Case Study

A case like this one shows potential social issues for a group which is, in many ways, invisible at EIU: those with mental illnesses. Only major occurrences like this one bring this group to the attention of the public and the student body. It is important to address the grievances that people will have with the case, how it factors into a recognition/redistribution model, and what could be done.
The major grievance for the students and staff of EIU should be how the Administration views their rules and policies, and also, how they shape them to their advantage. By being the empowered control here, the Administration is able to make the rules fit to the way they want them to be. They are able to choose the result because they choose the interpretation of the rules. Not only does this effect those with mental illnesses, but any of us could be put in a situation where the control uses their interpretation of the rules to discriminate against us.
When you consider the targeted group in this case, you should consider what goals they have. Those with mental illnesses want to be recognized as functioning members of society and to be able to be part of a normal classroom setting. The redistribution comes in the form of a desire to change the current EIU rules and policies to be more considerate of this group. This is another case where more recognition will lead to more redistribution.
There are a few options that those concerned about this case can do. I would suggest they investigate what exactly the rules are here and how the Administration interpreted them. If they feel Manges was wronged, they should rally support behind her. Emma Goldman almost certainly would have put together a protest to get her back in the classroom. She would have had a bold, no-nonsense speech put together and she would have said exactly how she felt. Goldman was a woman of action and she would have made sure the just outcome prevailed.