A 23-year-old University of Glasgow student took his own life on the day he was due to graduate after the institution mistakenly told him he had not earned enough credits, an error later acknowledged in an internal report that the university described as a “tragic” mistake and for which it offered a “sincere apology”. Ethan…
A 23-year-old University of Glasgow student took his own life on the day he was due to graduate after the institution mistakenly told him he had not earned enough credits, an error later acknowledged in an internal report that the university described as a “tragic” mistake and for which it offered a “sincere apology”. Ethan Scott Brown died on 13 December 2024, three months after being informed he would not be eligible to graduate; his family say the notice shattered his confidence and future plans and that the error was not caught by multiple layers of academic scrutiny. In a statement released after the family pressed for answers, the university confirmed it had wrongly informed him in September that he lacked the necessary credits and said a review found failures both in the calculation of his degree outcome and in communications, including the fact that he was not referred to student support services after disclosing wellbeing concerns.
The circumstances were set out publicly this week at a press conference in Glasgow, where Brown’s mother, Tracy Scott, read a statement describing her son’s final months and the family’s efforts to obtain a full account from the university. “Ethan was a kind, caring young man who was very much loved. So it breaks my heart to now be aware of the mental anguish this university must have caused my son,” she said. “Ethan left this world believing he had failed, and the University of Glasgow were correct. The truth is, Ethan had successfully attained a 2:1 honours degree, despite the university repeatedly informing him he had been unsuccessful.” She added: “They failed him, not only academically, but also to support him.”
According to the family, the error originated when Brown was recorded as not having been awarded a grade for one course, which in turn meant he was told he would be unable to receive an Honours degree. They allege the mistake evaded detection by two internal exam boards and an external exam board, and that staff did not identify it before the December graduation period. His mother found him at home on the morning of 13 December, the day he should have been receiving his degree; within a month the family contacted the university, which commissioned a review by a recently retired senior professor. The university said the deputy vice-chancellor and the author of the report met representatives of the family in early February to explain the findings and deliver an apology.
In its statement, the university said: “The report found that a tragic error had been made in calculating Ethan’s degree outcome,” adding that “this error should have been picked up during the exam board process” and that the institution had also identified “a shortcoming in communications” because Brown “was not referred to Student Support Services when he disclosed wellbeing concerns”. The university said it had checked all records and was “confident that the error in relation to Ethan’s marks was an isolated one and that no other students have been affected,” while pledging “a thorough review of our academic and wellbeing policies and practices” and revised training for staff involved in exam boards. “We are profoundly sorry that this terrible event occurred and understand the deep distress it has caused Ethan’s family,” the statement concluded.
The family’s solicitor, Aamer Anwar, said their priority was to establish how a calculation error could survive multiple points of review and whether the shortcomings identified in the internal report were confined to a single department or indicative of broader weaknesses. He told reporters the family wanted to know “whether this systemic failure would ever have been identified had Ethan not died and his family had not fought for answers”, and said they had “serious concerns” about the support offered to students who report mental health difficulties. “The University of Glasgow, the family believe, failed Ethan,” he said, adding that Brown “should have graduated with honours”. He said all options were under consideration, without confirming whether the family would pursue legal action.
Scottish Government ministers signalled that the case would be studied across the sector. Education Secretary Jenny Gilruth said: “I cannot begin to imagine the impact this tragedy has had on Ethan Brown’s family and friends,” adding that she welcomed the university’s statement and the outcome of its investigation and that it would be important for institutions and the Scottish Funding Council to consider measures to prevent a similar situation arising again. The family, who live in Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, said they want to see steps that guarantee robust governance and a clear duty of care when assessment or administration issues put a student’s progress in doubt.
