3 ms·

I've personally never heard of any other incident quite like this happening at MIT, at least not in the last 7 years or so when I was on campus; could you provi

I've personally never heard of any other incident quite like this happening at MIT, at least not in the last 7 years or so when I was on campus; could you provide any other examples? The only other thing I can think of off the top of my head is psych data being used to send people home on forced mental health leave. The handling of this incident made me very angry, principally because it's so hard to get MIT students to seek mental health counseling because they are very fearful of retaliation for doing so. The misuse of the mental health survey totally validated their concerns and severely damaged the fragile trust that various orgs student health orgs unaffiliated with this incident at MIT had worked hard to build with students. Also, this article does a poor job of explaining the recent history leading up to the closing of Senior House, which better explains why the closing of the house was viewed as a total attack on alternative culture. MIT didn't just close senior house, they also knocked down Bexley, another alternative dorm, a few years earlier under somewhat dubious circumstances (suddenly refusing to repair the dorm post flooding iirc?) without proper student input, and I believe there was controversy about a third alternative dorm as well. The students' interpretation of this was that the MIT administration was fundamentally targeting alternative culture and were not negotiating in good faith during any of these closures.

wegs2 8y ago
The incidents I know about haven't been publicly exposed. If I spoke about them in specifics, the Institute would retaliate. One I can bring up -- since I don't think it exposes me -- is email. In essence, if you use an institutional email account (or keep personal data on Athena or otherwise) you can presume administration will read it without permission. If you get into conflict with the Institute, personal emails can come up and be used against you. MIT has a lot of good people, but "unaffiliated" is a difficult word to use here. The problems come from the very top of the administration. Just because a particular mental health organization is good and built up trust doesn't mean they have the power to not get overruled by the Central Administration later. Until and unless the Institute institutes some real checks and balances, students absolutely should go outside for mental health.
- Thriptic 8y ago
  I agree that students should seek mental health care off campus. In terms of checks and balances, one nice feature of MIT is that power seems to be very diffuse, to the point where it's actually annoying to try to get anything done at an institute level. For example, I was at one point affiliated with an org that was dealing with sensitive student medical data and we had enough political power due to who we were affiliated with such that I don't think anyone could have tried to force us to disclose data.
  - wegs2 8y ago
    Power is somewhat diffuse. Ultimately, there are channels for real power. It's a corporation with a small number of officers with signing authority. Ultimately they, in a very real sense, own and control the Institute. The Institute owns the computers your data lives on. The Institute owns and has keys to the rooms where those servers live. The Institute believes it owns the data too. What force do you think is needed? Power at that level is rarely exerted at levels visible to a student or employee -- but it happens. I can't comment on your medical data, but most places, there are discreet channels for what the Institute considered to be more serious issues.

wegs2 8y ago

The incidents I know about haven't been publicly exposed. If I spoke about them in specifics, the Institute would retaliate. One I can bring up -- since I don't think it exposes me -- is email. In essence, if you use an institutional email account (or keep personal data on Athena or otherwise) you can presume administration will read it without permission. If you get into conflict with the Institute, personal emails can come up and be used against you. MIT has a lot of good people, but "unaffiliated" is a difficult word to use here. The problems come from the very top of the administration. Just because a particular mental health organization is good and built up trust doesn't mean they have the power to not get overruled by the Central Administration later. Until and unless the Institute institutes some real checks and balances, students absolutely should go outside for mental health.

Thriptic 8y ago
I agree that students should seek mental health care off campus. In terms of checks and balances, one nice feature of MIT is that power seems to be very diffuse, to the point where it's actually annoying to try to get anything done at an institute level. For example, I was at one point affiliated with an org that was dealing with sensitive student medical data and we had enough political power due to who we were affiliated with such that I don't think anyone could have tried to force us to disclose data.
- wegs2 8y ago
  Power is somewhat diffuse. Ultimately, there are channels for real power. It's a corporation with a small number of officers with signing authority. Ultimately they, in a very real sense, own and control the Institute. The Institute owns the computers your data lives on. The Institute owns and has keys to the rooms where those servers live. The Institute believes it owns the data too. What force do you think is needed? Power at that level is rarely exerted at levels visible to a student or employee -- but it happens. I can't comment on your medical data, but most places, there are discreet channels for what the Institute considered to be more serious issues.