Former student sues Idaho State University, claims she was kicked out of program due to her race
Published at | Updated at
POCATELLO — A former Idaho State University student is suing the school, claiming she was discriminated against and expelled from the Doctor of Pharmacy program because of her ethnicity.
According to court filings, ISU allowed the “discriminatory and retaliatory expulsion of Chanica Sintima from ISU’s Doctor of Pharmacy program because of her race and her protected activities under Title VI, the Idaho Human Rights Act, and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Chanica Sintima is suing ISU and employees Dr. Erin Berry and Dr. Kasidy McKay, alleging retaliation and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Court documents say Sintima was among the few Black students enrolled at ISU.
According to the lawsuit, “only 38% of Doctor of Pharmacy candidates (at ISU) are female, and only 2.14% of students are Black or African American.”
According to court filings, Sintima “earned substantial academic successes, including multiple Dean’s List recognitions, and a cumulative 3.62 grade point average.”
Sintima’s name does appear on the ISU College of Pharmacy’s Dean’s List for 2021 and 2022.
Allegations
Sintima was enrolled in ISU’s Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience (APPE) courses, where she was required to complete 6-week supervised clinical rotations.
During the Summer of 2023, Sintima had reportedly completed most of her required clinical rotations, receiving all “A” grades.
On Sept. 18, 2023, Sintima began her last clinical rotation, supervised by Dr. Berry, who is a Caucasian woman.
Sintima says she observed “disparities in Dr. Berry’s treatment towards her” compared to another female Caucasian student.
The allegations include “inconsistent and disparate application of Berry’s attendance and tardiness policy, as well as disparate application of course resources.”
ISU guidelines require Berry to provide students with a “mid-point” performance evaluation during the third week of the 6-week rotations to give them feedback on their work.
Berry reportedly submitted Sintima’s mid-point evaluations late, while other students received theirs weeks earlier.
On Oct. 5, 2023, Sintima brought this up to Berry and later emailed ISU’s Associate Director of Equity and Inclusion about the issue.
Court documents state that Sintima also believes she was being held to a different standard than other students regarding Berry’s attendance policy, even after explaining to Berry that she was experiencing transportation challenges with her personal vehicle.
Sintima reportedly noticed that Berry “did not penalize her Caucasian classmate’s tardiness and/or absences in the same manner as she criticized her.”
The lawsuit claims, “the only difference apparent to Ms. Sintima being the students’ respective race and skin color.”
Sintima eventually confronted Berry and reportedly told her she intended to file a protected grievance regarding discrimination to the Office of Experiential Education.
The lawsuit alleges that Berry threatened Sintima because of this, saying she would report her to Department Chair, Dr. Kasidy McKay.
Sintima continued to contact Berry about her mid-point evaluation. On Oct. 16, 2023, at 10:34 p.m., Berry reportedly texted Sintima that her evaluation had been submitted online.
The same day, Sintima followed up with ISU’s Office of Equity and Inclusion, stating:
“I just had a conversation with my instructor earlier and told her she is treating me unfairly related to discrimination. I sent you an email previously to file a discrimination complaint but I haven’t heard anything from you. Please tell me what I should do? I am very nervous as she is reporting me to Kassidy [sic]. I am a bit nervous for retaliation right now as my instructor face was pink. I am not sure what is going to happen to me.”
Sintima also documented her concerns to the EIRMC clinic where she was completing her clinical rotations, and reportedly contacted Dr. Kenneth Monroe, President of the Pocatello Branch of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (“NAACP”).
The lawsuit claims that Berry was contacted by a colleague at EIRMC, informing her that Sintima was “extremely upset and had sought emotional support from an EIRMC colleague regarding the dispute.”
Filings claim Berry shared this information with McKay.
On Oct. 17, 2023, McKay contacted Sintima and informed her she was being referred to the Office of Experiential Education (OEE) because she had received a “2” in the areas of “self-awareness and professionalism.”
Sintima claims that other Caucasian students also received “2” scores regarding professionalism, but “were not referred to OEE for supervision or consultation.”
McKay reportedly asked Sintima to meet with her during her EIRMC rotation, but Sintima was unavailable because of her work hours, transportation challenges, and fear of being reprimanded due to Berry’s attendance policies.
Over the next two days, Sintima and McKay attempted to arrange a time to meet, but they could not.
