A Down-Under Politician Looks Down on “Those People”

Pauline Hanson Australia

A troubling report from Down Under. Have a look at this article about Pauline Hanson, a senator from Queensland, Australia. In it, she argues, quite inelegantly, for students with autism to be separated from their peers and placed into self-contained classrooms. Why? Because these students are “holding back” the other students who want to learn.

Below are three quotes from her address on the matter, followed by three comments—all of which should be painfully obvious, but apparently are not. At least not yet.

  1. “Most of the time the teacher spends so much time on them they forget about the child who wants to go ahead in leaps and bounds in their education, but are held back by those.”

As if children with autism don’t want to get ahead or are incapable of making leaps and bounds of their own. They deserve more than to be “looked after.” Please don’t assume they are incapable of anything more than this. They’re not burdens needing routine maintenance or looking after.

  1. “It’s no good saying we have to allow these kids to feel good about themselves and we don’t want to upset them and make them feel hurt.”

What a cruel mischaracterization! This comment reveals an ignorance that is both embarrassing and unacceptable in a public official. I have no doubt that parents of autistic children want more for their kids than that they feel good about themselves. Like all parents, they want their children to receive an education, to develop their skills and gifts, and to know they can make a real contribution.

  1. “We need to get rid of those people because you want everyone to feel good about themselves.”

Well, at least her office later clarified that “those people” referred to “do-gooders” demanding autistic children remain in mainstream classrooms. But my sigh of relief was cut short when I realized that she was still talking about “getting rid of” some nuisances and who may be threatening the status quo. Again, the condescending language of exclusion, elitism, and overweening power. As if you can get rid of any parent.

 

No, It’s Not Okay

fullsizeoutput_449c

So I met my son at a local minor league baseball game today. It was a happy coincidence. Our company was taking a day at the park as a part team-building, part pressure-relieving event, and my boy’s sixth-grade class was taking a field trip. So after spending some time with my colleagues, I went looking for my boy.

It wasn’t hard to find him. He was the only kid wearing a long sleeve sweater. It was in the upper 70s and sunny, so all his classmates were in shorts and tee shirts. But there he was, seated at the end of his bench, squinting in the sun, his head darting left and right with that vague here-but-not-here expression I’ve come to expect when he’s in a crowded public place.

Okay, I Guess.

As soon as he saw me, he smiled and gave me a big hug. He buried his head in my chest and rubbed it back and forth while I scratched the top of his head. It’s our thing.

“How’s it going?”

“Okay, I guess,” he said.

“Are you enjoying the game?”

“Not really. I know balls and strikes and home runs, but I don’t like baseball so much. It takes too long.”

“Okay, so what are you doing instead of watching the game?”

“Oh, nothing, just sitting here watching my friend play on his 3DS.” [He wasn’t watching all that intently. Just glancing over his shoulder every now and then.]

He seemed perfectly content to sit there in the background, sweating in the sun. He wasn’t engaged or absorbed in anything. He was just “there,” innocently taking up a seat and waiting for his teacher to tell him it was time to go back to school. I learned that he had been there for more than an hour already, and he wouldn’t be leaving for about another hour. And he spent the whole time alone, in his own world. No kids were seeking him out. No one seemed to care that he was on his own. His guidance counselor, who knows about his diagnosis, was sitting a couple of rows behind us, and even she seemed oblivious.

Happy Compliance.

It broke my heart. It was the first time in a couple of years that I saw him in his school element. I knew he had been like that in elementary school, but I thought he was coming out of himself. Not so much.

The thing is, it didn’t take much for me to get him involved. We watched the next few pitches and cheered each hit by the home team. We analyzed each misstep. We clapped at two home runs and followed the foul balls that flew over the net and landed in the stands. It wasn’t hard.

I also noticed that he had a packet of worksheets with him. They were filled with STEM questions he could answer for extra credit. He had done none of them. “My grades are good enough,” he told me. “I don’t need to do it.”

“Come on!” I said. “We can knock these things out right now. Don’t you like seeing your grades go up?”

“Okay.” No resistance. No fight. Just happy compliance.
So for the next 20 minutes, we tackled the problems. “What is the area of the baseball diamond?” “If Team X has lost three times as many games as they have won, out of 72 games, how many games did they lose?” “If you could interview the pitcher, what would be two STEM-type of questions you would ask him?” Simple stuff.

