mirandaw

For support and a sense of community. Why do some posts smack of judgment and condescension?

Thank you, spambot!

Hey Guys,

I just joined this new Social News website YouAreNews.com for people to write about current events, or just about anything going on in your life. If you like to write and get good comments and criticism, feel free to join. If you want your article to be in the "Featured Articles" section of the homepage, please let me know and I will make it happen.

For support and a sense of community. Why do some posts smack of judgment and condescension?

For support and a sense of community. Why do some posts smack of judgment and condescension?

I finished the rest of the internet early. Also, I find it flattering that I have made such an impression on you.



oh my god, why didn't I thin... oh, I did. I was asking this question to see if you all realize how pointless and unhelpful this site is. Really, I got into like, a bajillion top-tier programs and I'm going to my dream school and I didn't get one useful tip from lurking here all season, not one.

Dear folks,

I'd like to elicit your thoughts and comments on a heartbreaking issue. I came across this article in which the authors surveyed graduate admissions committees for "kisses of death" that would lead them to reject otherwise strong applicants. I discovered that the disclosure of struggles with one's mental health represented an ostensibly egregious error in that category. To survey respondents, this indicated emotional instability, and the authors of the article warn that evidence of a turbulent personal history or trauma could suggest an inability to function as a successful graduate student.

I'm objecting to this reasoning not only because I've struggled with severe recurring depression ever since I was 13, engaged in violent self-harm before attempting suicide nearly two years ago, and am thus inclined to rush to the defense of the despondent. I object because the characterization of my brothers and sisters in suffering as "unable to function as successful graduate student" infuriates me, and I view surviving trauma and abuse (or self-abuse) as a testament to one's strength, not infirmity. I object because exhibiting our humanity when we convey these narratives should elicit respect in the very least--not icy reprimands, "kisses of death."

I object because divorcing personal history from professional ambition can carry particular sting. In this context, stigma is the shame of having to keep something private for fear of prejudice, disgust, disdain, disapproval. I have no doubt that private victimization, however defined, can propel us to achieve in our fields. Grief motivates us to dream harder. And the relationship is bidirectional; our academic work can spur emotional growth, our zest for living. There are probably hazards to this linkage of the private and the public, but they do not justify discriminatory admissions practices. Indeed, very few things do.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against qualified people with disabilities, including those with mental illness. I say "qualified" because an applicant or employee must still perform the "essential duties" of his or her position. If a psychiatric diagnosis interferes with this, then an employer could legally deny an applicant employment. It's immaterial whether the disclosure of psychiatric history is voluntary, I believe, as in the case of personal statements--just as an employer or university cannot discriminate on the basis of religion if one were to offer that information. In any case, the judgment that a mentally disordered individual cannot execute the basic functions of his or her position cannot be made on the basis of stereotypical generalizations but on objective evidence. This also applies in assessments that an individual may be a "direct threat" to him/herself or to others.

For all the moral disgrace of mental health stigma, prejudice, and discrimination during the application process, I've discovered that these are likely to dissolve once nestled safely in a graduate program and under the wing of a supportive advisor. I was blessed with such an advisor already; indeed, I was surprised he was capable of such compassion as when I informed him via email that I had landed in the hospital after doing all I could to end my life. I don't plan on disclosing my history to my current advisor, but I can already tell that if I were to relapse, she would grant me all the resources I would need for an accelerated recovery.

So how are admissions committees quick to dismiss applicants who discuss emotional/physical trauma and/or mental illness but equally quick, as individual advisors, to accommodate students suffering the same? If mental illness really does manifest an inability to function as a successful graduate student, then graduate students who disclose their illness to advisors and department chairs would be deemed unfit to continue their studies and promptly expelled. The reasoning of survey respondents in the above article leads to that harsh conclusion.

Ultimately, capricious, inscrutable admissions committees can reject applicants for reasons that have nothing to do with merit. We've grown accustomed to that by now. Fairness doesn't always prevail. So why raise the issue?

Well, for one I'm concerned that misconceptions about the mentally ill as violent or dangerous will continue to dominate admissions/hiring decisions. Though this callous discrimination can melt away in relationships with colleagues, thus challenging those stereotypes, our attitudes towards groups as whole entities does matter. There's a difference between demonstrating compassion to a schizophrenic co-worker and having favorable attitudes towards schizophrenics in general. These are of course related, but I would argue that much of what passes for prejudice reduction occurs at the interpersonal level only, not the intergroup level. So ambivalence towards certain groups can survive independent of our interpersonal treatment of members of these groups. And such ambivalence (or antipathy) still poses a problem because it can predict discrimination in organizational settings and perhaps political opposition to budgetary allocations for mental health services.

Put simply, I will never doubt the capacity for human beings to love one another within their established social networks, but I am far more pessimistic of our good will towards groups in general. To bridge that distance, I suppose we ought to feel every suicide as the suicide of a loved one, every abuse as the abuse of a loved one, every illness as our own--but that would defy our bloody history. That's the tragedy here--placing groups at a psychological distance justifies our cruelty even though every tear, every death, should break our hearts whether or not we know the afflicted.

So what do you think? Is mental health stigma still a problem? I'm sorry I've spit this out so incoherently. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated. Thanks for reading!

Oh my god, this post is actually the most pathetic thing I've read in a while (and the War on Women is going on right now, you know).

Why do some people continue to post on this forum, for what in some cases seems to be years, after the grad admission process? Do they not access to other graduate students / advisors to talk to in real life about their graduate school issues? It just seems a bit pathetic to me.

because they are full of judgement and condenscention.

