University of Massachusetts Nursing Dean Fired After Saying “Everyone’s Life Matters” [Updated]

downloadWe have been discussing the growing fear of professors and students over the loss of free speech on campuses for years, but recently those concerns have been greatly magnified with the investigation or termination of professors for expressing opposing views about police abuse, Black Lives Matter movement or aspects of the protests following the killing of George Floyd.  There is a sense of a new orthodoxy that does not allow for dissenting voices as campaigns are launched to fire faculty who are denounced as insensitive or even racist for such criticism.  The most recent controversy involves the recently installed University of Massachusetts-Lowell Dean of Nursing Leslie Neal-Boylan. Dr. Neal-Boylan had only been in her position for a few months when she was fired.  The reason, according to many reports, is that she sent an email on June 2 to the Solomont School of Nursing on the recent anti-racism demonstrations across the country that include the words “everyone’s life matters.” As a blog dedicated to free speech, it has been difficult to keep up with the rising number of cases of the curtailment of speech or academic freedom on our campuses.  What is equally alarming is the relative silence of most faculty members as individual professors are publicly denounced by their universities, forced into retirement, or outright terminated for expressing dissenting views.  This case however raises an equally serious concern over the loss of due process for academics who find themselves the focus of a campaign for removal — or simply summary dismissal.

I reached out to the University and updated the column with the response, which does not clarify most of these questions but suggests that the Dean may have been terminated for other reasons.  I have also reached out to Dr. Neal-Boylan for a response on both the cause and merits for her termination.

Dr. Neal-Boylan was heralded last September as a “visionary leader” by the university in taking over the deanship.  Her writings include strong advocacy for those with disabilities in the nursing field. Those writings show tremendous empathy and concern for inclusivity in the profession.

This controversy began when Dr. Neal-Boylan wrote the email which started with the following words: “Dear SSON Community,” the email provided to Campus Reform begins. “I am writing to express my concern and condemnation of the recent (and past) acts of violence against people of color. Recent events recall a tragic history of racism and bias that continue to thrive in this country. I despair for our future as a nation if we do not stand up against violence against anyone. BLACK LIVES MATTER, but also, EVERYONE’S LIFE MATTERS. No one should have to live in fear that they will be targeted for how they look or what they believe.”

One can understand that many felt that the statement detracted from the need to focus on the treatment and loss of black lives. However, one can also read these words as a nursing dean expressing opposition to all violence.  However, the email was immediately denounced in a tweet as “uncalled for” and “upsetting”  by “Haley.”  The university quickly responded to Haley and said “Haley – Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The university hears you and we believe black lives matter. See the letter the chancellor sent out Monday.”  The letter isa statement in support of Black Lives Matter.  Soon thereafter the University reportedly fired Dr. Neal-Boylan.

University spokesperson Christine Gillette issued a statement to the site Campus Reform Wednesday that stated  “The university ended the employment of Dr. Neal-Boylan on June 19 after 10 months in her role as dean of the Solomont School of Nursing. As with all such decisions, it was made in the best interest of the university and its students.”

What is particularly concerning is a June 19 letter referenced on the site that was allegedly written by Neal-Boylan and sent to Provost Julie Nash. The letter states “It is important to point out that no one ever gave me an opportunity to share my views of how the college and school were interacting nor explain myself regarding the BLM email. My meeting with you, [Dean] Shortie [McKinney], and Lauren Turner was clearly not intended to give me an opportunity to defend my actions. I was condemned without trial.”

The statement from the university does not state what specifically is “in the best interest of the university and its students.”  However, the failure to specifically state the grounds and the process used to reach the decision is alarming.  The University let the public record stand — and the view that Dr. Neal-Boylan was fired for expressing the view that “Black Lives Matter, but also Everyone’s Life Matters.”

What is “in the best interest of the university and its students” should include free speech and due process.  The mere fact that we do not know if Dr. Neal-Boylan was afforded either right is chilling.  If there were other grounds against her, the university should state so.  Instead, the clear message to faculty is that the dean was fired for expressing concerns over the loss of lives across the country in these protests.

