On the Immorality of Mandatory Reporting for Suicide on College Campuses

Abstract

Mandatory reporting policies for suicide on U.S. college campuses are often defended as necessary protections for student safety and institutional liability. This paper argues that suicide-related mandatory reporting in higher education is morally impermissible because it undermines student agency, erodes trust, and can worsen the harms it aims to prevent. After outlining how these policies operate in practice, particularly through faculty and resident advisors, I argue that mandatory reporting treats students in crisis as risks to be managed rather than as agents deserving of respect. Drawing on philosophical work on agency, person-respecting care, and coproduction in mental health treatment, I contend that preserving agency is both ethically required and therapeutically valuable for individuals experiencing suicidal ideation. The paper examines the risks of mandatory reporting, including involuntary disclosure of sensitive information, fear of institutional surveillance, and coercive interventions such as involuntary hospitalization, which may discourage students from seeking help and increase isolation. Through a personal narrative as both a reported student and a mandatory reporter, contrasted with experience in crisis lifeline work, I illustrate how these policies fracture trust and impose moral strain on those tasked with enforcing them. I conclude by proposing autonomy-respecting alternatives and addressing common safety and liability objections.