<p>The problem with social problems is first, recognizing that they ARE social problems (not just individual problems) and second, that they need to be dealt with by society as a whole; we cannot blame or dump the problem onto only one group to solve, be it the individual, the parent/family structure, education, law enforcement, advertising/media, bars/liquor stores, etc. "It takes a village..." I am not trying to avoid responsibility but I believe that it took a village to create the drinking problems that exist today. </p>
<p>I know, I sound like a broken record and too many of the words are being skipped.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The dorm that he was living in is a private off campus dorm, not under UT control.
[/quote]
ag54: Is this a common arrangement at colleges? Gosh, something else to consider before sending Jr. off. I'd feel very uncomfortable if my kids' dorms weren't controlled by the U. Other than decreasing their liability in the event of an accident/death, etc., why do colleges do this?</p>
<p>mini: Here in NJ, the health curriculum covers all that. They may not retain any of it, but they are taught it. It has to be reinforced (and taught by example) at home. I was in a liquor store recently & they had a huge display of a beer brand, complete with hats, shirts, etc. A dad & his 12 year old son walked by & the boy was raving about how "cool" the stuff was. "Wow!" "Awesome!" I found it so odd that beer would be elevated in their family to some reverential plane. And I do love my beer.</p>
<p>Private dorms are mainly a large state u phenomena. At UT, there simply isn't enough university-owned housing, so these huge, private dorms sprung up (and I DO mean UP). Penn State has some, as well.</p>
<p>"mini: Here in NJ, the health curriculum covers all that."</p>
<p>Honestly, I doubt it (I look at curriculum as part of my job.) But, be that as it may, if these august educational institutions know, from experience, that their students are not educated, and, more than that, don't know how to negotiate an alcohol-laden environment where a large proportion are going to end up as alcoholics, then they are frankly fourth-rate institutions when it comes to education. There are three kinds of strategies that have been shown to work: educational; behavioral; and environmental, but for the most part I get the sense that they just don't care very much, which, for me, calls into question how much they really care about the education of their students generally speaking.</p>
<p>Put it another way: for every future medical doctor my alma mater produces, they are going to produce a little more than two alcoholics (of course there will be some overlap). If that were placed on the Princeton Review website, how many applicants do you think they might lose?</p>
<p>Yikes, my daughter stayed at University Towers for a summer ballet program. She said a popular party spot was on the roof of the building which is pretty scary to think about! I feel horrible for the family of this young man. Very sad all around.</p>
<p>Quoted from another poster (sorry, don't know how to use quote boxes)</p>
<p>"As a parent of a college student, though, I would never consider suing a college for a foolish or irresponsible decision or action taken by my young adult kid. I'd be thinking...well, OMG, if I didn't send him off to college with any more sense that THAT...."</p>
<p>I cannot believe this quote. If, god forbid, this ever happened to your child, then you might be in a better position to judge the actions of others. Losing a child is the most horrible thing in the world, and one should not fault any parents looking for answers and yes, even looking to blame if that's what they need to do to get through their grief or hope to prevent others from befalling the same fate. </p>
<p>I've met many parents who think they raised the perfect kid with loads of common sense, and their kids get out there in the world and do stupid things. I'm sure it would be all the more hurtful for the parent of a dead child to hear someone like you implying that they didn't raise a child with "sense". And I'm sure you would never say anything like that to a grieving parent in person....would you?</p>
<p>The fact that the parents need to blame does not mean it is the right thing to do or that they are right in doing so. A kid recently jumped off a parking structure at the uW and died. Should they be blaming the UW? They might want to but that would not make it right.</p>
<p>And you, as a homeschooler, mini, must realize that no one is as equipped to teach this as a child's parents are. But the schools do have a supporting role in this. That is, if the kids don't catch their DARE officers smoking outside the local businesses, as my kids have often done...</p>
<p>
[quote=Take0ForGranted]
I cannot believe this quote. If, god forbid, this ever happened to your child, then you might be in a better position to judge the actions of others. Losing a child is the most horrible thing in the world, and one should not fault any parents looking for answers and yes, even looking to blame if that's what they need to do to get through their grief or hope to prevent others from befalling the same fate.
