Ex-Mass. student sues college over roommate's sex

[MADem]

Sounds like she's looking for a payday, to me. I don't buy her outrage, not one bit:

BOSTON—A former student at a Roman Catholic college has filed a lawsuit against the school, claiming administrators didn't do enough to help her when she complained that her roommate was having too much sex in their dorm room.

Lindsay Blankmeyer said in a federal lawsuit that she suffered from depression and attention deficit disorder before she enrolled at Stonehill College, but was driven into a suicidal depression after school officials wouldn't give her reasonable housing alternatives to get her away from her roommate at the school in Easton, Mass.

Blankmeyer said her roommate had sex with her boyfriend while she was trying to sleep just feet away and also participated in "sexually inappropriate video chatting" while Blankmeyer was in the dorm room.

After trying unsuccessfully to persuade school officials to force her roommate to move out or to give her an acceptable private room, Blankmeyer ended up living at a hotel, according to the lawsuit filed earlier this week....

Much more at link: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/03/02/ex_mass_student_sues_college_over_roommates_sex_1330705691/

[ZombieHorde]

1. Interesting. nt

[IggleDoer]

2. Sounds like a future member of the Santorum Party

n/t

[exboyfil]

4. Sounds like the school made a reasonable level of accomodation

but on the other hand, it is ridiculous to think that you could engage in sex in a shared dorm room without some consideration for your roommate. A roommate should have an absolute veto right for anyone else being in the room while the roommate is in the room.

I went through this crap at college. I gave my roommate two hours to be with his girlfriend. After more than the two hours was up (it was actually three), I had to get into my room to get my textbooks for another class. I was the bad guy for knocking. At least I knocked. It sounds like this board thinks it would have been better to go in and watch.

I frankly have to wonder about anyone who would want to engage in sex with spectators around.

[rebecca_herman]

5. So here's the full lawsuit

http://cbsnewyork.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/blankmeyer-v-stonehill-1.pdf

I think it's pretty unreasonable that the roommate was the one who broke a clearly listed school rule yet was allowed to keep the room alone, while the girl who is suing was kicked out of the room.

I feel sorry for the girl. I suffered from a lot of depression and anxiety related to college, but I was able to recognize I would never be able to handle the typical college dorm, so I chose a school ten minutes away and continued to live with my parents. So I do sympathize with her. I think the school should have reassigned the other girl, as she was the one who broke a school rule they didn't feel like enforcing.

For those who don't want to read the whole thing, the relevant section:

"Mrs. Blankmeyer pointed out the many Stonehill regulations that Laura had violated with her behavior and therefore it was extremely unjust that Laura be allowed to remain in the room alone and Lindsay had to move out. Ms. Hicks responded that the school does not really punish students for violating those regulations. Moreover, Ms. Hicks said that it is customary that the student who makes the complaint of rules violations has to move out."

[MADem]

7. Stonehill doesn't accommodate "grudgingly."

That's the first flag on the field, here.

They are well-known for making accommodations of all types. I have a relative who has a lot of experience in college placement who informs me that that school is one that excels at integrating the "differently abled."

So right there, I wonder about the veracity of the young lady's claims.

Keep in mind that the lawsuit is not "what happened." It's what the plaintiff SAYS happened. The school is saying something very different.

We have yet to hear from the roommate--what's one person's "sex in the room" could be another person's cuddling. One person's "sex talk via video" could be "coy flirting."

Further, as someone who knows how Boston area Roman Catholic colleges define "cohabitation"--it's this: You can't "sign in" a member of the opposite sex (which shows how naive THEY are, but that's a separate issue) for more than 23 hours. In by nine, out by eight--otherwise they regard it as a house of prostitution, or something.

We also do not know if this young lady is telling the truth about her conversations with school officials. This lawsuit is just her perceptions--not necessarily what actually happened. She's clearly upset--but is she upset because she had to get a new roommate in her senior year, that her "routine" was disturbed?

Further, she managed to reside at Stonehill for three years with a roommate, so why would "reasonable accommodation" suddenly be a much more expensive single room without any roommate? How about a roommate who doesn't have sex all the time or stay up late?

That said, I would agree with the school that the person who doesn't like the living situation should be the one to move, not the other way around. If you're happy, why should you be inconvenienced?

[rebecca_herman]

8. how about because you're breaking the rules?