He happily dove into each problem and did a great job. (He is an honors student, after all.) But he wouldn’t have done anything if I hadn’t have been there to get the ball rolling. He would have remained static in his thought bubble, because no one seemed to care.

A Shove and a Nudge.

I suppose I shouldn’t care either. After all, my son was content. He gave no indication that he was feeling lonely or misunderstood or even bored. So why make a deal out of it?

Maybe it was the fact that no one seemed to notice that he was alone. Maybe it was the glassy-eyed look he had when I first found him. Maybe it was because I hate being passive myself; I always have to have something “useful” to do. Maybe it was because I got a brief glimpse into what his future might be like, and it scared me.

Whatever it was, I know one thing: I think it’s time to start planning for the next school year. Bone up on disability education law. Get to know a couple of his teachers. Observe him in some classes. Sketch out what an IEP might look like for him—and get ready to fight for it.

Because I don’t want life to pass my son by. I don’t want him to miss out on the relationships and the learning and the enjoyment that could be his if someone were to just welcome him. Because he’s a good kid. A bright kid. A kind kid. He should have the opportunity to let his light shine. All he needs is a little nudge.

And that means I’m going to have to do a bit of shoving

Which I don’t mind at all.

Adventures in Airport Advocacy

Airplane! Logo

Every now and then I am reminded of how far we have to go before our world welcomes people with disabilities and neurological differences. Yesterday gave me two such reminders back to back. I was at the airport at the start of a business trip to visit my publisher in St. Augustine, Florida.

“Gawd!”

The first reminder happened as I was standing in line, waiting to board the plane. I spot an older man (~70-75) walking in circles at the gate area. He is cross-eyed and has the pleasant-but-pouty look of someone with cognitive challenges. When his care giver walks him to the gate for pre-boarding, he hands his pass to the agent and declares in a loud, excited voice, “I’m ready to fly!”

The agent smiles back. “Yes you are, sir,” and shares an ill-timed high-five with him.

A beautiful scene. Until the woman waiting in line ahead of me (~60-65) grimaces and turns to her friend. “Gawd, I hope he don’t end up sitting next to me,” she practically spits. “I’m here to relax, not deal with his kind of people.”

Her friend nods. A knife to my heart. A very brief thought that maybe I should say something. But I decide against it. What’s the point? She does not seem the type given to respectful dialogue. Instead, I offer up three prayers: one for the man, one for the woman, and one for myself.

For the man: “Thank you, Lord, for this fellow’s joy. Please keep him safe in your arms.”

For her: “Lord, please help her become more understanding and welcoming. I cannot fix stupid, but you can fix everything. Please help her out here.”

For me: “Please, God, help me be more forgiving. And maybe more brave.”

The Regular Dads Club.

The second reminder happened on the plane. I sat next to a Navy JAG officer and his wife. Both about my age. A delightful couple. Pleasant, engaging conversation with a good amount of back and forth between the JAG and myself. (The wife was a quiet sort.) We talked about our travels: his deployments to Iraq and Addis Ababa, and my six months in Tehran and post-Soviet trips to Central Europe. We talked about school: him at the Naval Academy, and me at The Mount. We talked about politics—after some careful circling to tease out each other’s views, of course. (He didn’t like Trump either, so we continued amicably.)

Then we talked about kids. His daughter, a linguist who was getting her Air Force commission this weekend. His son, who just graduated from Cornell, his second son, with an MBA from Stanford. And his third son, who is graduating from high school with a swimming scholarship to Colorado. He was obviously proud of his kids, but not in a snotty way. He didn’t even humble brag.

Then he asked me about my kids. “You have a lot of kids. Have you got colleges all figured out yet?” When I told him that we weren’t so sure about who would be going and who wouldn’t, he looked puzzled and asked why. I told him about their ASD diagnoses and some of the challenges they face.

It got awkward. He tried to say something like, “Well, not everyone’s cut out for college,” and “There’s plenty of trade jobs out there that need to be done.” I tried to change the subject, but he had essentially checked out. The conversation politely petered out, and a couple of minutes later, he opened his laptop, plugged in his ear buds, and settled in to a movie.

I don’t fault him. He just didn’t know what to say. His world had been circumscribed by success after success—of course, with hard work and sacrifice—and he didn’t have any reference point to orient him to special needs parenting. It’s a shame, too. We were having a good conversation. For a few moments, I was a Regular Dad. I was part of the club. I was just like everyone else.