Well, I'll forgive this misguided post since you are either 1.) a newbie, or 2.) someone who has a vendetta against me because you think that <em>I</em> think that my kids are "perfect."</p>
<p>My statement was in the GENERAL, not the specific toward the student who died or his family. My record of empathy on this site is well-documented, so I won't waste any time defending it. </p>
<p>Blame should <em>NOT</em> be cast as "what they need to do to get through their grief." In fact, that is an egregious misuse of blame. The fact that someone is grieving does NOT excuse taking the wrong entity to task. </p>
<p>Society places an array of dangerous, risky, illegal, immoral, and unethical behaviors in front of our children. The <em>ONLY</em> hope for them is that they are taught INTERNAL control of their actions. External controls only work when someone is looking. If a kid doesn't have enough internal control to make good choices, then he is destined to risk tragedy, whether it is in a dorm room, a car, an apartment, or a friend's house. </p>
<p><strong><em>NOTE TO EVERYONE</em></strong> For the BAJILLIONTH TIME, my children are NOT perfect, have never been perfect, will never BE perfect--and neither am <em>I</em>. I do not claim to be. They <em>and</em> I have done and I'm sure WILL do plenty of "stupid things." That I choose to teach my children to empower themselves with INNER controls that will serve them no matter what friends, society, or whoever dishes at them is, IMHO, a GOOD THING. And it has worked for us so far. Nevertheless, if it ultimately fails any of my children, I shall not seek to blame society or a school. </p>
<p>............That I choose to teach my children to empower themselves with INNER controls that will serve them no matter what friends, society, or whoever dishes at them is, IMHO, a GOOD THING..........</p>
<p>BERURAH - well said ! It is OUR responsibility as parents to get the job done the best we can......</p>
<p>For the life of me I cannot understand THIS:</p>
<p>When I was a high schooler and college student, "everyone" said that I would use illegal drugs eventually. I never did. There seemed to be a great deal of animosity toward me about this from certain crowds...animosity about the fact that I had enough inner control to do or NOT do what <em>I</em> wanted to do or not do.</p>
<p>I never lectured, scolded, berated, or vilified ANYONE else for their choices. In fact, I attended many a party where there were illegal drugs but chose to have a glass of wine instead ('twas legal then). Some of these people were my good friends. </p>
<p>Now, when I express the fact that my older children have this same type of inner control (yep, fostered by their father and me), there is, once again, animosity. Like...some sort of "issue" against kids who are able exercise these inner controls. They get "taunted" by parents as "perfect" when in fact, they are very normal teenagers who don't happen to drink (my nearly 20-year-old son drinks lightly and occasionally at college) or use drugs. </p>
<p>I have one college soph and a h.s. senior this year. Neither of them drank/drink in high school. Neither of them does drugs. In fact, my D was at a party last weekend with some college students, and a friend of my older son (who stayed at a local college) offered her alcohol. She politely refused--again, no lecturing, scolding, etc. Simply her choice. The friend was fine with that. Why does this bother some parents, then? Why are some parents so hesitant to think that some kids in h.s. actually do not drink? Why are these kids (and their parents) looked DOWN upon and ridiculed (or at the very least doubted) for doing what we ask them to do?? </p>
<p>I know some kids in high school do not drink. I have one myself.</p>
<p>And while mine is neither sheltered nor smothered, and he has made decisions freely, no one can guarentee what children do when they get to college. I have seen terrific kids go ballistic and fall apart away from home, and others manage themselves maturely without any parental intervention (I would say, that even among the "good kids" we know, more of them have had issues with alcohol than not).</p>