I can understand the sensitivity to those who feel that the inclusion of other lives tends to take away the focus on the need for action on the treatment of African-Americans in our society.  However, it is possible that, as a leading health care figure, Dr. Neal-Boylan was speaking out to seek to end all violence in the protection of human life.  Medical and health care professionals tend to oppose all loss of life and violence.  The question is whether an academic should be able to express such a view and, equally importantly, whether there is a process through which a professor can defend herself in explaining the motivation and intended meaning of her words.

The uncertainty over the process used in this case creates an obvious chilling effect for other faculty members. In 30 years of teaching, I have never seen the level of fear among faculty over speaking or writing about current events, particularly if they do not agree with aspects of the protests.  Not only is there a sense of forced silence but universities have been conspicuously silent in the face of the destruction of their own public art and statues. Even New York Times editors can be forced out for simply publishing opposing views.

As we have previously discussed, chilling effects on free speech has long been a focus of the Supreme Court.  Free speech demands bright line rules to flourish. The different treatment afforded faculty creates an obviously chilling effect on free speech.  Avoiding the chilling effect of potential punishment for speech is a core concern running through Supreme Court cases.  For example, in 1964, the Supreme Court struck down the law screening incoming mail. A unanimous court, Justice William Douglas rejected the law as “a limitation on the unfettered exercise of the addressee’s First Amendment rights.” It noted that such review “is almost certain to have a deterrent effect” on the free speech rights of Americans, particularly for “those who have sensitive positions:”

Obviously, many of these schools are private institutions but freedom of speech and academic freedom have long been the touchstones of the academy. What concerned me most was that I could not find a university statement on a matter that resulted in the canning of one of its deans — just an ominous note that the page of Dr. Neal-Boylan can no longer be found.


I contacted the University to confirm (1) whether Dr. Neil-Boylan was fired for her statement about “everyone’s life matters” and (2) whether she was given an opportunity to hear the complaints against her and to contest the allegations.

The university responded with this statement:

“Leslie Neal-Boylan’s employment at UMass Lowell ended on June 19, after she was informed she would no longer serve as dean of the Solomont School of Nursing. She had been in that role for 10 months. Although a tenured full faculty member, she declined to join the nursing faculty. As with all such employment decisions, it was made in the best interests of the university and its students. Although we are not able to discuss specifics of a personnel matter, it would be incorrect to assume any statement by Dr. Neal-Boylan was the cause of that decision.”

This suggests that there were other reasons for the termination but, if the letter posted from Dr. Neal-Boylan is accurate, she was not aware of what those reasons might be.  If she is unaware of those allegations, this would be a rather Orwellian position where the university protects her privacy by refusing to confirm the basis for her termination even to herself.  I was hoping that the University would at least say that she was given those reasons and an opportunity to defend herself.  Instead, the university did not deny the allegation that Dr. Neal-Boylan was denied the opportunity to respond and contest any allegations.

The problem with the response is it leaves even more questions.  Dr. Neal-Boylan was fired soon after the University public stated that it was looking into the controversy over her statement.  She has said that she does not know any other reason, or at least that is what the letter posted on the Campus Reform site suggests.  Indeed, she is being quoted as writing:

“Her firing was “attributable to one phrase in my initial email that otherwise was very clearly a message to NOT discriminate against anyone. To those students who were upset regarding my email, wouldn’t it have been better to use that as a teachable opportunity to explain that leaders also make mistakes and use this as an example of why lifelong learning is so important?”

If her firing was unrelated to the statement, the University could have so stated without any violation of privacy. Such a clarification would have put to rest concerns over free speech.  Instead, there is lingering confusion, including with the subject of the action.

318 thoughts on “University of Massachusetts Nursing Dean Fired After Saying “Everyone’s Life Matters” [Updated]”

  1. Do we not want all people working in the field of nursing to be of the mind set that all lives matter?

    1. Obviously this nursing schools mandate is to punish if you aren’t of their mindset. Any one contemplating going into nursing AVOID this school at all cost .

