 |
| Daniel Strouse (1950 – 2007) playing with the "Blue Laws." |
In August 2007, Daniel Strouse, the long-time Director of the Center for the Study of Law, Science, and Technology, passed away at the age of 57 after a five-month battle against an aggressive form of lung cancer. Dan directed the Center for eleven years, a period in which the Center achieved its most impressive growth and established itself as one of the nation's leading academic legal centers. Much of the Center's success and reputation is due to Dan's leadership, energy, commitment, and vision. Dan had recently stepped down as Director of the Center to re-devote himself to an ambitious program of teaching and scholarship in health and public health law, while remaining an active participant in the Center as a Faculty Fellow. Dan excelled at each of the many roles he played, including administrator, scholar, teacher, colleague, friend, mentor, musician, and always most importantly, as a father and husband. But what was most unique about Dan was the deep humanity, caring, and kindness he brought to every aspect of his life. His obituary in the Arizona Republic succinctly captured the essence of Dan's life as follows:
Beyond all his professional achievements, what mattered most about Daniel Strouse were his extraordinary qualities as a human being: his soulful compassion, his deep love for his family, his high integrity, quick sense of humor, true modesty, readiness to listen and talk through anything from legal questions to other people's troubles to the best spot for catching fish, his rare gift for lasting friendship, his capacity for fun, his gentle strength.
Dan's far-too-premature passing has created a sense of loss and sorrow that is deep and lasting, but fortunately "deep and lasting" also describe the many positive impacts and memories that Dan left for the Center, his colleagues, and students. To help memorialize Dan and the role model he provided, the College of Law, with the leadership and support of Dan's former student Dr. John Shufeldt, has created a student scholarship program in Dan's honor, which will include annual scholarships to a 1L, 2L, and 3L student, as well as a $10,000 "Strouse Prize" to the graduating student each year, who best exemplifies Dan's mix of academic excellence, outstanding personal qualities, and engagement in the activities of the Center and beyond. As the announcement of this scholarship fund noted, "the world could use more people like Professor Daniel Strouse." Contributions to this scholarship fund may be sent to Development Department, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, P.O. Box 877906, Tempe, AZ, 85287-7906. Please make all checks payable to ASU Foundation. For more information please contact Terry McManus at 480-727-0645 or tmcmanus@asu.edu.
To further pay tribute to Dan's many contributions, the Center Faculty Fellows have asked three prominent individuals who have interacted with the Center during Dan's leadership — a former student, a law professor from another law school, and a practicing attorney — to provide the following remembrances of our remarkable and beloved former colleague.
— Faculty Fellows, Center for the Study of Law, Science, & Technology
Dr. John Shufeldt, former student, now CEO of NextCare Urgent Care:
I did not realize how serendipitous it was to have Dan for my advisor after my first year of law school. He was the perfect mentor; brilliant, a bit self-deprecating, and humble to a fault. He had a quick wit and an easy, disarming smile.
It did not take long to realize that Dan's teaching ability was the standard against which all educators should be measured. Students in his class performed not out of fear of being called upon, but out of the desire to acknowledge his enthusiasm and teaching ability with their grasp of the material. The mental gymnastics he performed during class by transforming our answers into a logical analysis, illustrated his creative intellect and compassion. Dan never used his stature as a tenured professor to drive his point home. In his mind, he and the students were collaborators in an educational process where everyone was learning. He was empathetic enough to suffer fools gladly, a talent many law professors find challenging.
I was fortunate to have Dan as my thesis advisor. This meant I was able to spend significant time with him discussing the paper, journal sites and life in general. It was during these discussions that I learned Dan was a "closet Renaissance Man." He was a gifted musician, writer-scholar, and most importantly, a wonderful husband and father.
After he was diagnosed we rarely talked about Dan's illness even though it was obvious he was very worried about how it was affecting Nancy and the girls. When we did talk about it, he would apologize for imposing on our friendship. It has been said that suffering galvanizes a soul's intrinsic strength. This was not the case with Dan; he already possessed a quiet inner strength which was masked by his profound humility and warmth.
Ultimately, Dan taught me as much about life and death as he did about law. He personified the phrase "gentle soul." I will always remember Dan for what he taught me through his own integrity, compassion, and behavior.
 |
Joseph Rosenbaum, Reed Smith LLP, New York:
It's hard not to find nice words by which to remember Dan Strouse. I recall meeting him for the first time in 1990. It was a meeting engineered by mutual professional colleagues. Dan was looking for ways to get the fledgling Center for the Study of Law, Science, and Technology at the College of Law moving. There was something here — this convergence of science and technology and the legal world — whether the application of law to science and technology — imposing ethics, due process and integrity in research — or the application of science and technology to law — exposing "junk" science, providing greater rigor in the admission of evidence. He wanted to teach, he wanted others to learn, but most of all he wanted to help build something of relevance — a vehicle through which faculty and students could interact; a vehicle that could move us forward in this ever changing legal environment. In a world dynamically affected by science and technology, lawyers needed to understand. Dan understood that, chose to make a difference and what better way to do so than as an extraordinary teacher, mentor, guide, and colleague.