<p>None of us know what will happen when those kids are away from the watchful eye of parents. We all hope we have done enough. But having seen plenty of kids go awry, I'd say absolutely none of us are immune.</p>
<p>berurah, I think it is jealousy. What parent wouldn't want a substance free child? The other parents are mildly resentful that you & h figured out the elusive combination of preaching/teaching/modeling behavior/presenting consequences that worked. Good for you! I never used illegal drugs, (O.K., under-age drinking, maybe) despite being surrounded by them in many social situations. So when people claim "everybody does it" about any illegal/stupid/unwise activity or action that is often engaged in by teens, I know that is not true. And I hope my kids will be the exceptions. Like you, I have failed to raise perfect kids, but have tried to develop internal controls in them. Hope they are strong enough.</p>
<p>mini: I know NJ's health curriculum covers chemical substances, long & short term effects, and drug refusal techniques. I can't believe we're trail blazers in that respect. It's mandated & I reviewed the curriculum & signed off on it back when d was in a public school. (Teachers are free to add any supplemental material of their choice, which has opened up a can of worms from time to time.) Can't vouch for its effectiveness, but I know it is presented. Check it out if you are curious. D is now in a Catholic h.s., so they may beef it up a bit, but she is required to write term papers about drug/alcohol/eating disorder topics. Health is not a cake course in her school. Not back-breaking, either. But the dangerous issues facing teens & college students are well-covered.</p>
<p>Quite telling is the comment posted at the bottom of the article.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Jim Smith posted 11/20/06 @ 8:20 PM EST"
This is sad. Since it was SAE's hell week, this could have been prevented if it weren't for their alcohol hazing that drove this child to go off his balcony.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Time after time, we are left with the same question. How many deaths will it take for colleges to take the necessary actions to eradicate the presence of criminal organizations masquerading as students' organizations? When was the last alcohol-induced death in Austin? Not too long ago! </p>
<p>Oh yes, there will be plenty of offended parties. Oh yes, there will be plenty of people rising to the defense of the fraternities or athletic teams. Oh yes, we'll see the parents of the deceased changing their mind about the issue. </p>
<p>Alas, for Tyler Cross, he just became one more sad statistic and a victim of our collective cynicism and lack of courage to do the ... right thing. And shortly, there will be another and another. But, heck, for some this not much different from the boorish behavior, peeing in the bushes, and hurling racial epithets that is so easily excused. </p>
<p>BERURAH - some kids listen and HEAR and some listen and DON'T - it is a choice they ultimately make on their own - no matter how we may brow beat it into them - we can only hope that they did LEARN tho - and be respectful of the choices of those who don't walk in their shoes.</p>
<p>It is truly sad that at times a young life is lost because of choices that were made - we have ALL had same/similar choices to make. And at times - sadly - a young life is snuffed out by accident - not by choice too.</p>
<p>It is important to respect and accept ones differences.</p>
<p>Stickershock, what a load. Of course not all high school kids drink. The fact is, many more of them do than one would hope or suspect. Of course it would be nice to have substance free kids, but I doubt it is a jealosy thing. So much of it is dependent on temperament as well as parenting and community/peer support. I am the first one to admit that I am a dismal failure at many aspects of parenting, but I'm sure not jealous of anyone else! I play the cards I was dealt, and try to correct mistakes as I discover them.
