<p>Gwen,
Can you clarify? Why would it matter if it were a male vs female, old vs young interviewer? Not meaning to antagonize-- I really would like to understand where the difference lies. I appreciate the clarification from the OP that the interview was with a 20-something girl (dont know if she swam or was relaying second hand info from friends) but that the interview felt like girlfriend chat more than an interview. If the interviewer were a generation older or of the opposite sex, why would that change your opinion? Just curious.</p>
<p>The interviewer is in a position of power with a very young woman. To bring up matters sexual is just wrong–lecherous in an older man. Either the problem is serious enough to be reported to the school, or it’s not serious enough to be offered as a ‘warning’ to someone who is applying. Knowing what kind of atmosphere a coach like that can create, many applicants would simply decide to choose a different school. As a gossipy girlfriend moment from someone who just graduated, it’s understandable and minor. imo</p>
<p>What if a middle aged male interviewer had a college age daughter himself and when the interviewee brought up the fact that she might be seeing a lot of this lecherous coach the interviewer couldn’t help but blurt out that she had to be careful around him? I think most interviewers in that situation, though, would probably be uncomfortable saying anything.</p>
<p>It usually is a gift to the interviewee if the interviewer is honest about his/her opinion of different aspects of the school.</p>
<p>Why don’t you call the interviewer and ask him/her to expound on the remark regarding the coach? Before dismissing the “not-so-subtle” warning to your daughter, it might be nice to know exactly how the interviewer knows this information about the coach. Perhaps the interviewer has personal knowledge regarding the coach’s behavior.</p>
<p>First, if it were my kid I would not advise saying anything until accepted or rejected from the school. But then…
I am drawing from my experience as a health care provider. We are obligated to report suspected abuse and leave it to the authorities to make a judgments call. Also, taking it to a more personal level, if a friend told another friend that a third friend was being abused or engaging in a life threatening activity, I think it would not be a legal obligation but a moral one, to take steps to save the individual at risk if the hearsay is credible…</p>
<p>Clearly it isn’t your d’s obligation to report this but what is morally correct is what I see as the question. Should the school know that this type of information is being dispelled at an interview? Should the coach know that these types of rumors are being spread? If true, should the coach be dismissed? Again if true, should the swimmers be alerted about what they might be up against? It seems to me that each answer points to reporting the information, even if it’s reported anonymously and even if the name of the interviewer is withheld. It would seem that if this is true the interviewer should have been the one to report it but since that didn’t happen or had no effect; I think it would do the most good for the most people if your d precisely reported what she heard. I also think that sometimes, when an established individual is accused, the accusations may need to be made multiple times before authorities will listen. Thus, if your daughter reports what she heard, and then another girl from the team makes a similar accusation she may be more readily believed. It is unpleasant that your daughter was put in that position but since she was she needs to do some soul searching to handle this the right way.</p>
<p>In life there are many times that we don’t go out searching for incidents that will ask us to come up with a solution to a moral dilemma. More often the moral dilemma is put before us and we must react to it. The way your daughter reacts can help define the person she becomes.</p>
<p>After rereading this it may look like I jumped a hurdle from inappropriate behavior to abuse. I guess whether this is abuse or not is questionable and depends on the specific circumstance. Either way I still think the thought process regarding dealing with this is the same.</p>
<p>I think that many of the posters here assume that if the college HAD been notified before that they would have investigated and dealt with the problem already.</p>
<p>I think that’s a false assumption, at least as far as what we’ve seen here in Colorado. (And, I don’t think that Colorado is in the least unique.)</p>
<ul>
<li><p>CU had major issues with the football team and women, involving variously recruits and students, coaches and players (Katie Hnida), athletic trainers and students,… These were years of problems, but CU did pretty much everything it could to ignore them for a long time. Another professor – a famous engineering professor – was finally fired after many, many incidents of sexual harassment. </p></li>
<li><p>UNC Greeley just had a huge problem with a musical theater professor; students reported that they’d complained for years about inappropriate behavior – it was only when a student actually found a hidden camera in the bathroom that the professor asked kids to use that it all unraveled. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>I think that there is an awfully big gap between what colleges SHOULD do with reports of inappropriate behavior, and what the ACTUALLY do, particularly when the person being reported is a valuable professor or coach. I’m more inclined to check the information out with other students who might know than to rely on administration assertions of, “Nothing to see here…” Every time one of these cases actually goes to court, the sordid behavior always began long before the current victim’s complaints.</p>
<p>“known for trying to sleep with the swimmers” could mean a lot of things. Maybe he has tried to ask more than one swimmer to go to dinner with him alone or come to his house alone. And maybe they’ve all said no and nothing more has come of it. Or it could mean he had more than one consensual relationship with a swimmer but it didn’t affect his ability to be a good coach. I think such situations are inappropriate but the university may not.</p>
