<p>Right you are, Soozievt. Right there is where ID exaggerated and lept over the moon.</p>
<p>Clearly, there are kids who never took a drink during their H.S. years whom subsequently get loaded regularly in college. They and other problem drinkers are the ones whom colleges need to provide services to…punishing them with harsh sanctions but no counseling typically won’t resolve the problem.</p>
<p>Otis was the character in Mayberry who, as the town drunk, would voluntarily go to Andy’s jail and lock himself in a cell, as he slurred, “Hey, Andy…Hey Barney.”</p>
<p>It’s a reference to the Andy Griffith Show.</p>
<p>I rest my case. Look at the collective gasp from College Confidential. OMG, that wouldn’t be fair. There’s drinking everywhere. We can’t do anything because, well, my kid might get caught up in it.</p>
<p>That’s the point. If you motivate College Confidential (used broadly) to demand attention to high school drunks because it might cost Biffy or Buffy an acceptance letter, you would see a whole lot less condoning of teen drunks.</p>
<p>But, it isn’t going to happen. The colleges pay lip service to alcohol poisoning, but then openly market to attract drunks, proclaiming their “work hard, play hard” cultures, their fraternities, and so forth.</p>
<p>In my opinion, the fundamental issue here is that high schools, colleges, parents, and students condone teen drunkenness and aren’t willing to go beyond window-dressing to reduce it.</p>
<p>Thank you for explaining “Otis” to me. :D</p>
<p>ID, many, including myself, would agree that colleges need to address drinking problems on campus. High schools do too. Parents do too. </p>
<p>As a parent, I don’t condone drinking in high school. My kids didn’t do it and I feel quite certain. I do condone drinking in college but I do not condone drunkenness. My daughters drank occasionally in college (probably once a week approximately) and they didn’t get drunk (their lives were too scheduled up to be able to do that even if they wanted to, but they did not). </p>
<p>Those of us against your “solution #3” in your first post on this thread do NOT condone drunkenness. We just do not agree with your solution.</p>
<p>I don’t agree with InterestedDad’s idea of a blacklist. But I do think that what some of you are calling “profiling” is, in other contexts, what I’d call a normal admissions decision.</p>
<p>Say InterestedDad, soozie, ellebud and I are on the admissions committee at Hoity Toity U. We’re deciding whether to admit Alphonse McTweedle, the captain of the lacrosse team at Snooty Collegiate Prep. Someone says, Snooty has a great lacrosse team and our boy Al is their top scorer. Let’s take him. But then InterestedDad says, Every single team in Snooty’s league is notoriously filled with heavy drinkers, and they’re none to careful in their treatment of women. Remember that other kid from the lacrosse team at Snooty, who was in the dean’s office every other week being dressed down for drunken loutishness? We don’t want that on campus, let’s reject him.</p>
<p>Are you claiming that we shouldn’t consider InterestedDad’s point? If so, how is that different from considering other aspects of school reputation? Suppose we’re considering Zuzina LaCresta, who is barely in top 15% of her class at Grind Magnet School, and I say, Grind is a very tough school and being in the top 15% is an accomplishment, remember when we took that other kid from Grind who didn’t have top grades and he was terrific, we should take her. That’s profiling a school-- is that OK?</p>
<p>[Otis</a> Campbell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otis_Campbell]Otis”>Otis Campbell - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Does anyone see a difference between assuming that the lacrosse players share a common culture, and assuming that all members of XYZ Public High share a common culture?</p>
<p>Cardinal Fang, I’m glad my kids’ colleges did not profile their school and accepted my kids even though it is rare for kids from our high school to attend these schools or programs. I’m glad they looked at my kids as people. </p>
<p>PG, you have a good point. In ID’s method, “Biffy” who attends hoity toity college prep school that happens to have rowdy behavior boys on its lacrosse team but Biffy plays the flute in the school orchestra should not be accepted, because Hoity Toity college prep school sent some previous “town drunks” to their college.</p>
<p>I think that hoity colleges would only have to blacklist one school for one year for the word to get out and the condoing of teen drunks to start changing. What you need is a clear message that colleges have had enough and are willing to put some teeth into their admissions profiles to reduce the number of campus drunks they enroll. That would be a very different message than many colleges current send.</p>
<p>ID, some campus “drunks” get into that behavior once they are in college and did not do it in high school. Just saying. </p>
<p>And if colleges do accept students who are having serious problems with alcohol, then they have to have standards on campus of what is acceptable or not and if certain guidelines are broken, remove the kids from campus. No need to punish every Susie, Jane, or Biffy at the home high school who do not drink at all. These are the kids the college should want, in fact.</p>
<p>Each person is responsible for his or her own behavior and should not be punished for the behavior of others.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think dealing with a high school kid with addiction issues is the responsibility of the parents and / or the police.</p>