      1. Exactly. The faculty and especially the administration are cowards and afraid that their heads will role next.

      1. The University erred. I am Black and I believe all lives matter. I understand afro-americans have been under white supremacy since arriving in America. And this is an atrocity. But that does not change my thoughts that ALL LIVES MATTER. The University got it wrong. She should not have been fired, if this is The reason she was fired.

    2. I agree! I’m white but proudly wear a Star of David. So because I’m white, it’s ok for me to be beaten and have ethnic slurs hurled at me? Which group in America, other than Blacks, marched, stood up for equal rights and died alongside other civil rights participants? I assure you that it was the Jews.

  2. All lives matter. If you have to put a color in front of that, you are part of the problem.

    1. I agree!! All lives matter!! No one should get fired for stating the truth!!

    2. Unfriggin’ believable!!! This is where your job can be stripped with no just cause? And freedom of speech is tossed right out the window… what exactly is wrong with saying All Lives Matter? Because in the end it is the truth.

    3. No one never said all lives didn’t matter they say black lives matter cause a larger percentage of blacks get killed for no reason that whites that have committed way worst crimes now with that being said you are part of the problem and anyone else with that thinks as small as you do but I you are probably some white guy that has a problem with people of color and you cannot tell anybody why because you living off of what was told to you by someone in your family like a grandparent or aunt/uncle who didn’t have a bad experience with a person of color either because ignorance is bliss

      1. Statistically, police are more likely to shoot a Caucasian than an African-American, given equivalent circumstances.

        I’m fine with someone saying either “Black Lives Matter” OR “All Lives Matter.” I get why someone would want to be a little more specific, and I get why someone would want to be a little more inclusive. If, as you say, no one has said that all lives didn’t matter, then maybe a person shouldn’t lose her position for mentioning that they do.

  3. As a professional in the medical community it’s factually clear that ALL LIFE MATTERS. People or patients that want to reinforce or prioritize a race, skin color, are simply converting the core purpose of healthcare into a political issue and racial smear issue.The promotion of blm or any race, gender cause in a health setting is despicable. The University could have bridged this issue, by taking the high road and stating that all life matters, and restating the Hippocratic Oath instead they illustrated their spineless decision.

  4. Hellooooo!

    At best this situation is murky. If she was fired for her innocuous and inoffensive post, that is outrageous and foolish, but there is some evidence that is not why she was fired. In the CampusReform article, see her letter of June 16 (copied at the bottom of the article) about her firing. She does not bring up the post in question about All Lives Matter. She brings up butting heads with the Dean over what appears to be union contract negotiations and her support of the faculty on the matter.

    Given that so far we have seen only one tweet in opposition to her from a Taylor Swift groupie, it hardly seems there was much pressure to fire her over All Lives Matter. The dean may have decided it was in his/her interest to keep the firing ambiguously tied to that reason when a power play over unions is what is really driving it.

    1. “At best this situation is murky.”

      Obama did nothing about Russians having Americans killed.

      Everything is murky to this cretin except things that he can’t proven but he agrees with. He has to be held accountable for his stupidity.

      ““The real killings started in 2006, and the maximum in 2008-12,” the source said. “There are hardly any American troops now. Did the Russians pay the Taliban to kill Americans? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But Russia did support Taliban aims in Afghanistan.” “

      1. Claims about Russian bounties in part based on old reports, intelligence sources say
        No one definitively has determined the truth about bounty allegations.

        Reports that a Russian military intelligence unit offered bounties on coalition soldiers in Afghanistan are based partially on old information that surfaced more than a decade ago, international intelligence sources said. The sources include both Western-based analysts and front line personnel on the ground in South Asia.

        Many of the sources spoke to Just the News via encrypted communications, and insisted that their names not be revealed because their lives are at risk.

        “The only thing new about this story is the date on the headline,” one South Asian contact said. “This is old information, going back to Obama days and before. Everyone who has been involved in Afghanistan heard this a long time ago.”

