MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: UWW2MU on May 02, 2018, 08:41:49 AM
-
Since many people on this board are in tune with, involved or follow student athletics, I thought this would be an interesting topic to get opinions on here. Especially since I’m assuming the median household income is probably higher than the general public as well, and that may also play into these decisions.
A student athlete at Arrowhead high school was suspended for four games for hosting a party in which some of the kids were consuming alcohol. After losing on appeal, they are now suing the school, the district, etc. to reverse the decision based on the students constitutional rights being violated.
I just can’t wrap my head around what these parents are thinking. The rules are pretty clear on underage drinking in our society and in code of conduct policies at our schools. If you are hosting a party where there is underage drinking, I cannot imagine any situation in which the host is not held responsible, even if they didn’t supply the alcohol. In fact, I’m surprised the students who attended but weren’t drinking were not also facing some sort of consequence as well.
How did we end up at the point where student's parents sue the school for handing out consequences for breaking rules and making poor decisions? It’s bad enough when you have some parents who don’t hold their children responsible for their actions, but to take it a step further by trying to block the school from doing so as well shows me the lengths some parents go to “protect” their children from learning the hard lessons of life.
Do you disagree with me? I’d love to hear your logic.
The original story:
https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/lake-country/crime/2018/05/01/arrowhead-high-school-student-suing-district-over-soccer-suspension/565302002/ (https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/lake-country/crime/2018/05/01/arrowhead-high-school-student-suing-district-over-soccer-suspension/565302002/)
-
Since many people on this board are in tune with, involved or follow student athletics, I thought this would be an interesting topic to get opinions on here. Especially since I’m assuming the median household income is probably higher than the general public as well, and that may also play into these decisions.
A student athlete at Arrowhead high school was suspended for four games for hosting a party in which some of the kids were consuming alcohol. After losing on appeal, they are now suing the school, the district, etc. to reverse the decision based on the students constitutional rights being violated.
I just can’t wrap my head around what these parents are thinking. The rules are pretty clear on underage drinking in our society and in code of conduct policies at our schools. If you are hosting a party where there is underage drinking, I cannot imagine any situation in which the host is not held responsible, even if they didn’t supply the alcohol. In fact, I’m surprised the students who attended but weren’t drinking were not also facing some sort of consequence as well.
How did we end up at the point where student's parents sue the school for handing out consequences for breaking rules and making poor decisions? It’s bad enough when you have some parents who don’t hold their children responsible for their actions, but to take it a step further by trying to block the school from doing so as well shows me the lengths some parents go to “protect” their children from learning the hard lessons of life.
Do you disagree with me? I’d love to hear your logic.
The original story:
https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/lake-country/crime/2018/05/01/arrowhead-high-school-student-suing-district-over-soccer-suspension/565302002/ (https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/lake-country/crime/2018/05/01/arrowhead-high-school-student-suing-district-over-soccer-suspension/565302002/)
I'm totally okay with the punishment. And, I agree with you that it is the correct action.
However, look around our society. There are an ungodly amount of examples of similar situations with adults where those in charge, whether with or without knowledge of underlings actions, skate by without consequence. Corporate CEOs, government administrators, college administrators, college coaches, etc, etc. It used to be "well, I didn't know it was happening.." (plausible deniability). Luckily, at least for college coaches, they've now used institutional control as a guideline.
If you were the kid, or the kid's parents, why should you absorb a punishment that others routinely avoid?
We've got quite the double-standard
-
1. I have zero-doubt that the high school likely applies its athletic code in an inconsistent manner.
2. That being said, while this offense was not specifically outlined in the code of conduct, it was obviously within the spirit of the code.
3. Suing is a ridiculous over-reaction.
-
Make the drinking age 18 like the rest of the world.
Thats all I got for this thread.
-
I'm totally okay with the punishment. And, I agree with you that it is the correct action.
However, look around our society. There are an ungodly amount of examples of similar situations with adults where those in charge, whether with or without knowledge of underlings actions, skate by without consequence. Corporate CEOs, government administrators, college administrators, college coaches, etc, etc. It used to be "well, I didn't know it was happening.." (plausible deniability). Luckily, at least for college coaches, they've now used institutional control as a guideline.
If you were the kid, or the kid's parents, why should you absorb a punishment that others routinely avoid?
