<p>This thread is about the “zero tolerance” policy in place at most top tier boarding schools regarding drug and alcohol use. Do you think this policy if fair? Is it too harsh, or not harsh enough?</p>
<p>I know some people love the policy. They think that the policy is in place to encourage students to be better, healthier individuals. They believe the policy also ensures that if any student DOES decide to experiment (and gets caught sooner or later as they most likely will), that they cannot negatively influence the rest of the student body or peer pressure their classmates to experiment as well because they will face expulsion. Not suspension, not probation… EXPULTION. They will be gone forever, never having had the opportunity to hurt anybody but themselves. </p>
<p>However, I also know others who don’t like the policy. They think that boarding schools are too harsh on students when it comes to drug and alcohol use, especially considering that day students (whether at boarding school, private day school, or public school) use alcohol and drugs in the same or worse ways than boarding students in the privacy of their homes or on weekends, when it is not their school’s business to get involved. “Teens will be teens” is often the mantra of people who share this view. </p>
<p>I would like to know, what are your thoughts regarding this very controversial, highly sensitive issue? Do you like the policy, or not, and why?</p>
<p>I don’t like it, I don’t plan on drinking or doing drugs, but for those who do, they deserve a second chance. Its high school, and everyone makes mistakes sometimes.</p>
<p>I don’t hold a “teens will be teens” attitude yet I am in favor of NOT expelling students for alcohol and drug abuse. I have many reasons for this, but the biggest one is out of concern for the kids. Expulsion may be just what it takes for a kid to go from experimentation to full scale abuse. Expelling them represents a missed opportunity to help them. It just doesn’t seem very compassionate to me. </p>
<p>That said, I think one pass is enough. Two strikes and you’re out.</p>
<p>I do think that issues related to morality should be zero-tolerance, such as hazing, cheating, stealing, lying, the SELLING of drugs, etc. I guess I just don’t consider a teen getting drunk to be as much of a moral lapse as an intelligence lapse.</p>
<p>A zero-tolerance policy would not prevent me from sending my child to a school though. I suppose my opinions are not strong enough on this issue. You could say that my preference is ~ZT. </p>
<p>I think that it really depends on the circumstances. For example, if students are caught drinking, but no real harm is done, I don’t think expulsion is in the students’ best interest. But if its something dangerous like cocaine etc, expulsion would be an appropriate action.</p>
<p>Maybe others can chime in, but none of the schools I’m familiar with expel kids for a first time drinking offense. They are put on a “no use” probation and may have to go to counseling etc. Different schools treat drug offenses as more serious, or not. Day students are held to the same standard as boarding students, your student handbook should explain the “reach of the school” rules.</p>
<p>Are you familiar with The Hotchkiss School? It’s in Lakeville Connecticut and, according to the handbook, has something in place called the “no chance” policy which clearly states that any student caught using or in possession of drugs and/or alcohol will be expelled. </p>
<p>Haha sorry for sounding a little arrogant up there… ^^^ I meant no harm, I promise.
People have always told me that most top tier BSs automatically expel students if they experiment with drugs and alcohol, but I only know for sure that Hotchkiss does.</p>
<p>Actually…I don’t know much about THS except that I had to drive there once for an athletic event and…it took a really long time. What does the handbook say about day students? It would be interesting to hear from other current students and parents, though it seems that many have taken a vacation from the board.</p>
<p>“I think that it really depends on the circumstances. For example, if students are caught drinking, but no real harm is done, I don’t think expulsion is in the students’ best interest. But if its something dangerous like cocaine etc, expulsion would be an appropriate action.”</p>
<p>I don’t understand your logic. You say that if students are caught drinking then they shouldn’t be expelled but if they are caught using cocaine they should be? I wouldn’t say that drinking is less dangerous than cocaine.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, you’re right Baystateresident… many have stopped coming on CC because admissions decisions have been made and application craziness is dying down… :(</p>
<p>The handbook refers to all students, boarding and day. But I assume that if a day student gets involved with drugs and alcohol on their own time, there’s not really much the school can do about it.</p>
<p>I agree with you, 2010 hopeful. Drinking can be equally or even more dangerous than using cocaine, or any other drugs for that matter. </p>
<p>Also, Bamagirl, I wouldn’t say that it is possible for “no real harm” to be done when alcohol is involved. If a student is caught drinking and no damage has been done, one must think about the amount of damage that COULD have been done had he/she not been caught. Alcohol makes people do crazy, even violent things that they would never do if they were sober. According to scientific research, this is true even more so for people under the age of 21, hence the legal drinking age. By drinking, an underage student is not only putting themselves at risk, but their fellow classmates too. To me that is just not fair.</p>
<p>At many schools, there is a “safe haven” rule for students who are in need and head to the infirmary for help. You will not be prosecuted in those cases, even if you are drunk or under the influence.</p>
