by James A. Bacon
The biggest controversy roiling the University of Virginia today swirls around accusations leveled by 128+ letter signatories against leaders of the UVA Health System and School of Medicine for using the tools of bureaucratic repression to create a culture of fear and intimidation. The accusers have yet to release any specifics to the public. But outsiders can get a glimmering of what they might be talking about by reading a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court filed in September by Kieran Bhattacharya, a medical student who ran afoul of UVA’s administrative apparatus in 2018 after daring to question the academic premises behind microaggression theory.
It is important to note that the incidents described in the petition occurred before Craig Kent became CEO of the health system and Melina Kibbe joined as dean of the Medical School. The two key figures in the current controversy played no role in the Bhattacharya case. However, evidence surfaced by the Bhattacharya proceedings reveals the nature of the medical bureaucracy that Kent and Kibbe inherited. What they did with the system they were bequeathed is beyond the matters I discuss here.
Multiple tools of control play prominently in the Bhattacharya court pleadings. One is the anonymous system for filing complaints. Another is a system for filing “professionalism concern cards.” Another is the existence of a tribunal exercising the powers of investigator, judge, and jury to administer complaints. Another is the ability of university officials to order mental health evaluations and commit people against their will to psychiatric hospitals. And finally, there is the ability to expel people from the university by means of No Trespass Orders (NTOs).









