Too little, too late

Last Monday, March 18, was declared a “Day of Mourning in remembrance of Kristel Pilar Mariz Tejada, Iskolar ng Bayan” by the University of the Philippines Manila. Classes were suspended in all academic units and students were called to reflection and sobriety. A black cloth was draped over the Oblation amid mass protests of angry students and alumni who were taking a stand for justice and the right to education.

While this is only right, and a way for this tragedy to not go unremembered, it saddens me because it’s all too little, too late. If only this outpouring of support and outrage against a non-flexible red-tape school policy had happened sooner, perhaps the life of a young bright 16-year-old would not have gone to waste.

I still remember first hearing the news of the freshman that had taken her life because she was so despondent over having been forced to leave school. I was so sad, upset, and yes, angry. I can only imagine the hopelessness she had felt to feel that suicide was her only option. I can’t even begin to imagine how her parents felt having lost their child because she felt her dreams for a better life for herself and her family was being taken away. As a parent myself, I understand how important it is to us to be able to give our children better chances in life. An education is one of the few things we can give them to help them fulfill their dreams. For her parents to have lost the ability to give her that, and then to have lost her too, is just a heartbreak I can’t even fathom.

Much has been said about Tejada and her experience at UPM, and while the academic institution may “legally” have no responsibility for her death, they still have much to answer for. I personally believe that education should be everyone’s right, and while this utopian dream may not be realized for everyone, surely it can be extended to our best and brightest scholars — those students who truly work hard and achieve in hopes of bettering their lives and those around them.

Tejada was one such student who worked hard throughout high school and was a scholar who had many prospects. She not only got good grades and studied diligently, but she was one of those students who loved school. As she told one of her UPM professors, studying was a coping mechanism for her, a way for her to forget her family’s problems and dire financial situation. For a student like Kristel Tejada, studying was a way of investing in her future and the only way she knew how to help her family get past the poverty that they struggled with. To have that all taken away from her must have indeed been crushing and would have certainly made life seem desolate and hope-free.

Some people may not understand why she went to the extent she did. Perhaps they may say, she should have forged on and found another way, but these are also usually the people who don’t understand the tragic hopelessness that sometimes comes with little to no opportunities and no promise of change. For the poor, education is a means for them to get out of their current situation. It is usually far more important to them than the affluent who have been known to take their education for granted because it is so readily accessible to them. Many well-to-do students wake up in the morning and whine and complain about having to go to school while those who are not as affluent wake up at the crack of dawn to walk for miles and miles just to be able to attend classes. School represents their hope and it’s something they desperately cling on to.

Unfortunately, Kristel was not able to hold on to her dream because of UP’s “no late payment” policy. While I understand the need for policies to be put in place to maintain order in an educational system, I feel this particular policy is quite harsh for a state university. Though the words “forced” leave of absence may not be the exact terminology, that is essentially what it is when a student is not allowed to attend classes because they have not paid their tuition yet.

According to sources, Tejada fell under Bracket D in the Socialized Tuition and Financial Assistance Program (STFAP), which meant she had to pay P300 per unit per term. Her father was a taxi driver and her mother was a housewife. Plus she had three other brothers and sisters who also took a share of her father’s meager income. How she still fell under this bracket is a mystery to me. Would a student from a one income, barely minimum wage, household that had six mouths to feed fall under Bracket D? In September, Kristel had asked to be re-bracketed to E2, which would entitle her to tuition free with a small allowance. According to school officials it would have been possible but she failed to submit the corresponding supporting documents. What a horrible excuse!

So as it stands, you have a student who is hardworking, smart, and dedicated, who is actually eligible to be re-bracketed and who is begging to be allowed to stay in school yet due to a paperwork issue is still turned away. How complicated could this paperwork be that they could not ask her to complete before the semester ended? Would that have been unreasonable request? UP officials have been quoted saying they could not make an exception for Tejada because it would set a precedent. In my opinion, it should set a precedent. So many students experience the same thing Tejada experienced and should not just be lumped into one big group that can’t afford to pay their tuition. Is there a problem in truly looking at each case on an individual basis and assessing from there?

What’s worse is that officials from the state university who get a lion’s share budget for state colleges and universities, seem to “shrug off” the incident as simply an unfortunate case. They feel that since they followed procedure, procedures they themselves had set in place mind you, then they have no responsibility in what followed. How can that be the response? In the wake of such a tragedy, to simply answer: “well it’s unfortunate but we did our job” seems not only dismissive but uncaring as well. And while I am sure that may not be the full picture of the university’s response, it is surely what they are projecting. This is understandably the case because they have to be very careful in the amount of responsibility they accept lest they admit they have a part in the blame.

People are angry. That much is clear. And they should be. What a waste of a promising young life over red tape and non-flexible school policies. What’s worse is that UP alumni were even more than happy to help pledge financial assistance to underprivileged students but were not allowed to do so in this case because there is no system in place to monitor and regulate this. Again, while it makes sense on the whole, it’s not a good enough answer. I know many UP alumni who are ashamed of their alma mater these past days. UP has always stood as a beacon and light for those who work hard and strive to achieve a college education. In this case, it stood for none of that.

Tejada’s death is an unspeakable tragedy, one that unfortunately has probably happened to many other nameless and faceless students who lost the opportunity to go to school because of financial constraints. While everything that is happening now is too late for her, perhaps it can help others. A review of the current policy should be done and flexibility on a case-to-case basis is something that should be considered. A review of the STFAP classification system should also be done to prevent students from being bracketed improperly. UP should truly look into ways to prevent this from happening to future bright minds. While it may be too late for Kristel, perhaps this senseless tragedy can turn into renewed hope for other students like her.