Trigger warnings are becoming an issue in today’s culture and the University of Chicago makes their opinion of them clear with their ban on campus.

In theory trigger warnings, a preemptive measure to warn of graphic or lewd material, seem reasonable. However, recently they became a blanket term used to describe topics someone might find offensive, causing over-censorship.

The University of Chicago banned trigger warnings by sending a letter to incoming freshman  stating, “Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called trigger warnings, we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own.”

Some might see their statement as abrasive, but the University is making student’s education a priority overprotecting others who are in the adult world from potentionally explicit discussions.

Students should not be able to dictate how someone’s words or art are presented. Some people do suffer from psychological disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder but the majority of the poulation does not.

Students should be self-aware enough to make decisions on what they can be exposed to.

Those who believe they need protection from certain content areas should look for context clues like lecture titles, synapses of movies and syllabuses.

School is a place to learn and grow both intellectually and emotionally. Part of growing up is learning how to discuss problems and find solutions for them. More schools must ban unecessary trigger warnings within their curriculums as University of Chicago has done.

University of Chicago’s ban on safe spaces and trigger warnings unintentionally creates liabilities for both students and the school itself.

Trigger warnings are necessary because a student may have gone through a traumatizing experience, and a word, picture or scenario could make their upsetting emotions stemming from such an event resurface.

A student should never be forced into such an unpleasant situation that it could cause them to break down.

Contrary to the University of Chicago’s notion that students will need to get uncomfortable to create a productive debate, there are many ways educators can facilitate a meaningful discussion without using potentially disturbing content.

In extreme cases, a student could file a lawsuit against their own school for the distress and trauma, which resulted from exposure to offensive content.

According to Abbott v. Pastides, a group of students at the University of South Carolina sued the school after they were threatened to be punished for an offensive demonstration.

A veteran who served in a war might be taking classes at school and if a professor makes them do something related to war, the veteran may get terrible flashbacks.

The University of Chicago insinuates people with traumatic histories need to get over their issues, making the student’s already difficult life harder.

The University of Chicago is saying that they do not recognize post-traumatic stress disorder as a true disorder; that students are only making a request not to see certain images.

Teachers need to use trigger warnings to make sure all their students are at their best ability to learn in a safe environment, both mentally and emotionally.