drinking code violation: this is ridiculous

<p>NSM, I am glad things worked for you S, but I am curious what would have happened had he "laid down the law" and roomies would have snuck it in, or just flat out ignored him. Glad it didn't come to that.</p>

<p>"It's not a matter of the college's being too lazy. How exactly is the college supposed to find the students who vandalize the dorms? Unfortunately, it's not easy to find such rule breakers."</p>

<p>Well if they can't figure it out, again, not the kids' problem, certainly not the ones who aren't on campus. If your car gets vandalized on the street do you bill everyone on your block, neighborhood, city? Put up a camera or get better RAs.</p>

<p>CPT, good advice, and Heron, let us know what happens.</p>

<p>Father05, you then let the RA know the problem and request a room transfer. It does put you in a precarious position, I agree, but so it does if you're caught in your room with alcohol.</p>

<p>Many years ago (the girl is now an attorney at a prestigious law firm), my friend's D narrowly missed being expelled in a substance abuse purge at her boarding school. She was at the event, indulged, but then had to go elsewhere that evening and did not get back until very late that night. She denied involvement (a lie) and passed the urine test as she had had the drinks much, much earlier and it had cleared her system. </p>

<p>Later that term, she went into a deep depression, partly because so many of her friends were gone, and maybe because of the guilt she felt. It has only been recently that her mother found out that she was indeed involved in the event, as she insisted on her innocence. </p>

<p>I guess what I am saying is that sometimes kids do not tell the truth about their involvements in things. So a parent does have to proceed very carefully when investigating these situations.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I guess what I am saying is that sometimes kids do not tell the truth about their involvements in things

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I had to smile. I'm handling a "situation" at one of my company's locations where there was alcohol on the premises and we have some employees lying. Sort of a "I didn't inhale" kind of thing. And these are adults.....</p>

<p>I believe it. I would have to be pretty danged sure of the story, and the consequences have to be worth contesting before I got involved. But if it passes the BS sniff test (and I don't mean the degree), and the consequences can be far reaching, you had better believe I will talk to the school. I have found that if things are truly wrong, the right administrator will drop the matter immediately. Sometimes there is a rogue in the mix that is on a power trip and it has to be taken to another authority. In one case, where my son was written up and charged for a problem, the RA was just to lazy to refile the original report, and just put my son off. When I showed up, the matter was immediately resolved. (A fire alarm was set off as a prank; son was not there, well documented as he was in a performance at the time) All there were written up and given a disciplinary point. Son's name accidently got put on the list.</p>

<p>"NSM, I am glad things worked for you S, but I am curious what would have happened had he "laid down the law" and roomies would have snuck it in, or just flat out ignored him. Glad it didn't come to that."</p>

<p>We asked about that and were told that a decision probably would be made that was based on S's overall reputation. S is unusual in that there's no indication that he drinks alcohol. I have even overheard him telling his friends that he never plans to drink even after he turns 21. I think that he made that decision after seeing his older brother flunk out of college and run into some other difficulties after getting heavily into a partying life.</p>

<p>In a residential treatment center I worked at for juvenile offenders, in order to reach higher "levels", you were expected to "make your peers accountable". I had my concerns about this policy, as it was very had for these boys, sometimes gang members, to do. I likened it to what a good family (which these boys had no other experience with) does for each other..</p>

<p>"It's not a matter of the college's being too lazy. How exactly is the college supposed to find the students who vandalize the dorms? Unfortunately, it's not easy to find such rule breakers."</p>

<p>"Well if they can't figure it out, again, not the kids' problem, certainly not the ones who aren't on campus."</p>

<p>I assume that if the college can't fid out vandalized the property and it doesn't hold dorm members responsible it passes the expense on to the entire student body as part of some aggregate expense related to residential life. The college certainly does not "eat" the expense. </p>

<p>Is it more "unfair" to have kids who don't live in the dorm or who are returning from a year abroad pay than for dorm residents who were out for the night?</p>

<p>My D's situation aside, the problem with this policy is that it helps the college but not the kids. Rather than make alcohol use and abuse a community issue, all it does is make it necessary to hide it. That does nothing to increase awareness, education, or responsibility. It just increases fear and stealth. I'm not sure what the answer is, but it seems to me that there should be a better way than that. And a saner way than punishing non-drinkers for walking into a room where alcohol is present. If you are lucky, you never run into alcohol (yeah right). Sorry: Bitter.</p>

<p>Sadly, I think the policy encourages, perhaps intentionally, students to turn each other in to avoid your D's situation - - which is a form of responsibiliby. And not every policy exists to increase awareness or education; I assume the school does that through other related programs. </p>

<p>Like you, I am uncertain of what the answer is. Certainly, to give a "pass" to every kid who pleads, "I was just passin' thru" is not the anwer, nor is installing cameras or adminstering polygraphs or random room checks/drug-testing. </p>

<p>The existing, admittedly flawed, policies may be the best that can be done. And, no matter where one draws the line, someone will be unfairly peanalized at some point. But knowing that doesn't take out the sting when it's you or your kid.</p>

<p>Let's face it, kid's lie. How many who get a citation tell their parent's it was everyone but them? College's have rules, they publish them and they need to follow through. At the college my son recently started at there was no mandatory academic summer reading, no mandatory placement tests.....just mandatory readings on alcohol, the school's policies and a mandatory test to make sure they understood them.</p>