        Reports of an alleged deal between the Taliban and Russia’s military intelligence directorate, the GRU, leaked last week, leading to public outrage on many fronts. President Donald Trump has said the claims likely are fabricated, and Democrats in particular have accused Trump of siding with Moscow to deny the truth.

        No one definitively has determined, though, what the truth is in this situation.

        “The Taliban didn’t need Russia to pay them to kill Americans,” said an American intelligence analyst. “They were already doing it on their own.”

        The Pentagon said that no solid evidence bolstered the bounty allegations.

        “The Department of Defense continues to evaluate intelligence that Russian GRU operatives were engaged in malign activity against United States and coalition forces in Afghanistan,” Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said in a statement. “To date, DOD has no corroborating evidence to validate the recent allegations found in open-source reports.”

        Any bounties paid would have changed hands more than a decade ago, according to a foreign intelligence source in South Asia.

        “The real killings started in 2006, and the maximum in 2008-12,” the source said. “There are hardly any American troops now. Did the Russians pay the Taliban to kill Americans? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But Russia did support Taliban aims in Afghanistan.”

        The U.S. State Department agrees.

        “The fact that the Russians are engaged in Afghanistan in a way that’s adverse to the United States is nothing new,” Secretary of State Michael Pompeo told reporters at the State Department on Wednesday, adding, “The Russians have been selling small arms that have put Americans at risk there for 10 years.”

        Russia and the Taliban have been legacy enemies, from when their predecessor entities — the Soviet Union and the Mujahideen — fought one another when the USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979.

        Amid the enmity, though, links formed.

        “The Soviet Army penetrated the Mujahideen in the 1980s,” according to a second intelligence source in South Asia. “The connections go back a long time. The Taliban founders were trained by Soviets. It is no surprise that Russians maintained the connection.”

        By 2016, the connection involved meeting with one another in Russia and Tajikstan, a practise that Afghan officials called a “dangerous trend.” Army General John Nicholson, at the time the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, warned that Moscow was conferring legitimacy upon the Taliban.

        Since 2018, American military officials have spoken openly about Russia helping the Taliban, as noted in a June 25 report from Congressional Research Service analyst Clayton Thomas.

        But Russia is not alone in supporting the militant Afghans, he wrote.

        “In the past two years, multiple U.S. commanders have warned of increased levels of assistance, and perhaps even material support, for the Taliban from Russia and Iran, both of which cite [Islamic State] presence in Afghanistan to justify their activities,” Thomas wrote.

        That, too, is a longstanding situation, Pompeo said.

        “Money flowing to Afghanistan to support the Taliban has been going on since we went to Afghanistan now almost two decades ago,” he said. “It’s not just the Russians. Indeed, probably not majority are the Russians.”

        Added Pompeo: “Money has flowed from lots of places — from Iran.”

        The flow of weapons, money, and support are not linear within the nation that has been called “the graveyard of empires,” sources said.

        On Monday, CIA Director Gina Haspel addressed the bounties story by suggesting that her agency is investigating whether proxies had been used.

        “Hostile states’ use of proxies in war zones to inflict damage on U.S. interests and troops is a constant, longstanding concern,” Haspel said in a statement. “CIA will continue to pursue every lead; analyze the information we collect with critical, objective eyes; and brief reliable intelligence to protect U.S. forces deployed around the world.”

        The practice is widespread throughout the region, one observer told Just the News.

        “It is absolutely possible that Russians remained engaged with the Taliban through other regional countries during 2018 and 2019,” said Mushtaq Rahim, who studies conflict and peace in Afghanistan. “Playing proxies has been a trademark of the Afghan conflict, and it continues to be to this day.”

        As questions persist over who knew what about bounties, and whether Russia offered such payments, U.S. intelligence officials have held briefings for American lawmakers. The briefings were held on Capitol Hill in secret sessions. In public, though, Haspel alluded to why no one outside of the intelligence community claimed to validate the bounty reports.