At the very least, if it happens as she said it did, the roommate had guests without her permission, a clearly stated rule. Kicking her out for being unhappy about that is blaming and punishing the victim.

Also the previous roommate she had was someone she had been friends with since before college. The friend took a medical leave of absence and she was assigned someone random. As someone who has also suffered from anxiety and depression, I can certainly see why the prospect of yet another strange roommate (in a dorm known for being loud) would cause her a great deal of anxiety.

[MADem]

9. It's a she said/she said assertion. When someone tells you it's "OK" and it really isn't,

( and I'll bet that's what the roommate will say, and I would not be surprised if the plaintiff didn't make herself clear about her feelings and expected the roommate to "figure it out" ), or even that the annoyed roommate's interpretation of events is faulty, the school is at an impasse. You want them to favor one student's interpretation of what transpired over another--they just can't do that. It's only a problem if one roommate doesn't like it--that's the rule. The roommate has to SAY something, though.

They have two students--one is pissed off, the other happy. The pissed off one is the one who needs to move.

The school offered to give her new accommodation. If she wanted a single, she could always have paid for one, like most people who want a single do. She had enough money to go to a hotel, but she couldn't cough up for a single? Please.

This isn't a freshman, either--we're talking about a senior. If she can't handle a less-than-optimal roommate, how is she going to handle the real world?

We'll see what happens as this plays out--to me, knowing Stonehill's excellent reputation for accommodating people who are disabled or learn differently, this smells like a money grab.

[rebecca_herman]

10. that may be, but...

She asked for a single and they said they had none available. Her psychiatrist contacted the school and said that at that point, she needed a single room for her mental health. As for whether the converted room they offered her as a "single" was acceptable, it's hard to say without seeing the room myself. I guess what I feel is, what's the point of having rules if they aren't enforced? At least investigate the matter and see whose story is more probable. Otherwise there may as well not be rules.

Like I said, I have mental health issues. I do not have the exact same diagnosis this young woman does, but I absolutely would have had a similar reaction and yeah, I probably would have done the same thing and had to go home and finish the semester online. The situation she was living in would have been unbearable to the point of a nervous breakdown for me, and I would have felt extreme anxiety at the prospect of having to try to live with a new stranger after what happened the previous time, and in a dorm known for being noisier too. Now, I was able to realize that I needed to go to a school that I could commute to from my parents' home. And perhaps she should have realized her limitations. But at the same time, a close friend was going to the same college, and that was her roommate the past 3 years. It wasn't her fault her friend had to take a medical absence after a suicide attempt, and I can see why she'd want to finish when she was so close to graduating.

Ultimately, I'm on her side because of my life experiences because I absolutely can see myself having the same reaction and feeling completely helpless and trapped.

[MADem]

11. You are assuming that the suer is telling the truth and the roommate is lying.

The only "rule" that exists is visitors are a no-go if the roommate OBJECTS.

For all we know, this aggrieved individual wanted her roommate to read her mind.

Also, she'd been at the school for three years--she didn't have a single solitary friend other than the one suicidal roommate?

I think your comment about realizing her limitations was probably on the mark. Surely she could have gone round and had a chat with the potential roommate(s) before packing up her stuff? That's what people with a little maturity would do, regardless of their mental health issues. I don't think she tried very hard to actively participate in solving her problem.

I dunno--like I said, I have knowledge of Stonehill's accommodation expertise, and some requests are unreasonable.

I'm not on anyone's side here--if I were betting, though, I'd say the school isn't going to have to fork over much if anything.

[MADem]

6. I think, after a certain point, one has to take responsibility for oneself.

If the person doesn't speak up and say "Take that shit elsewhere" then they are giving tacit consent to the conduct. People will get away with what they can get away with--it's human nature.

The roommate should have gone in the room and turned on her favorite CD of Sousa marches, or perhaps watched Alvin and the Chipmunks on television while ostentatiously video-conferencing with a friend, remarking about the rudeness/inappropriate conduct of the horny roomate and turning the camera on them, or something. I'll bet the lovebirds would have found another place to perch, if that were the case.

Two can make life miserable--it's not just all on one person. I also suspect a bit of this story might possibly be "perception" on the part of the offended party.

I should think a roommate who knocks, and who gives a bit of privacy, would be a gem to be treasured.