<p>At Groton, getting caught with, or under the influence of, any alcohol or drugs will get you sent before the Disciplinary Committee (“DC”). It is not necessarily an offense that would get you kicked out, depending on the circumstances. The DC is made up of 5 students & 3 faculty, so the admistration is not making these decisions. Since there are more students on the DC than admin/faculty, I think you could even go so far as to say that the students would be kicking you out (if that was the course of action chosen)</p>
<p>However, since Groton lives by an Honor Code, if you were caught drinking and LIED about it, that would be immediate grounds for dismissal. </p>
<p>Considering the legal liability issues for allowing underage children to consume alcohol or controlled substances illegally, I think these rules are completely logical. I agree that it can seem harsh, but if you think about the legal ramifications that would ensue if the schools turned a blind eye then this course of action makes complete sense. </p>
<p>I think it’s worth noting that if you were public school student who was caught at a party drinking, you would be arrested and locked up in jail until your parents bailed you out. You would then have an official juvenile arrest record & a permanent mug shot on file. Sure, it could get sealed at 18 (if you pay to have it sealed, and even then not all states are as prompt about this as others). The police & government, however, can always see this info.</p>
<p>If you compare getting DC’d to being arrested, then the boarding school route really isn’t so harsh after all. </p>
<p>FYI- I agree with Neato that getting kicked out could turn into a slippery slope :(</p>
<p>neato, I disagree. Having the zero tolerance rule makes it easier for kids to not start in the first place. When a peer offers to share, a kid can say “Love to but I can’t risk getting kicked out”. A little experimenting that gets caught early and causes expulsion is not likely to be start of the “slippery slope” to a serious drinking and drug addiction. If a kid does not have much experience with drug/booze and gets kicked out, wouldn’t the student’s reaction be “Well that stupidity screwed up my life”? Why would it lead to “What the heck, I might as well go for it and jump head long into making a bad situation much worse? I will turn to a life of party, party, party. I’ve blown it now, so there’s nothing to lose” The parents will be watching that kid like a hawk too, I imagine, making it even less likely.</p>
<p>If the student has managed to hide the drinking/taking drugs for a long time and actually has a physical addiction at the point of being caught, then it’s time that kid had a serious wake up call and sought treatment - which most boarding schools do NOT offer. Parents MUST be involved at that point, not the school, in how to handle the situation.</p>
<p>I can’t see how it’s a bad thing. I went to a public school for high school, so I didn’t have any experience such a policy… but if I had been attending a school that had it, it probably would have prevented me from making a few stupid choices in high school.</p>
<p>The vast majority of the top tier schools are “second chance” schools and have policies similar to what grotonalum outlined for Groton. </p>
<p>Most teens will be teens and will , unfortunately, make mistakes sometimes. Most adults, looking back, will admit to doing things that they regret. I believe in second chances and in the opportunity to learn from your mistakes and the personal growth that comes as part of the process. For many offenses, I think a zero tolerance policy is too draconian. However, I don’t believe in endless chances. Get caught a second time, then pack your bags. </p>
<p>At schools with zero tolerance policies, I wonder how often faculty “look the other way” when they encounter a student that may be under the influence of drugs/alcohol?</p>
<p>I’ve actually seen this scenario play out in a couple of situations and it was really heartbreaking. In both cases the parents berated the kids to the point where they had so much shame and their self-esteem was so low that the really did feel like that had nothing to lose. A bad situation got worse very quickly.</p>
<p>I guess the big thing about zero-tolerance (for anything) that really bugs me is that zero-tolerance leaves no room for discernment.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure most of the top schools have second chance policies - there’s one here at Andover as well as the ability to call “sanctuary” on someone else or yourself. Calling sanctuary prevents disciplinary action and mandates a long series of appointments with Graham House and Isham. Parents are notified and the student may occasionally be drug-tested - but they’re not kicked out and nothing goes on their transcript. Sanctuary cannot be called for the same type of offense twice during a student’s career here.</p>
<p>Second chance is the ONLY way to go. Drugs and alcohol are all over the place at boarding school, and if you think they’re more limited on “no chance” campuses, you’re sadly deluded. I came from a no chance day and boarding school before Andover and if anything drugs and alcohol were even more present there because they were more restricted and therefore “cooler.” The fact is that a huge number of kids on boarding school campuses drink and smoke weed, but how many of them really develop serious problems? Is it worth expelling kids instantly for something 25% of the student body does?</p>
<p>Andover’s 2009 State of the Academy survey revealed that 36.9% of Andover’s student body had consumed alcohol “to an extent that their parents would disapprove of” and that 12.8% of the student body had done so on campus. Do you think that 36.9% of Andover graduates leave with alcohol and drug-related problems? If it’s a danger to you, you get caught more than once and you’re out. If you do it recreationally, maybe you’ll get caught once and decide that the risks of continuing aren’t worth it. You do, however, have the event recorded on your transcript for colleges to see. That’s enough incentive not to do stuff like that here, never mind getting kicked out.</p>
).</p>