        “When developing intelligence assessments, initial tactical reports often require additional collection and validation,” Haspel said.

        Noted the South Asian intelligence source: “The reports also should be current.”


    1. BLM does not supersede ones right to responsible free speech- the Dean is right to correct BLM and say “all lives matter” and the Board who fired the Dean should be reprimanded…harshly!

      1. Absolute snowflakes! Nurses come in all colors, creeds, & genders, & we take care of all colors, creeds & genders. She had a perfect right to express that opinion – please refer to 1st amendment. Nurses are culturally sensitive : please also refer to annual polls that put nurses as the most trusted among all professions. I have an MSN in nursing education, & find myself relieved I went into professional development rather than nursing school education if this is how faculty are shut down voicing opinions. What a shame – this is how we teach new generation of nursing professionals to keep your mouths shut, or you could be fired. All nurses abhor violence for its effects on the bodies and minds of our community.

        1. Ayesha Martin – just a counter argument.

          The Irish slave trade began when 30,000 Irish prisoners were sold as slaves to the New World. The King James I Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.
          Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.
          From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well.
          During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.
          Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly were: Slaves. They’ll come up with terms like “Indentured Servants” to describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.
          As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.
          African slaves were very expensive during the late 1600s (50 Sterling). Irish slaves came cheap (no more than 5 Sterling). If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African. The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master’s free workforce. Even if an Irish woman somehow obtained her freedom, her kids would remain slaves of her master. Thus, Irish moms, even with this new found emancipation, would seldom abandon their kids and would remain in servitude.
          In time, the English thought of a better way to use these women (in many cases, girls as young as 12) to increase their market share: The settlers began to breed Irish women and girls with African men to produce slaves with a distinct complexion. These new “mulatto” slaves brought a higher price than Irish livestock and, likewise, enabled the settlers to save money rather than purchase new African slaves. This practice of interbreeding Irish females with African men went on for several decades and was so widespread that, in 1681, legislation was passed “forbidding the practice of mating Irish slave women to African slave men for the purpose of producing slaves for sale.” In short, it was stopped only because it interfered with the profits of a large slave transport company.
          England continued to ship tens of thousands of Irish slaves for more than a century. Records state that, after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia. There were horrible abuses of both African and Irish captives. One British ship even dumped 1,302 slaves into the Atlantic Ocean so that the crew would have plenty of food to eat.
          There is little question that the Irish experienced the horrors of slavery as much (if not more in the 17th Century) as the Africans did. There is, also, very little question that those brown, tanned faces you witness in your travels to the West Indies are very likely a combination of African and Irish ancestry. In 1839, Britain finally decided on its own to end its participation in Satan’s highway to hell and stopped transporting slaves. While their decision did not stop pirates from doing what they desired, the new law slowly concluded THIS chapter of nightmarish Irish misery.
          But, if anyone, black or white, believes that slavery was only an African experience, then they’ve got it completely wrong.
          Irish slavery is a subject worth remembering, not erasing from our memories.

          Think about you lighter toned relatives. How many are part Irish?

        2. Is this meant to be some kind of sick satire on the poor education of African-Americans? Because if so, it’s in extraordinarily bad taste. It also suggest that one can become a nurse while being functionally illiterate, which I refuse to believe.

        3. How about this!!!! Read
          Chinese Girl in the Ghetto by Ying Ma. The widow of Tian Sheng Yu wanted justice. None. Ying Ma writes, “the bounds of political correctness became all too clear.” It was blacks killing Asian residences in Oakland, but the author of the book said that because of political correctness, the blacks were never in jail, even for killing.
          I think that shows blacks can be racist too.

    2. This is ludacris. She (or anyone else) has the right to say whatever they want. Our freedoms are being taken away little by little, until we won’t have any left.

      1. I work at a College. No! We are not allowed to say or post our opinions. You will be fired immediately if you say or post something that is not in line with their agenda. I now stay silent, voice no opinion. Stay away from people unless interactions are necessary. They keep trying to get us to fill out surveys. We all know to answer any survey, you would be fired before the end of the day. Have put in my retirement papers.