Public records of the case outline a tight timeline. In September 2024 the university told Brown he had not been awarded a grade for one course and would therefore not be eligible to graduate with an Honours degree. Over the following months, according to the family, he struggled with the implications for his future and told the university about mental health difficulties but was not referred to student support. On 13 December, the day of the winter graduation ceremonies, he died. The family contacted the university in January, prompting an investigation and the completion of an internal report that the university says was shared with them; a meeting in early February conveyed the findings and an apology from senior leadership. This week’s press conference brought the case into the public domain and prompted statements from ministers and renewed commitments from the institution to tighten processes around exam boards and pastoral referral. (
Brown studied geography and, according to his family, was proud to have secured a place at the university and to be on course for a degree. At the press conference, his mother described him as someone with “a smile that would light up the room”, a phrase echoed by the family’s lawyer as he read their prepared remarks. The family said they would keep pressing for accountability, with Scott saying, “We seek justice for Ethan in the hope that other students and their families do not have to experience the pain that myself and my family will have to live with forever.”
The university’s acknowledgement that the grade error should have been identified during exam board scrutiny has sharpened attention on the checks designed to catch miscalculations before degree outcomes are confirmed. According to the family, the error was not spotted by any member of staff, nor by two internal exam boards and an external exam board that review results before graduation decisions are finalised. University leaders have said they have revised training for those involved in such processes and are “looking for ways to further strengthen” quality assurance and student support. The institution has also said it has reviewed records and is confident no other students were affected, an assertion the family has questioned by asking whether similar errors might have gone undetected without intensive follow-up.
The case has resonated in part because it touches on a broader debate about how universities respond when academic or administrative events coincide with emerging mental health risk. In recent years coroners and courts have criticised shortcomings at institutions where students in crisis did not receive effective support or reasonable adjustments. In 2022, a judge found the University of Bristol had discriminated against physics student Natasha Abrahart, who took her own life in 2018, and awarded damages to her family; Bristol’s subsequent appeal was dismissed this year. In 2022 a coroner strongly criticised the University of Exeter after the death of student Harry Armstrong Evans, saying the university failed to respond effectively to his “cry for help” after disastrous exam results. Sector analyses have highlighted recurring themes in preventable-death reports, including weak follow-up when students stop engaging and unclear ownership for welfare interventions. Brown’s family say his case illustrates how academic governance and pastoral care can fail in tandem, with a single undetected error cascading into overwhelming pressure without a safety net.
Media coverage of Brown’s death began after the family disclosed the internal report’s findings and the university’s apology, and has been accompanied by calls for independent oversight of quality assurance where degree calculations are disputed. Outlets reporting on the case have emphasised the university’s statement that it considers the error isolated while noting its acceptance that the exam board process should have captured the mistake and that opportunities to refer Brown for wellbeing support were missed. The family, for their part, have said they want to know whether other students were wrongly told they had failed and whether any such cases would come to light without families pressing for answers after a tragedy.
At the press conference, Scott said the family had been “robbed” of a son, stepson and nephew and that their focus was ensuring “this never happens again”. Anwar reiterated that Brown had in fact met the requirements for a 2:1 Honours degree, and that the family believed his death was inseparable from the erroneous notice and the absence of adequate support. He said they would continue to engage with the university and with ministers on potential reforms, and that they expected the institution to demonstrate transparently how it has changed training and quality control around assessment decisions. The university has indicated that the principal would be willing to meet the family and discuss its actions.
Officials at the Scottish Government said institutions and the Scottish Funding Council would consider actions to guard against repeat failures, while reiterating condolences to Brown’s relatives and friends. In the meantime, the University of Glasgow has said it has strengthened training for members of staff involved in exam boards and will keep reviewing academic and wellbeing policies. For Brown’s family, those assurances will be measured against evidence that systems now reliably capture calculation errors and trigger prompt referrals when students disclose distress. Their central claim—that a student who had earned an Honours degree died believing the opposite because an avoidable error was not caught and welfare support was not engaged—has been accepted in substance by the university’s own review, even as the institution maintains the case was exceptional rather than systemic.
Friends and family have remembered Brown as a bright, gentle presence whose success should have been celebrated last December. As his mother put it, “My son, Ethan, was so happy to be accepted to study at the University of Glasgow. We as a family were delighted for him.” Her account, and the university’s admission that his degree outcome had been calculated wrongly, have focused attention on the often unseen machinery of exam boards and welfare calls that sits behind final grades. The case has become a test of whether those mechanisms can be made sufficiently robust to prevent another family from learning, too late, that an institutional mistake has been conceded and an apology offered. (Sky News)