This article is more than 1 year old

Everyone assumes universities have a duty of care towards students – our campaign would establish one

The parents of a student who died by suicide set out their case for consistency and clarity over avoiding future tragedies in higher education
This article is more than 1 year old

Robert Abrahart is a retired university lecturer

Margaret Abrahart is a retired psychological wellbeing practitioner

We are one of twenty-five bereaved families that have launched a petition, calling on the government to establish a statutory legal duty of care for students in higher education.

In the case surrounding our daughter, a judge ruled earlier this year that her university had not made reasonable adjustments to the way she was assessed as part of her course.

The judge did not find that the university owed Natasha a more general duty to take reasonable steps to avoid causing her psychiatric injury and harm, although he did say:

… if I am wrong on the matter of the existence of a relevant duty of care … [t]here can be no doubt that the University would have been in breach; the main breach would be continuing to require Natasha to give interviews and attend the conference and marking her down if she did not participate when it knew that Natasha was unable to participate for mental health reasons beyond her control.”

Confused duties

So, what exactly is meant by “duty of care”? There is a lot of confusion around. In response to our group’s petition calling for a change in the law, the sector’s representative body says:

[Universities UK] does not believe that a statutory duty of care is necessary, as universities are already subject to health and safety regulations and duties under the Equality Act.”

It continues:

Universities go beyond their legal requirements to prioritise the mental health and wellbeing of their staff and students, to provide support services for those in difficulty, and to work closely with NHS services…If additional legal duties are to be placed on universities, above what is required in other adult work or education settings, it needs to be accompanied by better mental health care across the health service and additional funding.”

The Department for Education (DfE) adopts a similar position, saying:

The mental health and wellbeing of students, including suicide prevention, is of paramount importance to the Government which is why this year we asked the OfS [Office for Students] to allocate £15m towards student mental health… We expect all universities to engage actively with suicide prevention and last year the DfE co-chaired a new roundtable on suicide prevention in higher education with Universities UK, which combined with the mental health charter has led to tangible action – including the commissioning of a new dataset which will better inform universities’ prevention work.”

On social media and in comments underneath media articles, more critical postings refer to hand-holding, treating young adults as children etc. – no “mollycoddling” allowed.

Are universities parents?

One of the phrases in the background to many cases, and the appropriate policy response, is the phrase “in loco parentis” – or the “prudent parent” standard of responsibility. As was made clear by David Malcolm on Wonkhe in 2018, no rational person these days would advocate that we should return to the paternalistic restrictions that were placed on student freedoms and responsibilities in the 1950s and 1960s. That isn’t the nature of the legal duty that is being sought by our group.

“Care” in this context is about giving serious attention, or proper consideration, to doing something correctly and in such a way that causing damage or creating a risk is avoided. It would cover both acts and omissions – what is done to, or not done to others, and doing things in a timely manner.

And “duty” in this context would mean placing legal obligations on universities to act towards others in a certain way, in accordance with certain standards, and to consider the effects of their actions upon other people who may be affected by what they either do or don’t do. In this case, our petition is simply arguing that universities should owe a legal duty to exercise reasonable care and skill when teaching students and providing support services.

As such, we are only seeking a legal duty for educational institutions to do what might reasonably be expected. Our campaign is not about duplicating the NHS, asking for an injection of government funding or asking for new facilities to be built. Nor is it asking for greater mental health support, for more wellbeing advisors to be appointed, or for shorter waiting times for students to see counsellors – although some of these things are desperately needed.

Consistency and clarity

Our campaign calls for consistency of practice, compliance with standards, and accountability. It is about ensuring obligations to avoid harm are implemented, universities taking responsibility for the activities that they have control over, and clarifying staff, student and family expectations.

It would end discourse on where duty does or doesn’t start, and ensure that organisations are clear about who is responsible for what – something that Simon Phillips, Deputy Director of Student and Academic Services at UWE, has said would ”really help”.

There would be no need for individual regulation of different activities since everything would be covered – policies, processes and procedures, as well as day-to-day practices. Due regard would need to be paid to relevant national guidelines.

