Call for action regarding student deaths in MSK/WCM

We know that the institution provides resources for m_ntal health management. However, some individuals never get to use those resources in the first place, and this can be because of several options: - they don't know that those resources are available. Although this is unlikely at this point, the institution should make sure they do all the efforts for everyone being aware of their existence. - they don't want to use the resources, and that can also respond to different reasons.

It's unfair to stigmatize labs by name without knowing the full story. One's life extends beyond the lab. However, this remains an important issue and academia at large needs to update practices regarding mental health and training.

I'm glad you say this, I fully agree. The mental health problems are a symptom of greater labor issues. Personally, I am beginning to look into organizational steps us workers in MSK can take. - Hassan Muhammad

I support the demands of this petition but I also think that they do not go far enough. There is a reason that graduate students so frequently face these struggles and it's not because of the individuals involved. Investigating, identifying, sanctioning and/or getting rid of a few bad apples is not going to fix this problem. Although we of course don't know what happened in these specific instances, anyone who has struggled with their graduate advisor (as I have) knows that the problem is at its root structural, a function of the singular cloistered mentor-mentee relationship. While this relationship can be very rewarding with the right advisor, failure of this relationship can literally mean death (certainly of the career) to the student. In my experience no one else (not Deans, not other advisors, no one) has a view into, nor the authority, nor the willingness to intervene in this relationship. Unless and until this structure is changed, these types of tragic events will continue to persist. One person, one advisor, simply should not have that much unchecked power over another.

If your PI is innocent of not creating a bad work environment, an investigation will prove it by uncovering facts that we acknowledge we don't have. Our demand is to simply bring facts to light. - Hassan Muhammad

“…Jordan might have experienced these abusive conditions in their respective laboratories”. This is a serious accusation and a big assumption you’re making here. Please do not make statements like this lightly when you do not have all the facts. I wish you would’ve come to our lab and talked to us. I agree 100% with your intentions that more measures should be taken regarding mental health of researchers. However, your petition heavily implies an image of our lab that is without factual grounds, and we feel deeply hurt by this. We can all be kinder to each other since PIs, labmates, fellow researchers, and support staff are all part of the training experience. Let’s stick with the facts as we move forward this important conversation on mental health.

I support this petition

Thank you for reposting

I tried to reply but my comment is under review *eyeroll*

Reposting my response to Esther's comment [This is called victim blaming] that she accidentally deleted earlier. Glad that you replied to the commenter's argument, Esther! Wow, way to go for shutting down an argument that has some points worth addressing. Although toxic work environment, the pressure to publish, the fear of getting scooped, mismatched expectations between the PIs and students, overconfidence in one's ability to handle pressure in a quote/high stress and demanding environment/unquote (though whether such environment is even necessary for success in academia is best discussed some other day) collectively affect the mental health of graduate students, these students are also autonomous individuals who have the agency to seek out help from the many psychologists and psychiatrists available on campus/other non-medical mental health resources, which I hope everyone reading this petition should be well aware of and should not feel ashamed to do so. Further, despite the aversion and skepticism that this course of action generates in graduate students (and how we all laugh it off/snicker when such scenarios were discussed during the Responsible Conduct of Research Course), blowing the whistle on these PIs (and trusting the institutes' non-retaliation policy, although there are definitely valid concerns about how effective they are in protecting the affected students, given that there are only that many quote/suspects/unquote that the PI can narrow down to) should be seriously considered if we need concrete actions taken against these PIs, i.e., building the case against faculty members demonstrating such abusive behaviors so that they are either removed, or that their funding be revoked if they continue facilitating a hostile lab environment (such assessment could be done by a third party inspector, by the institute, or by the lab members themselves, but this is another big debate altogether, and NIH should strongly consider adding some form of lab env

I deleted my comment by mistake when trying to reply. However, I will address one by one your points. - "graduate students or postdocs also take the advantage and attempt to abuse the system to create fears" Please, give examples so we can discuss them, since I haven't seen such cases yet. - "unbiased systematic rules or regulations are highly required to be designed or implemented where we are open to hear stories from both ends" That's why we are calling for an investigation, so the truth, whatever it is, it's known and justice can be applied. - "This is the first step to mitigate the chances of choosing a wrong lab" Candidates usually talk to people in the lab before joining. A lab can be "wrong" if, for example, the type of research that they do is not aligned with the knowledge or the interests of the candidate. If it is the case that the PI is harsh with the students/postdocs, expects them to work overtime unreasonably, etc, then why is that PI hired by an institution that claims to care about their employees/students in the first place? The point we are making in the petition is that we understand that there are some sources of pressure and stress that are inevitable, but that there are others that are simply inadmisible nowadays. - "you always have an opportunity to leave your current place where you are facing constant injustice and start looking for better opportunities" Why should anyone have to abandon a project that is going well, or leave a lab in which they did a good job without a good letter of recommendation, because of injustice??? We are asking for that injustice (that you are acknowledging that it exists in the first place) to be addressed, not to the students/postdocs to solely suffer the consequences as it is now. Also, I do not know if you have ever experienced any mental health issues (I hope you haven't), but under those circumstances people can lose the perspective and the ration

I support this petition

A good mentor learns from past experiences and doesn't perpetuate normalizing toxic behavior.

you have a right to your view and we have a right to call that view victim blaming lol - Hassan Muhammad

While I support the main cause of this petition, I do not agree with using the names of the students in the petition. It is not up to anyone to demand that the internal investigations and cause of deaths of the students to be publicly available - legally that is not allowed unless the families/friends say they agree to share. A key component of de-stigmatising mental health illnesses is to stop making conjectures and allow people to decide what and when they want to share. If you are not aware of the complete story, do not talk about them, just address the underlying concerns.

Wow, way to go for shutting down an argument that has some merits to it and worth discussing further. Although toxic work environment, the pressure to publish, the fear of getting scooped, mismatched expectations between the PIs and students, overconfidence in one's ability to handle pressure in a "high stress and demanding environment" (though whether such environment is even necessary for success in academia is best discussed some other day) collectively affect the mental health of graduate students, these students are also autonomous individuals who have the agency to seek out help from the many psychologists and psychiatrists available on campus/other non-medical mental health resources, which I hope everyone reading this petition should be well aware of and should not feel ashamed to do so. Further, despite the aversion and skepticism that this course of action generates in graduate students (and how we all laugh it off/snicker when such scenarios were discussed during the Responsible Conduct of Research Course), blowing the whistle on these PIs (and trusting the institutes' non-retaliation policy, although there are definitely valid concerns about how effective they are in protecting the affected students, given that there are only that many "suspects" that the PI can narrow down to) should be seriously considered if we need concrete actions taken against these PIs, i.e., building the case against faculty members demonstrating such abusive behaviors so that they are either removed, or that their funding be revoked if they continue facilitating a hostile lab environment (such assessment could be done by a third party inspector, by the institute, or by the lab members themselves, but this is another big debate altogether, and NIH should strongly consider adding some form of lab environment evaluation in awarding funding). Anyways, stop with the holier thou art name calling and address the argument properly if you want your case to be st

Thank you for bringing up this issue. Its high time MSK and WCM take this issue seriously. I was deeply affected by the death of the student last month and feel no one should have to go through such turmoil.

This is imperative and needs to happen ASAP. Thanks for putting this urgent matter into action!

Okay scab.

I support this petition. I would like to pose a consideration for demand 5: Rotation students should also have the opportunity to anonymously evaluate the PI and lab climate (differently than the identifiable rotation evaluations we currently have). I would also like to emphasize the importance of aggregating and using these evaluations to ensure student safety (rather than just putting them on file.)