Don’t get me wrong. I like the club I’m in. It would just be nice to bridge the gap between these two clubs every now and then. 

Even better, it would be even nice if there were no gaps. No separate clubs at all.

That’s why we need to keep advocating.

After the Intake

Notebook Writing

So we took our Little Guy to a pediatric hospital in Baltimore to begin the process of evaluating him for ASD. Up to this point, all we had for him was a provisional diagnosis from our psychologist in Florida—about three years ago. She had just begun her own evaluation when we ended up moving to Maryland, and we’re just now getting around to getting something more formal.

Anyway, today’s appointment was “intake”—a bunch of questions about his early development, his family history, his current state, and our concerns. As she asked us the standard barrage of questions, the psychologist also observed our boy in action. But the main focus was on us. For an hour.

It sucked. Not because we couldn’t answer her questions. We could. Not because the Little Guy was out of control. He wasn’t. It sucked because, well, you know why. A whole hour describing our family’s challenges. A whole hour listing our son’s deficits and telling stories about his meltdowns and his sensory issues and his social struggles and his attention deficits.

Poignant Reminders.

Katie did awesome. She always does. Her memory is sharp as a tack. She could recall his early developmental challenges far better than I could. She was clearer on his current challenges than I was. She spends more time with the kids than I do. She works part time, and I’m on a ten-hour-a-day schedule. Plus, she takes more therapy appointments than I do. So what was standard fare for her came flooding over me with a quickness and a matter-of-fact tone that felt like a gut punch.

You see, when your whole household is ASD, you tend not to notice all the details. It’s just part of your normal. We don’t have any neurotypical kids, so we don’t know what standard behavior looks like. After a few years, you begin to glide over the ticks and twitches of ASD. You take them in stride and keep trying to move forward. You get so accustomed to them that you don’t even recognize how many of them there are. That is, until you have to recount them to a perfect stranger with a degree.

So to hear the Little Guy’s symptoms rattled off with precision one after the other . . . well, let’s just say it was hard. Lumpy-throat hard. It broke my heart. Today was a reminder of how tough life will be for my kids—of how tough it already is.

It was a reminder of every tense, contentious, and tearful IEP meeting we ever had. It was a reminder of the friendships my kids have lost due to their social challenges, as well as the friendships Katie and I have lost because of people’s misunderstanding. It was a reminder of all that we are missing out on, like family dinners out or vacations or even peaceful walks in the woods. It was a reminder of the earlier days, when we were both new to this gig and so much more scared than we are today. And it was a reminder of the large amount of work that lies ahead of us as we plan and prepare for our children’s futures. So yeah, it was hard.

I so want to see my kids have the best future possible. I so want to see them thrive and kick ass in the world. I want to see them happy and productive, welcomed and loved. Some have a greater chance at this than others, but none of them will find it easy. All of them will ask the “Why me” question more frequently and with more poignancy than their typically developing peers. That’s why it was so hard.

Mission Accomplished.

Today was also hard because this evening our Little Guy put up a huge, weepy, melt-downy fuss about something he normally enjoys: soccer practice. He was probably worn out from the trip to Baltimore. It wasn’t that demanding in any ordinary way, but it was a break in his routine, and that never ends well. It hurt to see him so upset, but I knew I had to help him power through it. If he could just get on the field and start running around, he would end up having a good time. But the drive there seemed unending. No amount of consoling words or attempts at humor could calm him down. All I could do was keep driving.

We got to the field, and his mood lifted as soon as he saw his team mates. He ran onto the pitch and started kicking the ball around with them. Mission accomplished—for him at least.

It took me a little longer. Once I saw that he was okay, I took a long walk and prayed, my Rosary in hand. “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us. . . .” It helped. A ton.

Now I’m sitting here on the sideline, watching my son. He’s hesitant about mixing it up with the other kids. His kick and his run can be awkward at times. His teammates engage in typical boy humor that he doesn’t quite get. And he takes every misstep of another player far too seriously. Standard Little Guy stuff.

But it’s okay. I’m sitting in the shade of a tree. A cool breeze is blowing. I catch the scent of honeysuckle on the wind. And I know God’s going to take care of us.

Everything’s going to be all right.

