Do you feel students–and their parents–arrive with attitudes about drinking that are resilient to education? Are there perspectives within the institution that help or hinder education efforts?

Generally, according to my research, emotional-support animals, which have not been trained for their tasks, but are emotionally supportive because that’s what animals provide for their owners, are not allowed on campus. The reasons are numerous; allergies, cleanliness (where does the litterbox go?), and the fact that a residence hall room isn’t the best place in which to confine a cat or dog. Emotional support animals are not covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act, so it isn’t legally necessary to provide them access.

What are your policies on this? Have you had any appeals? How did you handle them?

Here’s a sampling of policies:

Disability Access Information and Support – discussion thread on therapy animals in residence halls

Idaho State

North Carolina State University

Clinton Community College

Loyola University Maryland

Winston Salem State University

Stockton College

Missouri State University

Brigham Young University

Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law – Obviously they’re for the access point of view.

Therapy animals briefly visiting residence halls:

Central Michigan University

However, this article notes that there’s nothing in the bill that exempts student health care plans for certain stipulations in the bill, namely that pools of generally young, healthy people–such as college students–must be averaged with other, less-young, less-healthy people. These rules don’t take effect until 2014. Lobbyists for higher education have time to argue that colleges and university health care plans should be allowed to remain exclusive to students. Otherwise, the costs of those plans could go up.

Unnoticed in much of the hullabaloo, student loan administration was also changed as a part of the health care bill. Private lenders can no longer make federally-subsidized loans; only the federal government can.

Some groups have estimated the new bill will eventually result in an annual $3000-per-employee savings for colleges’ and universities’ faculty and staff health care costs. If they occur, those savings won’t appear for several years.

The touristy boast takes on a darker meaning, however, when one considers that Cornell University students have jumped to their deaths from the bridges spanning the gorges. Six suicides have occurred in this academic year. The three most recent all occurred in 2010, and all involved the bridges. Some other years have also had what seemed to be a high suicide rate, while during others, there were none. Cornell is a very large institution (their total enrollment is 21,325), so the occurrences of things that are both positive and negative will be higher than that for smaller institutions.  However, this is no comfort to the students, staff and administration, and Cornell has been taking steps to prevent tragedies. Cornell adjusted its interpretation of FERPA to allow them to notify a student’s parents of signs of depression without the consent of the student. Faculty and staff members have been trained to spot the signs of depression. A team meets weekly to discuss students who may be suffering emotionally. The institution has beefed up its mental health and counseling services. Cornell has posted police officers on the bridges around campus.

Part of the problem might be something Cornell can’t do anything about: the gorges. The usual perception of a  suicidal person is that if the gorge weren’t accessible, he  would determinedly find another way to end his life.  That might not be the case. A study published in the British Journal of Criminology looked at suicide rates in Britain before and after the design of gas stoves was changed in the 1960s and 1970s.  Pre-1960s stoves delivered the gas in a way that made it easy for people to end their lives. Death by gas inhalation was far more common than any other suicide method during that time; nearly everyone, of course, has a stove. After stoves were made in a way that makes it more difficult to asphyxiate oneself with the gas, suicides decreased dramatically. Apparently the people who would’ve otherwise killed themselves with gas from the kitchen stove did not find another–less convenient–way to end their lives. Scott Anderson wrote about this study, and similar research, in an excellent New York Times Magazine article. Suicide, it seems, is often an impulsive act. If the impulse can be thwarted, the suicide is less likely to occur at all.

With The Placement Exchange and NASPA conference being only two hours from my campus this month, I had an easy excuse to drive to Chicago and visit with those who came to town. I carved time away from campus to have coffee with my grad school mentor. I spent hours with the student affairs community from Twitter, with whom I’ve only recently connected, but can’t imagine not having in my life. I crossed paths with a beloved faculty member from my graduate program. I visited with friends from GLACUHO. I met James, the voice behind the ACUHO-I Twitter account, who has provided me with a new tool for professional development via this blog.

In coincidental timing, a colleague from my first professional position is coming to visit this weekend. My enthusiasm, which is generally above average, is skyrocketing at this opportunity to reunite with the person I consider my best friend in the field.

I once asked a supervisor how she stays connected with her professional colleagues from her career path. Her answer was simple: She doesn’t. I was shocked. I can’t imagine not having this network for challenging discussion, for providing feedback, for providing raw enthusiasm that keeps me motivated on days when I feel isolated.

For a field that places people and connections at its center, we often neglect to maintain these relationships ourselves. How do you stay connected with colleagues personally and professionally outside of conferences?

Increasing numbers of students have been arriving on college campuses with food allergies they are unable–or perhaps, unwilling–to manage by themselves. Perhaps their parents had done most of the work of coordinating doctors’ appointments, medications and keeping the illicit ingredient out of the way.  Despite the parent’s best intentions, their child arrives at college with limited ability to cope with their own condition. Some students may be reluctant to admit that their allergy limits them in any way. Some have never had a very severe reaction, and regard their allergy as a mere annoyance, rather than something that could be life-threatening.

The situation is difficult for dining halls as well; ensuring that adequate meals are created without allergens and making students aware of the ingredients of each dish, all the while creating delicious meals that appeal to everyone, providing a welcoming environment, and hopefully making a profit, or at least breaking even. Some institutions have opened special allergy-free kitchens and refrigerators to deal with the issue. The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network introduced its College Network in 2009, a resource for students on institutions that can accommodate their diets.

Despite an institution’s best efforts, however, there’s no way of preventing an allergic student from eating an off-limits food, unknowingly or otherwise. And these are the sorts of things that keep administrators awake in the wee hours.

How has your institution dealt with this issue? Have food allergies affected the residence halls? Does a student who keeps a jar of peanut butter handy find it hard to live with a roommate who must avoid the stuff? Have allergies affected how the vending machines are stocked? Have you had to confront a student who is eating dangerously? Let us know.

Many institutions limit on-campus housing to full-time students because allowing part-time students to live in campus might lead to other issues: people who are mostly non-students taking advantage of the low rental rates on campus; students with too much free time. However, this sort of policy excludes students such as Fialka-Feldman, who are part-time for other reasons. Students with varying disabilities (diagnosed or otherwise) make managing the living environment more challenging. On the other hand, students who drink too much, who violate the community rules or who avoid participating in community gatherings, also make it harder to nurture a cohesive and safe community. Not all disruptive factors can be controlled, and at what cost? Have you encountered similar issues on your campus? How have you dealt with them?