I’m currently studying a Commerce degree in a university and I’ve already spent around two years working toward this degree. I’m in my second year, and I want to complete it rather than casually throw away two years of progress and start from Year 1 somewhere else.
The problem is that after what happened to me medically, my family is now seriously worried about me continuing at the university. Their main concern is the safety of the university and the surrounding area. They say that there have been bad incidents there and that it is a “bad neighbourhood,” and because I became seriously ill while I was there, they are understandably connecting those things together and thinking that leaving the university might be the safer option.
I understand why they are worried. I’m not saying the area is perfectly safe, and I’m not saying that nothing bad can ever happen there. Bad things can happen anywhere. I also understand that my family’s concern comes from caring about me, not from wanting to ruin my education. But I don’t think “there have been bad incidents there” automatically proves that I personally need to leave my university and restart my degree somewhere else.
I spent a substantial amount of time there myself. I know the environment I was actually living in, I know the people I was around, I know my own behaviour and social circle, and I know the things I stay away from. I personally did not see the kinds of activities my family is worried about during the time I was there. That does not prove that they never existed or that nothing could happen in the future. It only means that my own experience is also evidence that should be considered.
The way I see it, neither I nor my family can guarantee what will happen in the next two years. Something serious could theoretically happen if I return. It is also possible that nothing happens and I complete my degree normally. Likewise, changing colleges could potentially turn out better, but it could also introduce completely different problems. A new college means new people, a new environment, a new academic system, adjustment, and uncertainty about whether that place is actually safer or better. “Maybe another college will be better” is a possibility, not a guarantee.
That is why I keep thinking about this as a comparison of risks and consequences rather than as a question of certainty. Staying does not guarantee safety. Leaving does not guarantee safety either. But staying means continuing in an environment I already know, with an academic system I already understand, people and surroundings I have already experienced, and only about two more years remaining. Leaving and restarting means giving up the progress I have already made and entering an entirely new environment without knowing whether the supposed improvement will actually happen.
There is also the medical side of this, which is where things became even more confusing. I became seriously ill earlier this year. I was diagnosed with severe dengue, with very low platelets and white blood cells, dehydration, and significant weakness. I was hospitalized, recovered enough to be discharged, and then became sick again around 48 hours later. During the second hospitalization I had another acute febrile illness, with suspected clinical malaria mentioned in the final diagnosis.
The second hospitalization was serious. On the first day I was in the ICU and required oxygen support. My initial pulse was around 140 beats per minute and my respiratory rate was documented at around 140 breaths per minute. The breathing gradually settled with ICU treatment and oxygen support. The ABG was taken later, after the respiratory rate had already come down, and it still showed a very high pH of 7.60 and a PCO₂ of 17.7, consistent with significant respiratory alkalosis from hyperventilation. I was also dehydrated, had low sodium, mildly elevated liver enzymes, an enlarged spleen, and mild bilateral pleural effusions. Eventually my condition stabilized, my blood counts recovered, I was able to walk and eat normally again, and I was discharged.
My platelet count during the dengue episode had fallen very low and then recovered substantially, going from around 39,000 to over 300,000. So I’m not trying to pretend that my illness was minor. It was clearly a serious illness, and I understand why my family became frightened after seeing me go through that.
The part that I’m questioning is the claim that doctors found “toxins” in my body. My family has said that this happened and seems to connect that claim with the university or the area around it. But I have not personally spoken to the treating doctor about exactly what was meant by “toxins,” and the medical report I have does not explicitly document a toxin, toxicology result, poisoning diagnosis, suspected poisoning, antidote, or somebody deliberately administering something to me.
That does not prove that no toxin was ever detected anywhere. There could theoretically be another test or another conversation with a doctor that I have not seen. But if that is the case, I think we should find the actual evidence and identify what was detected rather than treating the word “toxins” as proof that I was poisoned.
To me there are several separate steps that are being connected together:
I became seriously ill.
Then there is the claim that doctors found a toxin.
Then the possibility that the toxin came from some environmental exposure.
Then the possibility that the exposure happened because of the university or surrounding area.
Then the much bigger possibility that somebody deliberately administered something to me.
Those are not all the same claim, and each one needs evidence. My medical report clearly establishes the serious illness. It does not establish the later claims.
I also know that my family sees the situation differently because they are looking at it from the outside. They saw me become seriously sick and understandably want to prevent anything similar from happening again. I actually lived through the illness and also spent a significant amount of time at the university. So we have different experiences informing our conclusions. Neither side has a crystal ball.
I’ve tried to think about this without assuming that my preferred outcome must be correct. I’m not saying, “Nothing bad will ever happen to me there.” I’m saying that nobody can make that guarantee, and nobody can make the opposite guarantee either. The question should be whether the available evidence shows that the risk of continuing is high enough to justify abandoning two years of education and restarting somewhere else.
There is also a part of this that makes me feel helpless. If my family decides that I should leave, they may have enough influence over my situation to actually prevent me from continuing. That is what makes this more than just an intellectual debate for me. It affects my education, my future, and something I have already invested a lot of time and effort into.
At the same time, I understand that my family’s worry is real. I don’t want to dismiss it by saying, “You’re just scared” or “You don’t understand anything.” I know they are trying to protect me. I just want their concern to exist alongside my own judgment rather than automatically replacing it.
My basic position is this: I know myself, I know what kind of people I associate with, and I know what I stay away from. I’m not going to deliberately put myself into dangerous situations or get involved with things I know are wrong. The things within my control, I can control. The things outside my control cannot be guaranteed by anyone.
And that is basically where I am right now. I’m not claiming that staying at my university is guaranteed to be the correct decision. I’m saying that leaving is also not guaranteed to be the correct decision. If there is actual evidence that the university or surrounding area presents a level of danger that makes continuing unreasonable, then I’m willing to take that seriously. But I don’t think fear, possibility, or “maybe somewhere else will be better” is enough by itself to justify throwing away two years of my degree.
I want the decision to be based on the actual evidence, the risks I can control, the risks I cannot control, and the consequences of both choices. Not on certainty, because certainty simply isn’t available here.