It’s Not the Disability, Stupid

trump-mocks-disabled

Well, the disability community’s Interwebs were lighting up again yesterday. This time, it was about Meryl Streep’s acceptance speech for the Cecil B. DeMille Award at Sunday night’s Golden Globes. For those who haven’t heard, Streep embedded in her speech a bit of criticism of one of Donald Trump’s more embarrassing moments on the campaign trail:

This instinct to humiliate, when it’s modeled by someone in the public platform, by someone powerful, it filters down into everybody’s life, because it kind of gives permission for other people to do the same thing. Disrespect invites disrespect, violence incites violence. And when the powerful use their position to bully others we all lose.

She was referring, of course, to Trump’s criticism of Washington Post reporter Serge Kovaleski, especially his mimicking of Kovaleski’s disability.

In response, as he has asserted many times previously, Trump told The New York Times, “I was never mocking anyone. I was calling into question a reporter who had gotten nervous because he had changed his story.”

The Data? The Argument? Or the Person?

Many people will find Trump’s words hard to swallow, but I wonder if something else isn’t going on here. I’m tempted to believe him when he says he wasn’t mocking Kovaleski’s disability. It’s likely that, to his mind, that’s not what he was doing at all. To his mind, he was simply rebutting something Kovaleski said. Full stop.

That’s where the problem lies.

It seems that Trump makes little distinction between the words that offend him and the person speaking the words—every aspect of that person. So if Kovaleski has offended him by implying that Mr. Trump wasn’t telling the truth about seeing thousands of Muslims celebrating the Twin Towers’ destruction on 9/11, then Kovaleski himself, in his totality, is fair game. And when he looks at Kovaleski, he sees the disability as a defining characteristic, one that is available to him as he pursues his retribution.

This tactic is similar to the way Trump responded to Meryl Streep’s address—tweeting that she is “over-rated.” As if her acting talent (or supposed lack thereof) disqualifies her from offering a considered opinion on any other matter. She’s a washed-up actress, so she must be wrong. About everything.

You see, it’s not enough to engage the argument; you have to destroy the person making it.

“We Create Our Own Reality.”

I don’t think Donald Trump is a pioneer in this area, either. He may have put his own personal stamp on it, but it’s been around forever. Especially on the political stage, but in other aspects of life, many assume that the best way to win an argument is to paint the one making that argument in the most insulting of colors. So anyone who supported Hillary Clinton is an abortion-loving, traditional family-hating liberal. Anyone who supported Trump is a heartless, uneducated, white knuckle-dragger. Opponents of Obama are racists, and pro-life people hate women’s rights. Truth and facts be damned, it’s all about the character of the person. Destroy the person, and you destroy the argument. And push aside the facts.

This reminded me of a conversation that journalist (and, incidentally, autism dad) Ron Suskind had with George W. Bush advisor Karl Rove. Here’s Suskind describing their exchange:

[Rove] said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

This, I think, gets to the heart of Donald Trump’s (and many other people’s) way of dealing with inconvenient facts. Take the focus off of that which can be documented, and put it on the more subjective and ephemeral. Create a new reality, and create it loudly enough, and you’ll outshout the data.

Truth, Power, and The Art of the Deal.

I’ll close with one more quote. This time from Peter Steinfels, one-time editor and now occasional contributor for the Catholic magazine Commonweal.

Mr. Trump does not appear to see public discourse as a process of establishing a state of affairs and drawing conclusions from them.  He sees it as a process of negotiating—a negotiation that is ultimately a power struggle. As The Art of the Deal advises, you open this struggle with an extreme position, or in public debate the most exaggerated, inaccurate, even preposterous pronouncement available and then, if necessary, you ratchet down.

Discourse is not, in effect, about truth. It is about power. In this respect, Mr. Trump has a quintessentially postmodern mind. The stricture against lying is about as relevant to this understanding of public discourse as the infield fly rule is to backgammon.

So no, it’s not the disability, stupid. It’s just that: calling people stupid, or lame, or losers, or has beens, or wannabes, so that you don’t have to reckon with facts.