<p>This is my third in college. What I've learned is that colleges are unyielding about their policies for good reasons in general. A parent complaining or hiring a lawyer is likely to be a big waste of time and money. They've heard it all before. Check their written policies and accept that the buck will stop there.</p>

<p>re posts #36 and #37

[quote]
Avoidingwork, that one should be fought unless there is much more to that story.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>S2 did explain the situation, school said it didn't matter. I believe the consequence was attending a meeting, which he did. And even after that, he had to follow up a few times as the school kept saying he hadn't attended it. </p>

<p>S2 was mostly irritated that he had the consequence without being a part of the indiscretion.</p>

<p>NSM, what I really meant is what would your son have done? Was he prepared to turn the roomies in first time? I'm just curious.</p>

<p>Heron, as I said as a parent who's hoping his kid is able to dodge such nonsense for 2 more semesters, I understand your bitterness. Expulsion from the dorms would be a fitting punshiment for alcohol present and a positive breathalyzer. The problem, the first time Johnny Bigbucks get's busted and dad alumni just gave half a mil to the school, what happens? Rather than put itself in this position of "no tolerance", they'd rather spread it out. End result appears to be from almost everyone's experience here is that a significant percentage of kids just don't care about the wrist slapping and will take their chances on a weekly basis. </p>

<p>nyc, the college should just charge more for the dorms in the first place if the RA's can't control their floor. My kid is barely scraping by at college. He doesn't need a couple hundred dollar bill thrown in mid year for something he didn't do.</p>

<p>I can see the difficult situation of administration, I know at my Ds schools (UCs) there is lots of drinking and not a small amount of drugs. </p>

<p>Interestingly DDs Berkeley sorority is intense about enforcing no alcoohol, whereas at another UC other Ds sorority had some girls (enough for D to tell us stories) using drugs for weight loss.</p>

<p>I think the most frustrating thing for a kid in the OPs situation is the arbitrariness of being caught- why don't they make it known they are checking and go door to door every night and catch them all, why just one room.</p>

<p>And, I agree kids lie, most kids would lie about this one to get out of serious consequences, BUT why not give a breathalyser, if it is 0.0 then no penalty. Give the potentially innocent a chance to prove it</p>

<p>I don't think kids should have to police each other to keep a scholarship. It makes the scholarship seem like payment for policing services rendered. It also means scholarship students will encounter greater challenges making friends (who wants to hang with the narc?), and it seems foolish to place discouraging roadblocks in front of the very students you want to lead by example. </p>

<p>If I were to give anyone other than cops campus policing powers, I would give those powers to school administration, so they could give assembled partiers Breathalyzer tests and kick out those who fail.</p>

<p>I wouldn't have a problem with the breathalizer, but why should the 21 yr old who bought the alcohol for the 18 yr olds get off scott free just b/c s/he has't taken a drink yet? And how do you feel about random, unannounced room checks? Or random bag/backpack searches? Or hidden camera? (someone - - perhaps there were party noises coming from the room and that's why the RA checked.)</p>

<p>Bottom line: no matter how well-drafted or well-intentioned, there is always some degree of arbitrariness with the application of a rule. Some who are innocent will get busted, some who are guilty will get off.</p>

<p>"NSM, what I really meant is what would your son have done? Was he prepared to turn the roomies in first time? I'm just curious."</p>

<p>I think that S would have done that since their actions would have put his college education at risk.</p>

<p>Why is it wrong for a school to have an honor code? It really is not about policing, but many schools ask that their student body feel a responsibility for asking their peers not to break laws.</p>

<p>And somemom, at each of the college's my kids have attended, they have consequences for drinking. It's no more arbitrary than whether the police catch you drunk driving. They don't catch most people, but should you ***** when they do catch you?</p>

<p>I have to say, in reading the post that started this discussion, my first thought was that a girl who left her own room to avoid alcohol but then got caught in another is stretching the imagination. Sure, this and anything is possible. However, I'd expect the RA to have caught her in mid sentence telling the drinkers off and heading for the door!</p>

<p>The policy at this school sounds quite standard from my experience... if there's alcohol present nobody under 21 may be in the room regardless of if they're drinking or not, no exceptions.</p>

<p>Yall may be right, maybe I am not thinking it through. I have to admit I understand the frustration of the feeling that "every one" else is getting away with it and the more innocent (perhaps not totally innocent, but more) gets caught and punished. I have not really seen a lot of this in college, at big UCs I have not heard stories of dorm alcohol consequences. I have seen it in HS when the kids we all know are regular drinkers don't get caught, but the kids who they talked into trying something do get caught. Not sure any one learns anything from those consequences.</p>

<p>That said, I agree that MOST kids will come up with a story that paints them the innocent victim, but sometimes some kids are just that, I thought a breathalyser would be a nice touch to allow an occasional person to be proven at the very least not yet guilty;)</p>

<p>These rules are just silly. Most of dorms we have visited had bottles (with alcohol) in plain sight. One school my daughter had a sleep over (a top 10) took her to a dorm dinner hosted by the resident professor where wine was served. It was an Italian night, pasta and red wine. </p>

<p>If a school has such a strict rule about drinking, then spend money for a guard at the dorm door to search every student before they enter, but do not put the burden on the students to watch other students. They have equipments now that could scan your backpack to see if you are carrying bottles (I was caught on a cruise ship). It is the school's responsibility to make sure it's substance free, not the students. The OP's daughter shouldn't have to leave her room to avoid drinking. The school, as the landlord, has the responsibility of providing a safe, quiet place for its tenants.</p>