Editorial: Residential Life should be more transparent with changes to disciplinary policy

The original version of this article and the headline accompanying it contained information that was unclear and has been changed. See the bottom of the article for more information.

UCLA Residential Life quietly changed a disciplinary policy posted on its website last week listed under “Sanctions” and “Exclusion from On Campus Housing.”

Two weeks ago, the policy included language specifying that physical harm or threats of physical harm to oneself, including threats of suicide, could result in eviction from housing on the Hill. Now, all of that language has been removed, leaving clauses that delineate “physical abuse to any person” and “threats of violence to any person” as grounds for eviction from housing.

On its surface, this wording change seems to protect students from the threat of removal for struggling with mental health issues that may lead them to suicidal ideation or attempts, which is laudable for UCLA considering that universities across the nation have recently come under fire for their policies on mental health.

But the policy change has two glaring flaws.

First, the new language of the policy does not specify that students will only be evicted from housing if they harm or threaten to harm others – it instead uses the words “any person,” which could technically include oneself. The interpretation of policy by administration is not under students’ control, and this kind of broad, vague wording means UCLA Housing could well choose to implement the policy so that suicidal thoughts or attempts are a cause for eviction.

In the same vein, one key component of the previous policy was not removed: Roof or ledge walking is still listed as a behavior that could get a student evicted from on-campus housing, categorized under “threats to any person.” Roof or ledge walking poses a clear threat to oneself and could be classified as suicidal behavior.

Second and perhaps even more troublingly, neither UCLA Housing nor the university itself made any attempt to inform students about the wording changes. UCLA spokesman Tod Tamberg told The Daily Bruin that the changes were clarifications of the previous policy, bringing them in line with UCLA’s practice of directing students toward mental health resources and not withdrawing them from the university for mental health issues. UCLA routinely updates or clarifies policies without public announcements to the student body, Tamberg said.

But at the same time, those “clarifications” were the direct result of Daily Bruin reporters’ questions and stories about the policy, Tamberg added. Explicitly and deliberately removing language from a policy after facing questions from the press does not qualify as a clarification, and the student body should have been made immediately aware of the changes.

When asked why UCLA had not publicized the changes, Tamberg responded that the policy had been clearly delineated to students through a submission to the Daily Bruin by Elizabeth Gong-Guy, the director of Counseling and Psychological Services, and Suzanne Seplow, the assistant vice chancellor for student development.

Nothing could be further from the truth. That submission was published Oct. 17, and did not mention any changes to Residential Life’s policies or clearly delineate the policy.

The change has the potential to lead UCLA in a positive direction regarding its policies on mental health involuntary withdrawal. But lackluster changes hidden under the guise of “clarifications” aren’t going to cut it.

UCLA should be frank and open about its policy mistakes and changes, and students should have wide access to that information.

Clarification: The Office of Residential Life has been renamed Residential Life.