I never touched drugs either, but I sure did drink in high school and college. I only recently learned just HOW many kids in my son's 9th grade class (several years ago) were drinking! I had NO idea at the time, and now they are all admitting it all over facebook. This was an Episcopal prep school with very strict rules. To me, it is shocking and frightening, and rather than be jealous, I, for one, am thankful for the kids who do NOT drink!</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly that we should teach our kids responsibility. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The issue is whether the colleges have ANY responsibility or culpability when a student dies from an alcohol related death. I believe that they do.</p>
<p>If a college had the means to reduce underage students' access to alcohol but neglected to do so, I think the college shares some of the blame when a student dies of an alcohol-related death. Does the student bear much of the blame? Of course, he does. That doesn't mean the college bears none.</p>
<p>If fear of a lawsuit or an actual lawsuit forces a college to take steps to alleviate certain dangers to students, then that necessaily means there WAS something the school could do. Lawsuits are a means of holding the college responsible - not wholly, of course, but partly -- and of forcing or encouraging them to take reasonable steps to alleviate those particular dangers. </p>
<p>I believe people should be responsible and avoid doing foolish and stupid things. That's what I teach my children and expect others do as well. I don't believe that the penalty for foolishness should be death, especially in a case that could have been avoided through some not unreasonable measures.</p>
<p>
[quote]
BATON ROUGE, La., Aug. 27 (UPI) -- Only days after Louisiana State University was named to the Top 10 Party School list, a 20-year-old fraternity pledge died from acute alcohol intoxication.</p>
<p>Sigma Alpha Epsilon pledge Benjamin Wynne had a blood alcohol level of .588 percent -- well above the .10 percent level to be considered drunk -- when he was taken to Baton Rouge Medical Center early Tuesday morning. Authorities believe Wynne may have consumed 25 to 30 drinks in one hour during a binge drinking fest.</p>
<p>Emergency Medical Services personnel arrived at the SAE house shortly after midnight to find two dozen fraternity members and pledges in various stages of unconsciousness. Wynne and three others were hospitalized, including 21-year-old Donald Hunt of Mandeville who remains in guarded condition. Authorities say there was no evidence of drinking at the frat house, but they believe Wynne went to a private party and an LSU-area bar before his death.</p>
<p>A favorite college nightspot, Murphy's Bar, was selling "Three Wise Men" by the pitcher. The drink is a combination of Bacardi 151 rum, Jagermeister liqueur and Crown Royal whiskey.</p>
<p>The fraternity, meanwhile, has been suspended by SAE fraternity headquarters while an investigation is completed. Students can live in the SAE house, but they may not conduct fraternity activities.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Thank God, SAE's must have this stored in the Word file: </p>
<p>"The brothers of Sigma Alpha Epsilon regret the unfortunate events of that night," said Chris Smith, the chapter's president.</p>
<p>They need it often! Colorado State University's investigation of a fraternity's alleged role in the alcohol poisoning of an underage female on Sept. 16 should be completed within a week. The Sigma Alpha Epsilon chapter was suspended by both CSU and its Chicago-based national chapter Friday pending the results of the investigation.</p>
<p>CSU, is the school where Sam Spady died two years ago. Spady’s mother, Patti Spady, who founded the Sam Spady Foundation to educate students on alcohol poisoning, said “You know, I think I’ve said everything I can say, and obviously it’s not getting through to everybody. It breaks my heart that these things still happen. Hopefully, no one else has to die to send a message home to others."</p>
<p>NCEPH - I agree and disagree with you on the above - colleges do have a responsibility to their students -both on campus and off - but off campus - is a real grey area. In their owned dorms they can apply - or not - all the rules they want - in a manner that is consistent to the codes of conduct - they can educate and write students up - fine them and suspend them - do superficial dorm searches etc... - whatever. But in off-camps private residences - they really can't - they really have no jurisdiction in that sense. On many a campus as long as the students are not acting out - can walk under their own steam - they are somewhat left alone by they police.</p>
<p>Access to alcohol is something I can't see a college being able to really control - except to maybe ban all alcohol on college property - which some do - but step off campus and again a different story. I think colleges are really caught between a rock and a hard place. When it comes to frats/sors and alcohol related things - I think at many schools some sort of limit are in place - but wether they can be really applied and controlled is another thing also.</p>
<p>I do agree that all schools should be doing everything they can to put controls in place for dangerous behaviors - drugs and alcohol especially.</p>
<p>I think you're right in a certain sense, but I think there still may be things the colleges can do. Perhaps they could at least require all freshmen to live in university-owned housing? So many of the deaths seem to occur among freshmen, so perhaps requiring them to live in a housing situation in which the university does have some control might help. Of course, the university would have to enforce its rules in that situation in order for it to be effective.</p>