<p>In case I didn’t make it clear, I don’t think it would make sense for colleges to blacklist high schools. But if colleges don’t want to be full of drunks, then they should try not to admit the kinds of students who are usually drunks, and they should disallow campus activities that end up with widespread student drunkenness. That would include parties at certain fraternities and sororities, if parties at those fraternities ended up with widespread drunkenness.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Harvard studies are quite clear. The college binge drinking rate (college drunks) is much higher among former high school binge drinkers (high school drunks). This is why I believe that admissions could be an appropriate tool for reducing college binge drinking.</p>
<p>It is also true that there is an environmental effect. Students at colleges with high binge drinking rates (lots of college drunks) are more likely to start binge drinking in college than students at colleges with low binge drinking rates (fewer college drunks). So a college would get a double benefit from an active effort to stop enrolling drunks. Not only would there be fewer drunks to start with, but there would be less peer effect tending to create new drunks. This in turn makes the college less attractive to drunks in the future. I mean, that’s basically what happens now. That’s the difference between a low binge drinking rate college and a high binge drinking rate college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For the most part, high school and college binge drinking is not an addiction issue. It’s more of a social norms issue. That’s why it can only really be addressed by taking steps to establish different social norms.</p>
<p>I don’t mean to say that there aren’t college alcoholics. There are, but that’s not the bulk of the binge drinking and campus town drunk behaviors.</p>
<p>Wow…this reminds me of when my public school teachers would make the whole class stay for detention because one or two idiots broke the rules. </p>
<p>Hey, they are problem behaviors in LOTS of schools. Here in Philly - we have teachers and students who fear for their lives. Lots of “bad” kids. Thankfully, many colleges look beyond the reputation of the school and pick out the 'gems" - kids who might go on to be lost souls if somebody didn’t give them a break. I don’t believe in punishing the whole no matter how enticing the thought of social reform is. And who knows if it would work in any case…</p>
<p>To me, the biggest concern is the safety of the students. Students need to be educated about how to deal with alcohol. What the dangers are. How to look after their fellow students. How to ensure that no one DIES (including policies that give amnesty to those who report trouble). That’s the most important thing in my book. But schools…and even some parents… don’t tend to go there because drinking is ILLEGAL. So we punish, and it goes underground.</p>
<p>Interesteddad is such a GDI. Good for nothing but laughing at. Enjoy your cargo shorts, while the rest of us frat hard and prosper. </p>
<p>Fact is, those prep school kids pay for the school with donations when they graduate and those complaining about this get a degree and never give back. Pretty sure this ban was already lifted because those who succeed and donate wanted it that why. Wonder why?</p>
<p>Very good points TR. The problem is the same throughout the world. When people are given the right to drink no matter what age there are some who tip the scales too far in determining what is the right amount for them. This is part of the learning process and the more out in the open it is the safer it will be for those who choose to learn about drinking in this manner. The unfortunate thing in the US is that “children” under 21 are charged as adults for consuming or possessing alcohol no matter how responsible they may be. Therefore, as TR stated it goes underground. I really don’t understand the logic of charging someone as an adult for underage alcohol possession. Seems to be selective prohibition.</p>
<p>Wow, these are some of the most unthought out responses i have ever heard. The Greeks at Clemson do a massive amount of community service and raise tons of money for charities. The kid was on coke, sounds like a personal decision. Greeks do more for schools than any other types of organizations. Greeks get a bad rep because yeah, we like to cut loose when we get the chance, but we also make much higher grades than the rest of the student body. Quit pointing the finger at Greeks and maybe come up with some sort of drunk bus system that goes from campus to the bars and back like we have at LSU. Please do some research before you post biased comments. </p>
<p>Yours truly,
Sig Ep from LSU</p>
<p>Our kids went to fancy schmantzy (public) high school. They were athletes and in theater (which is a big deal here). One of my kids was in one of the worst classes that the school has ever had, in terms of behavior, drinking and drugs, ever. The behavior was so bad that graduation ceremonies had to take a break because of the PARENTS’ behavior.</p>
<p>My kid? I’m still waiting, and the “kid” is in the twenties for misdeeds. Truly. (I’m no fool. I grew up here too. I know what to look for in all manner of things.) ONCE she drank too much. Called us from the restaurant asking us to pick her up. (Siblings weren’t available.) And yes, thank G** she called. She apologized over and over. She had had three saki bombs. And yes, she was…of course being her…of legal age.</p>
<p>…I wanted to tell her that it was about time.</p>
<p>If she had been painted in the same brush, she never would have gotten in anywhere and certainly not to her dream school/program. I’d be a terrible one for the admissions committee.</p>