      2. Completely agree. I am a 16 year nurse and we value all life, yes everyone’s life on this planet does matter.

  6. In nursing there is a concept of cultural competence. This is a professional competency. In order to provide good nursing care, it’s not just what you do with your hands but also maintaining a therapeutic relationship with all patients. In this cultural moment, the phrase “all lives matter” as a response to “black lives matter” is understood by many patients as willful invalidation and really a threat of disregard. This level of care, in nursing, is not specific to this issue. It also includes how we address each other, end of life decisions, etc. We check/ask for feedback and what matters to the person we’re working with. And we aim to be responsive. There are other ways to competently express the idea that we are able to care for everyone. The phrase “all lives matter” is known to be used by some to express something very different and because of her leadership position reflects a serious limitation in her ability to be effective in her job.

    1. I have to wonder about the character of someone who would traffick in sophistry like this.

    2. Frankly, if an US-American university fires a nurse for a phrase like ‘All lives matter’, so their students won’t learn such a thing, nobody really cares what the finer specifics of some arbitrary details in some arbitrary other statement might be. It just says what it says – for some, probably most Americans, not all lives matter. Not that this would be anything new for the rest of the world.

      Just a little warning, though. That one predominantly white and conservative country that will likely be the ultimate target of all that rabid hate is still one of the very few that can actually defend herself against you. So maybe your universities should also teach that even if our lives don’t matter, our weapons can still blow you to kingdom come. Otherwise your frenzied youth with all that screwed up ethics might do something really stupid one day.

    3. As a nursing professional, I find the dismissal of the Dean abhorrent! First and foremost, she is an American whose has a guaranteed right to voice her opinions. Secondly as a nurse, she has taken an oath to care for ALL people without regard to skin color, ethnicity, gender, religious, and/or political beliefs, and ALL LIVES DO MATTER based on her oath. If the Dean was terminated based on her statement alone, I would hope she will seek legal action against the university. If the BLM agenda was truly a concern for black lives, they (activists) would and should be out in force decrying the innocent murders of BLACK people (especially children) in Chicago, Detroit, New York, and other Democratically managed cities. Where are the BLM Activists, Rev. Sharpton, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and others who scream “systemic racism” from the rooftops? And yes, we MUST include the abortions of black babies! The BLM organizers and pandering Democrats are hate-filled marxists who only jump out to scream “racism” when there is money or the black vote involved. I’m not inclined to disagree with the Dean in stating ALL LIVES MATTER.

    4. “In this cultural moment, the phrase ‘all lives matter’ as a response to ‘black lives matter’ is understood by many patients as willful invalidation and really a threat of disregard.”

      — except, in reality, it is neither of those things, and people really need to stop adding a connotation to a phrase that was never there.

  7. “I despair for our future as a nation if we do not stand up against violence against anyone. BLACK LIVES MATTER, but also, EVERYONE’S LIFE MATTERS. No one should have to live in fear that they will be targeted for how they look or what they believe.”
    Any student, any professional, anyone who is upset by the above statement is likely insecure.
    I feel concern when we are no longer able to speak up for what is right for ALL people.

    1. Shame on this University for bending down to the level of firing a fine professor. This Dean of Nursing wrote a certain truth in an email, and was fired as Massachusetts’s University strived in vain to be politically correct.

      Black Lives Matter has proven itself to be a movement of human hatred, violence and dead cops. To fire a Dean for speaking honestly and truthfully that ALL LIVES MATTER reveals this institution of “higher learning “ to be biased and fearful of the BLM repercussions of violence if they stood behind their professor.

      Cowering on knees is not the American way, and offering up a dean as a sacrificial lamb for slaughter toward the BLM “cause” as MU has done, I fear for any unity as a people if we can not stand up and hold our arms out against further violence and divisive hatred.
      Shame on this university.