Importantly, it would also put students on an equal legal footing with staff, who are protected under employment law, and protect vulnerable young adults. How can anybody possibly argue that there should not be parity in legal protection for staff and students – the latter also being high fee-paying customers? This discrepancy obviously needs to be corrected.

Tertiary educational institutions are also out of sync with primary and secondary providers.

As lawyer Gus Silverman has explained:

It seems very strange that if a school owes a duty to act with reasonable care and skill in relation to its pupils that a university shouldn’t owe a similar duty to its students, particularly when universities, including the University of Bristol, regularly claim publicly that they do owe that kind of duty.”

In this article on the BBC website, UUK president Steve West is quoted as saying that universities have a duty of care around health and safety, and equality and diversity, but that “there isn’t a legal framework for that for universities, for [their] students, in terms of mental health.” However, a specific obligation to address student mental health and wellbeing issues would be completely different from the more general type of legal duty that our group is seeking.

Our daughter’s case has exposed the fact that 2.7 million students have limited statutory protection. Every professional has a duty of care to their client – a requirement to meet certain standards and to do what might reasonably be expected. So why not higher education providers?

Our proposal would create a degree of respect, and possibly a healthy obsession, for doing the right thing. Improved practices, shared learning, and a more compassionate education sector will follow, in which all students can thrive and be successful. And more importantly – it will save lives. It would have saved our daughter.

5 responses to “Everyone assumes universities have a duty of care towards students – our campaign would establish one

  1. In 2004 our son, then in his first year at Newcastle, went awol. Weeks later every point of contact at the University blocked us from any information about his whereabouts or health. Their argument was that they were legally required to give students privacy/ anonymity. Nothing was acknowledged as ‘their duty of care’.
    Eventually after time and effort on our side (London to Newcastle is a long and expensive journey- even more tricky as we were both in full time work) we reunited. One outcome was his being to asked to leave the university at the end of his second year- having failed one module of Psychology twice.
    Thankfully he was accepted at Warwick where he began his three year degree again and graduated successfully. At everybody stage we felt that Warwick supported him intelligently – and were very ‘communicable’ throughout.
    I understand that Warwick has more students who are sponsored by businesses and/or countries – and recognize the role we all play in successful and happy outcomes.
    I do hope that all universities today respect their vital role in the mix.

    1. Our son was left alone and never once challenged when not attending lectures or seminars in his 1st year. We were always talking to him but not once did any tutor show any interest or concern when he didn’t turn up to the lectures/seminars. He failed his 1st year and did want to change course too. The only reply he got from the Uni via email was saying he couldn’t change course but could retake 1st year but still NO tutor from his course has ever spoken to him to help discuss why he failed the first year, even though he put in his email asking for some help/support.

  2. I am really sorry to hear about your daughter. She deserved better. I am a student with serious disabilities who has to face Universities who do not give a hoot hence your victory means a lot to me. If University of Bristol continues to refuse to pay the compensation then try instructing High Court Enforcement Agents/Officers (baliffs are normally confined to debts less than £6,000.00) to recover the compensation. HCE Group – – are good (I’ve given you a link to their judgment instruction page). I know from personal experience that HCE Group do a good job as they very promptly collected a debt owed to a client that had been awarded by the County Court at Clerkenwell & Shoreditch (I’m a paralegal with 10 years of experience).

    Also if you need costs lawyers to deal with costs assessment, etc, try NWL costs lawyers – – as you may as well as squeeze out as much as you can from the University of Bristol.

  3. My time at Bristol was appalling, I speak of the English department, which is a horrid stuffy place. I can say that from my experience the University is racist, discriminatory, and arrogant. It has taken 11 suicides for this to come to light. I hope Natasha’s parents have a full recourse to justice and my best wishes are with them.

  4. Can anyone help me? My daughter went to Cambridge happy in October. Never heard from her since. Blocked by tutors and I don’t know what is going on. Worried sick. Anyone able to help?

Leave a Reply