[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”3.0.47″ custom_padding=”10px|0px|51.8281px|0px”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”3.0.47″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” custom_padding=”0px|0px|25.9062px|0px”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”3.0.47″ parallax=”off” parallax_method=”on”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”3.0.47″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”]

Photo | Hana Nikčević

Delay expected to be temporary 

The University of Toronto has decided to withdraw its proposal for the controversial University-Mandated Leave of Absence Policy. The withdrawal came at the request of the Ontario Human Rights Commissioner who compelled the administration to address the policy’s human rights concerns; namely, its failure to meet the duty to accommodate, and its stigmatization of students with mental illness.

The University of Toronto has decided to withdraw its proposal for the controversial University-Mandated Leave of Absence Policy. The withdrawal came at the request of the Ontario Human Rights Commissioner who compelled the administration to address the policy’s human rights concerns; namely, its failure to meet the duty to accommodate, and its stigmatization of students with mental illness. The Mandated Leave Policy is expected to be presented to the Governing Council for consideration again later this year.

In an open letter published in The Strand in November 2017, Students for Barrier-Free Access (SBA) wrote that this policy “specifically targets students with mental health disabilities and would allow the University to place these students on a mandatory leave of absence if (1) the student’s behaviour poses “a serious risk of harm to themselves or others” or (2) if the student is deemed “unable to engage in activities required to pursue an education.” The proposed policy raises numerous concerns for disabled and mad students, and our allies.” A full version of the SBA’s letter can be found on The Strand’s website, under the headline “The university-mandated leave of absence is discriminatory and harmful.”

Before the withdrawal, Vice-Provost Sandy Welsh had argued that the Policy was to be used in “exceptional circumstances…with very significant procedural safeguards.”

In a statement to The Strand, UTSU president Mathias Memmel said that, “the letter from the [Human Rights Commissioner] expresses the same concerns the UTSU has been expressing for months.” Memmel points specifically to the Policy’s ‘Scenario 2,’ in which the student “[does not pose] a risk of harm to self or others…[but] is unable to engage in activities required to pursue an education at the University,” as a concern, calling it “too broad.” The lack of a clear definition of what constitutes academic engagement gives the University discretion to decide what constitutes a “threshold for intervention.”
“We’ve also argued that there should always be a mental health professional involved in the leave of absence process. The commission agrees with that, too.” Memmel continued.

As the Policy continues to be reviewed, Memmel said that the UTSU is “hopeful that the university will work to address these concerns in the months ahead, and the UTSU is looking forward to being part of the process.”

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]