      Ralee Bailey

  8. If “all lives matter” is a controversial statement, then there is no hope at all for this country. Just let ’em burn it down, the Chinese will march in and then we will have the censorship that all these people so desperately crave. It may not be the kind of censorship they want but that’s kind of how censorship works.

  9. I have heard a news update on this story that indicates that the former dean has stated that she would not contest her firing, because to do so would be to encourage “conservatives.” And she apologized for making the statement. I am frankly shocked and disappointed by her taking the narrow viewpoint of the complainant and the school. 🙁

    1. If you find someone of character in higher ed administration, it’s a reasonable wager it’s the comptroller or the director of physical plant. Most of them are sh!ts.

  10. This termination is a disgrace! As a mother of two RN’s who give their all to their patients REGARDLESS of any other fact but that they are human beings, this woman was 100% correct. ALL LIVES MATTER!!!

    1. If it were whites getting gunned down because they were white it would be wrong to say all loves matter because at that time we making a stand for whites because thats where the injustice is..why can’t you people understand that? Cause you don’t want to understand..yes all lives matter..duh..but right now and for a long time the injustice is happening to black people and we are sick of it! I have a black son and he’s big for his age but he’s nothing but a big sweet loving “teddy bear” always willing to help others no matter your color and so kind but i have to worry about his life because he’s big and black and he may look intimidating to others it’s ridiculous..if all lives matter you would be taking a stand because you can relate if not for any other reason but at the least because he’s a human being. If this continues you will understand cause you will have to worry about your sons and daughters if somebody will label them a racist cause their white and Gunn them down.

      1. “for a long time the injustice is happening to black people”

        It is 2020, not 1960, Lashauna.

        What you are calling injustice, is not injustice. It is the result of Baby Daddy’s and fatherless homes.

        Look inward.

        1. i wonder why there are daddy-less homes might it be because for a long time if a black man was stopped with the same amount of weed that a white man was stop with he would end up in jail. which goes to prove that black lives matter and should not be treated this way

          1. Anonymous– That may be the weakest argument I’ve ever encountered. Most if not all of the black men who father children out of wedlock smoke marijuana, get arrested and sent to jail and that’s why they are not at home with their babies? Might I ask what you are smoking?

      2. Have you heard about the Hispanic soldier who was murdered by a African American soldier? And like her a lot of Hispanic vendors in California had been assaulted for money by African Americans.
        What about that? They can kill people and then what?
        That’s is hypocrisy

      3. Dear Ms Lashauanka:

        Thank you for your comment and sharing it. We welcome the conversation.

        I and my children are already deemed “racist” because due to “white privilege” even the most generous and fair minded whites are now “racist”… so that ship has already sailed, as they say. White folks have been called racist so much we soon will not care anymore. Then, perhaps, things will get even worse.

        Also, I have heard a lot recently from black folks that “you fear for your children’s safety.” I am sure you do. This is normal.
        But do you not think that any white parent does not fear for their children’s safety too?
        Do you think perhaps that we also fear black mobs of “peaceful protesters” will waylay and murder our children in anger at their “white privilege” ?

        Maybe you have been thinking that white folks all have life on “easy street.” Not so. We suffer too.

  11. She said “Black Lives matter and all lives matter, therefore no one should be discriminated against.” I don’t think she should have lost her job.

    1. Maylene – YouGov agrees with her and a majority of blacks agree with her. The university is out of step, not her.

  12. She has more character than most of our corporate leaders.

    1. If you look at the murder rates in Chicago, Baltimore and the like it is pretty clear Black Lives Don’t Matter.

  13. It is a shame that the Dean lost her position because of “All lives matter.” As someone who has wanted to be a nurse since childhood, I wanted to help take care of people of all colors. So I am very surprised that the University basically put the nail in the Dean’s coffin with those 3 words. A nurse cannot discriminate against any patient regardless of their background, sex, or color, rich or poor. The administration should resign as they are the ones discriminating against black lives matter vs. all lives matter. I know this University would be a college that I would not even consider going to nursing school. Wonder what they have taught the previous nursing students?

Comments are closed.