This is the worst possible place to try and look for support or community. The 'advice' floating around on here is usually absolutely horrific. Really, I question the intelligence of those that stick around and pity the people coming here with nowhere else to turn for answers to their questions. 99% of what is posted on here are unresearched opinions, conjecture and speculation. Bad.




That's funny, because I'm pretty sure I was only substantially (if you could even call it that) involved in one thread, which was dramatic and pathetic from the start, so, not only is your sample size woefully small, your hypothesis and conclusions are both totally crap too.

For support and a sense of community. Why do some posts smack of judgment and condescension?

For support and a sense of community. Why do some posts smack of judgment and condescension?

For support and a sense of community. Why do some posts smack of judgment and condescension?

For support and a sense of community. Why do some posts smack of judgment and condescension?

yeah, wow, sorry about the gender prejudice. pretty gross of me (and others).

Just my 2 cents...I've found the posts about discouraging students to apply for grad school just because they either didn't make an impression in your particular class or because...gasp...they got unremarkable B's in 2 classes, rather disturbing. I completely understand if for whatever reason a professor/teacher is not comfortable doing a letter, I don't feel like they are obligated to do so, but to declare that that student is unqualified based on his/her performance in your class alone is pretty shortsighted. If you don't know that student very well then you have no idea how they're doing in other classes. You might think well that's a no brainer...that student shouldn't be coming to me for a letter, they should be going to a professor for whom they performed better. But it's not always that easy. They may have gone to them and they said no because it's too late and they don't have the time to do any more, which is something that happened to me. They may be out of undergrad for a while and now have limited options because they can't track down the professors who gave them A's.

I got a C in one of my major classes and it was pretty devestating, completely disliked the professor and I would have never gone to him for anything let alone an LOR for grad school, I could so see him not only declining to write it, but disuading me from applying even without knowing a damn thing about me other than the one grade I got in his class. But sure, as a C would indicate I didn't exactly perform in a stellar fashion in the class, I'm not unaware of that. While that was the only C I'd received, I was no almost 4.0 student. I ended up with a 3.35 in International Studies, which included that C, a B- or two, B's, B+'s, and a few A's in my major classes. Those are mostly "unremakarkable" grades according to a few of you, fortunately for me as I was out of undergrad for a while I was able to get ahold of the professors who gave me A's. But if I couldn't do that I hate to think that I would have gotten some "you're not qualified at all because you got a B in my class" lecture from the others. Don't sell those of us who weren't "stellar" in your class short, we're just as capable of succeeding in grad school too. If I was a 3.35 kind of student in undergrad and I don't do much better than that in grad school, I'll still get my Master's degree just the same as the 4.0 students.

You might not be obligated to write the letter, but for those students who express to you that you are one of their few or only options, then I believe that you are obligated to work with them to see if you can muster up something good to say. If they comply with your requests for writting samples, goal statements, and whatever else, that means they're committed and ready to make their impression on you. It's not easy for many students to approach a teacher for a letter, I personally absolutely hated doing it.

I wrote several recs as a high school teacher. If asked, I held firm with our guidance office's policy of a three-week lead time. I generally found the truly poor and forgettable students would self-select themselves out, because they were asking way too last minute. So, I could decline and simply cite this reason.

In other cases, I'd query about the student's long-term goals. If their class with me didn't really relate, or I hadn't taught them since the 9th grade, I'd gently suggest they ask specific junior- or senior-level teachers, and stress that this looks better to college adcoms and would improve their chances.

In a few cases, students I NEVER would have initially guessed approached me for a letter of rec. If they gave me lots of lead-time and were super responsible, I saw this as an opportunity to get to know them better. I also requested individual meetings with them to talk about goals, accomplishments outside my class, etc. and asked if they could provide resumes, answer questionnaires about what they had gotten out of my class, forward personal essays they were submitting for other parts of the app, etc. If a student delivered all this to me, I had plenty of fodder and could easily write them a rec.

A rather quiet, poorly-testing student approached me to write a rec for a scholarship last year. Everything I asked for, she delivered, and I was impressed to discover her long track record of community service. Since this was a service-oriented scholarship, I just framed my letter differently. It also forced me to reflect on her other work in my class, and realize she was very diligent about her projects and other preparedness for class, as a way to compensate for not testing well. Despite her not having a mind for science, I am proud of my role in helping her secure her scholarship. I could tell it meant the world to her, and I would do it again in a heartbeat.

My program difference isn't much of a leap, but I did an interdisciplinary degree in English and Gender Studies in undergrad and was just accepted to a Public Policy program for my masters. When I finished UG, I got started in local politics and made my way up to campaign management, so this was applicable experience for a public policy degree. I feel like the discipline is different, but the analytical nature of an english degree provides transferrable skills, so it isn't too different.

I would definitely do grad school still. Going on year 2 of being ridiculously underemployed? No thank you.

You applied there knowing nothing about the program or the university?

You applied there knowing nothing about the program or the university?

In my experiences as a graduate student and from working in the private sector, I have found that if I unintentionally knock over someone's apple cart, putting things right is a good way to demonstrate good faith.
But then, you might be right. I should have just said "chillax" and used the voting buttons. Those two tactics are proven winners in academic settings.

We're too desperate and fragile to play jokes. What's laughter?

I don't know about everyone else, but I've ordered my Forever Lazy in 3 different colors for my first week of grad school.

Yes, but could we not compare something we don't like to someone having a mental impairment. Not okay.