers of "false positive" interventions but will avoid the dangerous consequences of not intervening with "false negatives." Setting thresholds at a low level will allow those involved in the interventions to obtain an experience which could ultimately provide for studied adjustments in both the protocol and thresholds for intervention. To ensure that the same group is involved with all instances, it is suggested that there be a single point of contact, i.e., a single telephone number, to initiate the intervention process. A team will then have and gather experience over years. It is proposed that there be two tracks working on two different philosophies. Track 1 would be primarily disciplinary and deal with situations that have already become violent. Track 2 works on a preventative premise, where the issues are clinical and risk-management rather than disciplinary, at least at the level of the initial screen. Accordingly, there needs to be a fire wall between the risk assessment team operating in the screening process and administration.

Track 1 - Disciplinary

A. Issues of domestic violence, dating violence, fights and assaults that have already occurred.

1. Members of the community should be encouraged to report these to campus security, Administration, and/or the Baltimore City police, as these already manage legal or disciplinary issues.

2. As some of these events will involve people with underlying clinical conditions, disciplinary intervention alone, while satisfying some aspects of the issues, could inadvertently ignore the clinical needs of the perpetrator. The humanistic values of the university require our procedures to be sensitive to these possibilities .

3. Administrators will consult a clinical member(s) of the Risk Assessment Team (the Director of the Counseling Center, Director of the Faculty and Staff Assistance Program, the Director of Student Mental Health, or their designees) to discuss the perpetrator's violent behavior in order to consider at least the following issues :

a. The necessity of a mandatory Mental Health evaluation by a licensed doctoral-level mental health provider.

b. The needs of the victim.

c. Any intermediate preliminary actions prior to resolution of the disciplinary matter in order to prevent additional incidents.

A. Procedure - For potentially dangerous situations, where no direct violent act has yet been committed:
1. There would be a single number for access to the Risk Assessment Team that community members would call.

2. Calls would be fielded by members of the Risk Assessment Team, who are focusing on behavioral issues (at a minimum, the Director of the Counseling Center, Director of the Faculty and Staff Assistance Program, the Director of Student Mental Health, or their designees) and faculty with specific experience in violence-related issues, mental health practitioners, Security staff and others deemed necessary and appropriate. Although administrators might be part of the team, their role would be as team member rather than as a representative of Administration.

3. At the first stage, as this is a clinical and risk management level of intervention, reporting to administration is not required. This will encourage reporting.

4. Members of the community, including faculty, resident advisors, peer counselors, the general student body, potential victims, members of the administration, and security should all be strongly encouraged to call the team when someone is suspected of being potentially dangerous. It is expected that case experience will help to clarify the situations in which contact with the Risk Assessment Team might become part of a mandatory protocol for university staff dealing with students who may be potentially dangerous. 5. Counseling Center, Faculty and Staff Assistance Program, and Student Mental Health staff are special cases. If one of these staff are treating a potential victim of another student or university staff member, he/she should consider encouraging the potential victim to call the Assessment Team. Existing confidentiality law would not allow the staff to call the evaluation team over the patient's objection.

6. If the staff in these programs are treating a potential perpetrator, they should make appropriate clinical interventions based on current Maryland law which has codified certain duties to warn when patients indicate an intention to harm a specific person(s).

7. It is expected that there will be several types of calls:

a. Anonymous calls, where advice is sought.

b. Non-anonymous calls, where advice only is being sought.

c. Non-anonymous calls, where specific help is sought.

1. The purposes of the Risk Assessment Team are to identify potential violence and to intervene and to serve as a central repository of information that will enhance the University's effectiveness in preventing acts of violence. In instances where violence has already occurred, the caller should be assisted in making contact with the disciplinary track described above. If there is an issue of sexual harassment, then sexual harassment policies and procedures need to be followed and callers appropriately assisted in making contacts consistent with that policy and procedures.

2. Team members will collect data, including demographics and case characteristics. Emphasis will be on behaviors, including threats of violence, evidence of stalking, persistent unwanted contacts, harassing or threatening letters, telephone calls or E-mail, and particularly issues of approaching, confronting and following the potential victim, and contacting the potential victim's friends. Information will be sought on the identity of the subject and the nature of past relationships, if any.

3. When the call is from someone other than the potential victim, interviews with the potential victim should be sought and performed by a team member. Faculty, staff, students, and others should be encouraged to make calls to the Team with the potential victim present so that contact can be made rapidly.

C. Dispositions

1. Dispositions can be of at least two sorts. When, in the judgment of the Team or Team member, the issue is one of practical joking or nuisance behavior, no action beyond giving advice may be needed.

2. Where there is an assessment that some risk is present, the Team will take the following action:

a. Determine the appropriate University staff to go out and confront the subject and notify him or her to stop the behavior.

b. The subject is advised that he or she needs to seek a mental health evaluation through the Counseling Center, Faculty and Staff Assistance Program, or Student Mental Health Service and must do so within 24 hours. If the person does not make an appointment within that time frame, Administration is notified, and the issue becomes disciplinary and goes to the Track for violent behavior.

c. If the subject agrees to evaluation, the evaluation procedures will follow the FASAP (EAP) model. Evaluation may determine any of the following:

i. There is no case.

ii. The person is in need of services and will be offered a contract specifying the treatment to be sought and requiring ongoing monitoring. If the person agrees, then the case will remain clinical unless he\she is not compliant with the contract. iii. In the situation where the person is non-compliant, Administration is informed and the subject goes to the disciplinary track to be managed.

Go Back to JHUNIVERSE Home Page