<p>I still maintain that before anybody goes running to tell someone else something secondhand or thirdhand about a third party’s moral compass the teller needs to think long and hard because no matter the outcome several people’s lives including the teller are going to be upheaved and much scrutiny given. This can cut both ways…the outcome can be good (bad person is punished) or very badly (people are damaged that should not have been.) I think it’s wise to err on the side of caution. If the D chooses this school and the coach is inappropriate then it’s first hand and the D should report it.</p>
<p>“The interviewer is in a position of power with a very young woman. To bring up matters sexual is just wrong–lecherous in an older man. Either the problem is serious enough to be reported to the school, or it’s not serious enough to be offered as a ‘warning’ to someone who is applying. Knowing what kind of atmosphere a coach like that can create, many applicants would simply decide to choose a different school. As a gossipy girlfriend moment from someone who just graduated, it’s understandable and minor. imo “</p>
<p>This is an interesting thread that in my mind parallels another robust thread in the “Parents Forum” on whether to allow a high school female to participate in an alumni interview at the home of the interviewer. It has generated a significant amount of passionate and at time totally irrational and paranoid debate, mostly focused on the unlikely potential for the interviewer (presumed to be a middle-aged pedophillic male) to kill, rape or otherwise to harm or to traumatize the interviewee. I kid you not—more than a thousand posts on this topic. It should be required reading for an advanced course in abnormal psychology and psychopathology.</p>
<p>What’s interesting here to me on this thread is the clear double standard that has been exhibited. I was struck by the number of individuals who assumed the interviewer to be a middle-aged “lecherous” male who had committed a terrible offense or worse by broaching the issue of “sex” and warning the female interviewee. Many felt that both the coach and the interviewer should be reported to the college. One parent suggested writing a letter to the president of the college “naming names.” When the OP clarified that the interviewee was a young female it significantly changed the attitudes of at least some about the interviewer as reflected in the above quoted response. What was initially perceived as egregious behavior on the part of the interviewer is now felt to be a “minor” and “understandable” exchange. </p>
<p>I know I digress here but from my standpoint there are many lessons to be learned from assumption-making and leaping to conclusions with less than complete and contextual information. More disturbing to me is how political correctness has permeated across age and gender and made it nearly impossible for people to engage in authentic interactions. It’s a very sad state of affairs.</p>
<p>^^Indeed, couldn’t agree more.</p>
<p>I have to say, I don’t think the sex of the interviewer makes any difference. I don’t think an interviewer should be talking about the swim coach’s sexual predilections; for that reason, I think the admissions office should be contacted. It’s unprofessional and inappropriate. It’s also indiscreet. Who wants an interviewer that behaves that way? And the OP’s description of her daughter as saying “it was like talking to a friend” makes me even more uncomfortable.</p>
<p>I can’t tell you how many times since this thread began that I’ve wanted to ask if the interview took place in the alum’s home or if the colloge in question was an Ivy. How absurd!</p>
<p>I fully understand that a man’s career may be at stake here but I would think that with all that goes on these days we must err on the side of caution and assume guilt before innocence in these situations because often it turns out the truth is so horrifying and no one did anything. I mean these are our children we’re talking about! And people are more concerned over protecting the reputation of a man they’ve never even met? I find that absurd. I would try to get to the bottom of it and find out whether the interviewer or the coach in question was at fault, but I would certainly let someone know about the situation. If it turns out he’s innocent then fine, but the fact that an alumni felt strongly enough about the situation to say something like that, obviously there was some inappropriate conduct on his part. You really can’t be too careful these days.</p>
<p>“These days” are no different from any other days in terms of the likelihood of something actually happening, IMHO. </p>
<p>It IS more likely that the accuser will be believed. It IS more likely that they will be believed by some even if they are totally full of it, and the accused’s life will be ruined.</p>
<p>There’s a simple solution here. Wait until after the admissions process, and then contact the interviewer and have a chat about it. You should be able to determine whether this is a serious issue or whether the interviewer was blowing smoke. If the latter, consider telling her that you are not reporting her because of the fact that the coach would be crucified, but that you think she should exercise more discretion in the future. That should take care of it. </p>
<p>If you think that the coach is a serious offender, as in the case presented by arabrab, then blow the whistle.</p>
<p>I would not do anything at this point. If accepted, you might want to say something to the college about the interviewer. The info about the coach is second hand, and you have no idea if it is true or not. For all you know, the interviewer and the coach could have issues with each other. The interviewer is not representing his school properly, and that should be reported to the admissions office.</p>
<p>I totally agree with ClarkAlum. Well said.</p>
<p>so jym I guess you DID mean to be contentious? Sorry I answered, I thought you said you were just curious.</p>
<p>NO GWEN, I DIDN’T mean to be contentious, as I said. I was sincere in trying to understand. I don’t happen to agree and wanted to understand your perspective. Sorry you misunderstood. I do appreciate your initial response (post #42). I happened to agree with ClarkAlum and said so. No need for the snippy comment above. I was genuine in my question and again, appreciate the first (not the second) response. </p>
<p>Go have a warm cup of coffee and enjoy the day. Too early to be cranky, IMO. I’ll hope that the irritibility this morning is because you were up late celebrating the Saints Super Bowl win and haven’t had enough sleep- or maybe you were a Colts fan and are bummed. Either way,your crack was uncalled for. Feel free to take issue with the other posters who responded to your post # 42 and leave me out of it. Sheesh. Apology accepted.</p>