Of Trailblazers and Human Pokémon

emma-spritzi

So here we are at Halloween, the second most expensive holiday of the year. Actually, our family has been living this holiday for nearly three months, as our kids usually begin planning for it just as back-to-school shopping begins. One in particular plans for a particular costume, then obsesses over whether it’s the right one, then scraps those plans and comes up with a new one, then obsesses over that one again, until . . . well, you get the picture. It’s not uncommon for people with ASD to get stuck on one thing for days and weeks at a time. It’s a form of perseveration that can lead to anxiety and depression, so we try hard to help the kids keep it to a minimum—with varying degrees of success.

A Quirky Constitutional.

But that’s not the story I want to tell today. I want to tell you about a little walk that one of our daughters took the other day. That’s her in the picture above. She decided to go trick-or-treating as a human version of the Pokémon Spritzi. But as a sort of practice run, and just because she wanted to, she told us that she wanted to walk around the neighborhood this Saturday in her get-up. That’s right, up and down the sidewalks with a mask, umbrella, dressy shoes, and pink dress. In broad daylight. On a regular autumn day. Oh, and she also wanted us to take her downtown so she could walk around Baker Park in full regalia.

Her request confronted us with a question that I suspect many ASD parents face. On the one hand, in defiance of a neurotypical one-size-fits-all world, we encourage our kids to be themselves. There’s no need for them to try to force themselves to be “normal” as general society defines normal. There’s also no need to add to their anxiety or sense of otherness by implying (unintentionally) that they have to hide who they really are.

But on the other hand, we know how odd a human Pokémon can appear to most of our neighbors. We don’t want our kids to be labeled as “weird” or, worse, bullied by neighborhood kids. This daughter, in particular, had some tough experiences in eighth grade, and the memories of it still haunt her two years later.

Quite the Quandary.

So that was our quandary: do you protect your kid? Or do you affirm his or her uniqueness and creativity? Do you do your part in helping to change society’s perceptions? Or do you give your kid a lesson on what the real world is like and on how to fit in without compromising themselves? It’s a perpetual balancing act, with no right or wrong answer.

In the end, we didn’t have to give any answer—mercifully. She slipped out on her own in the middle of the afternoon, while I was out running errands and Katie was upstairs cleaning. She had a nice little constitutional around a couple of blocks with hardly a peep from anyone. Just one person on our street made a comment, and even that was mild and jovial.

Still, I’d like to think that whatever choice we made, it would have been made in love and with the best of intentions.

Trailblazers by Default.

It’s hard sometimes knowing which side to come down on—with this and many other issues. There’s no manual for parenting, and that’s doubly true for ASD parenting. In the neurotypical world, you have the experience and example of the many people who have gone before you or who are walking along the path with you. But ASD parents often find themselves walking by themselves, and on a different path.

I think this is especially true for our generation. Ours is the age of Temple Grandin, Steve Silberman, and Parenthood. Ours is the generation of disability advocacy, the ADA, and IDEA. It’s only in the past decade or so that ASD has become better diagnosed and recognized. So in many ways, we are the trailblazers.

It’s not just in our neighborhoods that we’re blazing trails. Through our advocacy for our kids, we are teaching school administrators and teachers about autism. We are helping our churches learn how to be more welcoming and openhearted. We are making parks and playgrounds more accessible. And we’re doing it not just for our kids, but for the others around us—and even more important, for the next generation.

So keep this in mind, all you special needs parents. Your work is having a far greater effect than you know. Just by walking down the street or into a McDonald’s with your kids, you’re making a huge difference. A trip to the library or a walk in the park means a lot more than exercise for your kids. Every contentious IEP meeting adds another brick in the road toward full inclusion and acceptance. You probably don’t even know that you’re doing it, but you’re blazing a trail just by embracing the family God has given you. You’re paving a way to make a brighter future for everyone—even the human Pokémon among us.

A Breach of Trust at The Mount

IMGP4810

Take a look at this article from The Washington Post. It covers a controversy that has been roiling the campus of my alma mater, Mount St. Mary’s University, in Emmitsburg, MD, for the past few months. It seems that the newly-installed president initiated a survey for all freshmen to take early in their first semester. It was presented to the students as a way of helping them get to know themselves better as they transition from high school to college, and to help them understand better “the person you are and could become.” Fair enough. Everyone likes taking personality inventories and surveys like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It’s helpful to know what instruments like this tell you as you begin your academic career.

Only that’s not what the survey was really about. It was designed to help the university identify which students were at the greatest risk of dropping out so that administrators could encourage these students to leave early in the semester. And it was done in the hopes of boosting the school’s retention rate, thereby getting it better ratings in places like the US News ranking. The information in the survey was meant to be shared and discussed, not just scored and returned to the students for them discuss with their advisors.

