- the ombud convinces you to admit to disciplinary charges or to accept an inaccurate disciplinary finding when you have grounds to reverse that finding and avoid disciplinary sanctions that will affect your future long-term;
- the ombud lacks the legal knowledge and insight to advise you of claims and defenses that the law provides you, and as a result, you give up those claims and defenses for a less favorable resolution that leaves you at significant disadvantages;
- the ombud overlooks available state or federal administrative agency relief available to you, resulting in your failing to timely pursue that relief;
- the ombud's investigation discovers evidence that would exonerate you from the charges, but the ombud fails to disclose that evidence to you, leaving you with the mistaken impression that you cannot defeat a disciplinary charge;
- the ombud's investigation discerns the lack of credibility in the school's evidence against you and gaps in that evidence that would relieve you from the misconduct charge you face, but the ombud fails or refuses to disclose that evidence because it would lead to a contested hearing at which the school would lose;
- the ombud is unaware of your rights under federal and state disability laws, rules, and regulations, leading you to overlook accommodations, services, resources, and administrative relief that the school should have provided you;
- the ombud fails by ignorance or negligence to disclose to you the right to appeal a school finding of unsatisfactory academic progress and sanction of suspension or dismissal, when you could prove extenuating circumstances and an achievable remediation plan.
Although these scenarios may be unlikely (especially because they describe actions that are not best practice), this is a important perspective for University Ombuds to consider. (Lento Law.)
Likewise, an incompetent plumber may flood your home, an incompetent electrician may burn down your business, and an incompetent physician may miss the importance of test results and lead to your death.
ReplyDeleteYea, and a bad lawyer might not urge a criminal suspect to take the 5th, or a business to include a severability clause in a contract.
ReplyDeleteIn a prior career, I handled legal malpractice and ethics matters. This list is just examples of professional negligence that could also describe legal malpractice if you switched out 'ombuds' for 'attorney.'
ReplyDeleteWow, this makes me so curious about Mr. Lento's experience with Ombuds! Is anyone else tempted to reach out to him and start a dialogue? Not all Ombuds are bad Ombuds!
ReplyDeleteThis was in my mind too.
Delete"Although these scenarios may be unlikely (especially because they describe actions that are not best practice), this is a important perspective for University Ombuds to consider." The authors perspective might have been easier to understand if they wrote and placed this statement at the beginning of their piece (I believe that was added by Tom?). None of these scenarios are likely in my world - they are simply outside the practice of an "Organizational Ombuds who practices to IOA standards." That said, it has been my experience that what another does or says, says more about them than it does about me. The author seems to be expressing a 'position' here..... and likely wrote this piece to support that without consideration of the broader implication. If read and believed without a greater understanding, that perspective likely adds to their business model (ie, someone is less inclined to seek and Ombuds and more inclined to hire them?), yet there may likely be unintended negative consequences to the Ombuds field - and importantly to those who may have been helped that otherwise choose to not seek services.....that makes me sad.
ReplyDelete1. @Tessa Byer - yes! I hope someone talks with him. @TomK he has an office in LA....
ReplyDelete2. Unlike an attorney, electrician, plumber, or physician, anyone can call themselves an ombuds, and there is no malpractice for people who don't follow IOA SOPs. In fact, we have probably all heard about positions advertised as adhering to IOA Standards where the position description itself contradicts those Standards. Without required certification or licensure, we will continue to have to work to protect our reputations as professionals.
3. I believe Mr. Lento expresses some legitimate concerns even with Ombuds who are practicing to IOA standards. Many are unable to spot potential legal and policy issues which could help ombuds guide a visitor. And it is also not atypical for vulnerable students to misunderstand their autonomy in making choices. These are points that we should take to heart.