According to the lawsuit, “Dr. McKay retaliatorily prohibited Ms. Sintima from reporting to the EIRMC to finish her rotation until Ms. Sintima agreed to meet with Dr. McKay. Ms. Sintima became extremely upset, as Dr. McKay continued to schedule meetings during times in which Ms. Sintima was scheduled to report to EIRMC — placing her in a position of being in violation of the attendance requirements communicated and placed on her by Dr. Berry.”
The lawsuit claims that McKay called Sintima on Oct. 19, 2023, to tell her that she was reporting her to the “Progressions Committee (ISU’s supervisory disciplinary committee) to request discipline or dismissal from the ISU Pharmacy program.”
Sintima says she “collected herself emotionally and sent an email at approximately 12:07 p.m. to Dr. McKay to arrange a Zoom meeting at either 1-2 p.m. or 4:30-5 p.m. that day to mitigate their prior disagreement.”
McKay reportedly rejected Sintima’s request to meet, and again stated that she would be referring her for discipline and/or dismissal from the program.
That night, Sintima says she completed a homework assignment for Berry, and in the email attaching it, stated, “Have a great weekend and see you Monday.”
The lawsuit alleges that Berry and McKay considered the statement a threat, pretextually construing Sintima’s email as an “insubordinate threat to appear for her clinical rotation at EIRMC against their instructions.”
McKay and Berry then contacted EIRMC’s Director of Pharmacy and the Head of Security on Oct. 20, 2023 to report Sintima as a threat to hospital safety.
Sintima claims that Berry represented to EIRMC that she was “insubordinate and falsely represented to EIRMC that Ms. Sintima planned to ‘trespass’ at the hospital and was conspiring to release protected patient HIPAA information to members of the media.”
Berry reportedly communicated to others that Sintima would “jeopardize patient safety and the ISU/EIRMC relationship,” according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit then states that EIRMC placed a “BOLO” or “Be On The Lookout” with its security team and banned her from the property.
Sintima claims she suffered “substantial embarrassment, humiliation, and emotional distress” and that Berry’s and McKay’s conduct “further irreparably injured Ms. Sintima’s standing in her community and her professional reputation in the medical industry.”
Follow-up meetings
The same day, Sintima reportedly made plans to travel to Pocatello with Dr. Kenneth Monroe from the NAACP, to meet with McKay. Court records say Sintima emailed McKay at 3 p.m, confirming she was in attendance to meet at her office, but McKay never showed up.
Sintima again emailed McKay twice on Oct. 23, to request a meeting. McKay denied the meeting request and reportedly responded, “I will coordinate a meeting time with Dean Wadsworth and get back to you.”
On Oct. 27, Sintima requested again to meet with McKay via email and filed a formal complaint With ISU’s Title IX and Title VI coordinator, Ian Parker, “alleging discrimination and retaliation on the basis of race due to Ms. Sintima’s exclusion from the ISU APPE course.”
On Oct. 30, McKay reportedly refused again to meet with Sintima, and instead notified her that all correspondence would be “handled” by the Progressions Committee.
Although Sintima was reportedly given a “B” at the mid-point and completed most weeks of her six-week rotation at ERIMC, Berry gave her a “No Pass,” and she failed the course.
On Jan. 26, Sintima met with ISU’s Progressions Committee and “recounted her concerns of racial discrimination and retaliation.”
On Feb. 2, the committee voted to expel Sintima from the Doctor of Pharmacy program. Sintima filed to appeal the decision, and it was denied on March 28. Sintima filed for a second appeal, and it was denied by ISU in a “final decision” on June 3.
Sintima is now requesting monetary compensation for lost income, lost earning capacity, tuition, and interest on student loans, along with reinstatement in the Idaho State University Doctor of Pharmacy program to obtain credits and transfer to a different academic institution.
Statements
EastIdahoNews.com reached out to Sintima’s attorneys at Hepworth Law Offices, who responded that they are “unable to comment substantively on the active litigation beyond the pleadings set forth in the complaint. Procedurally, the lawsuit was filed, and we are waiting for ISU and the defendants to hire legal counsel and appear in the lawsuit.”
We also reached out to Idaho State University, who has hired Quarles & Brady to conduct an outside investigation into the allegations, for comment and they provided the following statement:
“The University takes the allegations expressed in this complaint very seriously. When these allegations were first brought to the University’s attention, the University immediately hired an outside law firm to conduct a thorough, independent investigation. That investigation found the facts do not support these claims and the university will vigorously defend against them in litigation.”
Further court hearings are not yet scheduled, and ISU has yet to file a legal response to the allegations.
Though this lawsuit has been filed, it does not mean the allegations are true.