Probing, Inappropriate Questions.

Now, the misrepresentation of the survey’s purpose is bad enough, but what’s worse is the fact that some of the questions are one-sided and not really related to its stated goal. Have you experienced a death in the family in the past year? Are you taking on major student loans? I don’t see how questions like these can help the students come to know themselves better.

But wait—it gets worse. An entire section of the survey is dedicated to the student’s mental health. They are asked how strongly they identify with statements like: In the past week . . . I felt depressed. I felt that people disliked me. I thought my life had been a failure. These are very personal questions, and the students should never be asked to divulge this kind of information—especially in a survey that is not kept confidential. They are also asked if they think they are calm and emotionally stable. Can they be trusted with money? Are they a hard worker? Have they been obsessed with a certain idea or project and then lost interest?

Then comes the final indignity. The closed-ended section of the survey ends with a question that comes out of the blue: Do you have a learning disability?

Seriously?

A Breach of Trust.

The best word I can find to describe the survey and its intended use is repugnant. Targeting for removal students who report feeling unstable is bad enough, but then expecting them to divulge whether they have a learning disability crosses several lines.

First, a student with a disability has the right not to disclose that disability to the school. At all. Ever. It is no one else’s business except the student’s—and anyone to whom he or she wishes to reveal it. It’s like Federal HIPAA guidelines; this information is protected by law.

Second, if a student does disclose a disability, the school is obligated to work with that student to determine the appropriate “academic adjustments” that will ensure that he or she is given an equal education opportunity. While not as stringent as the IEP process for elementary and high school students, the Americans with Disabilities Act lays out specific requirements for colleges—at least for those colleges, like Mount St. Mary’s, that accept government funding.

Finally, the school is obligated to keep this disclosure confidential. A teacher may not tell other teachers or students without the student’s permission. An advisor may not tell the president or dean. Again, it’s up to the student to decide who should know and to inform the appropriate people.

Elite Enclaves?

What is disturbing in this story is the implication that someone with a learning disability doesn’t belong in college. Or that someone struggling with anxiety or depression should drop out. It turns colleges—especially small, private ones like The Mount—into enclaves for the elite and privileged, for the well-adjusted and socially savvy.

But there are plenty of people with disabilities and disturbances who are more than capable of succeeding in higher education. What’s more, plenty of these people have the potential to go on and do great things with their lives—and great things for the people around them. Robin Williams comes to mind. So does Theodore Roosevelt. Or Charles Shulz. And, of course, Temple Grandin.

Not to mention, the presence of students who “deviate from the norm” is a great gift to any campus. Not to get too maudlin, but students like these challenge their peers’ assumptions and prejudices. They redefine the word “ability” for their teachers. They are a humanizing influence, opening people’s minds and hearts at a time in their lives when they are making crucial decisions about the kind of person they want to be.

I have children who would absolutely bomb on this survey, but who are earning As and Bs in high school. How would they fare? Or worse, what would they think of themselves when asked all of these questions? I hope they would have the common sense to either lie or leave them unanswered. I would be thrilled if they had the courage to challenge the whole thing and refuse to answer a single question. But I don’t know how they would respond. I can’t help but think of how questions like the ones above could convince someone that he or she really doesn’t belong . . . when it’s just not the case.

Praying for a Turn-Around.

I spent four wonderful years at The Mount. I graduated Summa Cum Laude and went on to earn a masters degree and pursue a meaningful, successful career in Catholic ministry and publishing. Much of that I owe to the education I received there and to the spirit of camaraderie and Christian charity I experienced there. But the first semester of my freshman year was hell. I was homesick and depressed. I felt overwhelmed by the work load. I started off in a dorm room with obnoxious, mean-spirited roommates. I didn’t know how to navigate the social mores of a college campus. It took me a while to adjust, to find my niche, and to settle in. Once I did adjust, however, there was no stopping me.

I would have failed that survey; I would have been encouraged to leave. But that didn’t happen. There were enough faculty and upperclassmen who knew how to help freshmen like me find their way. They embodied the best of The Mount—and the best of the Catholic faith. It saddens me deeply to see this happening at an institution that means so much to me. I can only pray that things will turn around soon.