I recall him telling me about his vision of what the Center could do; what it might be. It was infectious. I was a relatively junior practicing lawyer inside a major multinational company. I was the company's "high tech" lawyer — that's what they called us back then. Shuttling back and forth on business between New York and Phoenix, I had regular opportunities for Dan to tell me of his belief that by enlisting support in the broader legal and scientific community, he just might have a chance, a good chance, of building more than a few courses or a new curriculum. He just might help build that vision. He asked for my help. He offered me nothing but the possibility of more work, taking up more of my time and the periodic sandwich in his office. Oh, and the opportunity to come to Arizona in August when the temperature was . . . well, what could I say? What else could I do? Of course, I offered to help. I had no idea what my commitment meant back then. Dan was hard to resist. He meant what he said, he liked what he did and he cared. He made me believe — I am honored he did.
Over the years our informal lunches and conferences, phone calls and e-mail exchanges grew into a more formal role on an Advisory Board. From the day I met Dan, he had already had an advisory board. People like myself who counted themselves fortunate to have had the privilege of knowing and working with him. People who might not have always understood how it all came together, but who felt it was a good thing to help. Dan made us feel that way. He wasn't pushy or loud, he just believed in what he did. It showed. It made us care too.
We talked about family and friends. We talked about children being born and the passing of long time colleagues and friends. We talked about the law and more often than not our discussions waxed philosophic about the intersection of law and technology or the impact of science on the legal profession. Semesters when I taught law school in New York on an adjunct basis we swapped stories and references. But we always talked about the Center, about the College of Law, and about making a difference. Building something that could stand the test of time — of enduring value to the school, to the community, our nation and perhaps even the world — Dan dreamed big. He was like that.
My memories of Dan keep him alive for me. Undaunted by detours or roadblocks, he never complained — at least not very loudly or for very long — and while his interests were diverse, his commitment to family, friends, and professional life time consuming, he always kept the vision, the dream of what the Center could be and what teaching could be, in his heart and his soul. His passion for students and studies, his unswerving dedication to a vision I first learned in 1990, remained constant for all the years I would have the privilege of knowing Dan. Ultimately he chose to return to his first love — teaching. Perhaps he sensed the dream had become a reality. The vision had grown up — alive with teachers, students, curricula, degree programs, conferences, a real advisory board. Time to let it fly.
He asked us to understand his dream, invited us to share his vision, and made us part of his team, his extended network of friends and colleagues. He made me smile and challenged me to think. But most of all, he made me believe we all could share a dream — that together we all just might make a difference. It was hard not to like Dan. It was harder not to share his quiet, steadfast commitment to an idea whose time finally arrived — a thriving Center for the Study of Law, Science, and Technology — which stands as a continuing testament to his thoughtful manner and steady hand so instrumental in making a difference to everyone whose lives Dan touched. I cannot imagine how family and friends, colleagues who were so much closer to his daily life must feel at the loss of his keen intellect, his thoughtful smile, his kind gestures, his warm heart, and his caring soul. We can no longer share with Dan the places we have yet to go or the dreams we have yet to pursue. A good man is lost, but his vision endures, and the memories remain alive in each of us.
Over 20 years ago I did not understand. I did not appreciate the commitment Dan asked me to make; the vision he asked me to share; the meaning of camaraderie he was offering. I have now begun to understand. For all these things and for knowing that Dan continues to allow me to share his dream, I will always be grateful.
Mark A. Hall, Professor of Law and Public Health, Wake Forest University:
I've known Dan for almost two decades, but during most of that time we've been separated by most of the continent. Still, I feel that I've lost a valued colleague as well as a true friend. Dan's primary academic focus was health law — also my field. Dan earned a master's in public health at the "Harvard of the Northeast" (as I like to refer to the place), and, prior to ASU, he was a principal lawyer for the University of Wisconsin's health care system. So, it was with real eagerness that I greeted him as a health law colleague when I was at ASU.
I left Dan holding the health law bag, though, when I departed two years after Dan arrived. I was away much of that time and he was busy assuming the directorship of the Center for the Study of Law, Science, and Technology, so we never really connected as health law colleagues when we were together. That transpired later, from a distance.
About ten years ago, Dan joined Ira Ellman and me in writing the second edition of our Health Care Law and Ethics Nutshell. True to his humanism, he focused on the interpersonal and fiduciary aspects of the doctor-patient relationship. Around that time, Dan also began to teach out of the health law casebook I edit. Of all the people I know who have used this casebook, he has been far and away my most faithful correspondent. Dan wrote me several times a year pointing out interesting new cases to add to the notes, raising new issues to include in subsequent editions, or simply passing along a genuine and unsolicited compliment based on something that transpired in class. It is this kind of interaction that makes the labor of casebook updating and editing most worthwhile.
Everyone who knows Dan has basked in the glow of this great enthusiasm. I last saw Dan in his office during a trip to Tempe in April 2006. Books and papers were stacked everywhere, and he was brimming with excitement about the Public Health Law casebook that he was working on, which was published just a few months ago. This is a great achievement for Dan. It is the first law school casebook dedicated to public health law, and it is written with some of the leading scholars in the field.
I will miss Dan a great deal, both as a friend and as a scholar, but I will continue to think of him as a health law colleague. When new developments in the field come to my attention, one guide for deciding how best to integrate them will be to imagine what Dan would have said about their significance. In this way, I know that we will remain connected. |