We've got quite the double-standard
Maybe this is actually the real problem. Instead of thinking in terms of right and wrong, too many think in terms of what can they get away with vs what are there consequences for. Thus, people who think along those lines, who may be those in positions of power in their own lives, extend that to their children. If that's the case, I can only imagine situations like those you speak of become more and more frequent as these children become the leaders in the future.
-
I see they have a famous lawyer.
(https://m.popkey.co/bcccd7/jZ8N3_s-200x150.gif)
-
Yeah man, 100% four burnin' dem a knew won. O, butt if kin are involved, dat's a horse of another color. Dey wereant drinkin', just present. Don't touch mine 'cuz don't wanna negatively affect da college app. Parents, hey?
-
Not stated, but were the girl and parents cited for hosting an underage party where alcohol was available? Many states have this criminal law now. If so, that was why she too was suspended. The article is hazy how the school found out about the party. It sounds like the po-po was involved.
-
It's Arrowhead, so that tells you something about the students/parents involved. This is a great example of white, upper-middle-class privilege. Every single time I hear a story about a high school drinking party (including one that got a huge portion of the junior class at the school where I teach suspended), it is always rich white families who just assume that they can get away with everything. On top of that, the whole idea of "suing the school" is an option that is only available to the most affluent of parents. This is a crap lawsuit. Take your suspension, learn your lesson, and don't let underage kids drink in your house anymore (that's on the parents).
The only privilege stronger in schools than white-rich privilege is really-good-athlete privilege, but that's another story entirely.
-
White lives matter too, you know.
-
It's Arrowhead, so that tells you something about the students/parents involved. This is a great example of white, upper-middle-class privilege. Every single time I hear a story about a high school drinking party (including one that got a huge portion of the junior class at the school where I teach suspended), it is always rich white families who just assume that they can get away with everything. On top of that, the whole idea of "suing the school" is an option that is only available to the most affluent of parents. This is a crap lawsuit. Take your suspension, learn your lesson, and don't let underage kids drink in your house anymore (that's on the parents).
The only privilege stronger in schools than white-rich privilege is really-good-athlete privilege, but that's another story entirely.
Yup
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/us/ethan-couch-affluenza-jail.html
-
This kind of silliness isn't exclusive to sports parents.
A family in suburban Chicago is suing their 9-year-old's school district because he was banned from a geography bee for cheating.
http://www.dailyherald.com/news/20180412/lawsuit-against-oak-brook-schools-over-geography-bee-headed-to-trial
-
I'm totally fine with the punishment. I was a high school athlete and we all knew you just didn't go to (much less host) parties where there was a chance of booze being present, because everyone knew that getting caught meant you couldn't play, whether you were drinking or not. At my school, merely being in the same room was enough to sit you for a few games. Drinking parties were for summertime, not during the school year or sports season.
Parents need to get over it. Kid got caught, she has to do her time. 4 games isn't the end of the world. Good learning opportunity for the kid. What constitutional rights are being violated? High school sports are a privilege, not a right.
-
This kind of silliness isn't exclusive to sports parents.
A family in suburban Chicago is suing their 9-year-old's school district because he was banned from a geography bee for cheating.
http://www.dailyherald.com/news/20180412/lawsuit-against-oak-brook-schools-over-geography-bee-headed-to-trial
Humorous .. a couple months ago was my son's GeoBee. They sat the contestants too close together.
There were a couple kids that were peeking at the kids next to them for answers .. this cheating was clear and oddly humorous to the audience, as it was on full display .. but the judges were off to the side and likely didn't see.
In the end it wasn't an issue .. the cheaters didn't win (cough, my son did, cough.)
-
Did da udder kids get da Riley Crean Participation Award doe, hey?
-
Did da udder kids get da Riley Crean Participation Award doe, hey?
FFS, do you have to bring Crean up in every topic? I know you have an unnatural obsession with the dude but cmon...
-
Humorous .. a couple months ago was my son's GeoBee. They sat the contestants too close together.
There were a couple kids that were peeking at the kids next to them for answers .. this cheating was clear and oddly humorous to the audience, as it was on full display .. but the judges were off to the side and likely didn't see.
In the end it wasn't an issue .. the cheaters didn't win (cough, my son did, cough.)
Congrats.
Sadly, when I was in school, I didn't qualify for either the Spelling Bee or the GeoBee. Had to settle for this:
(https://www.jlryan.com/files/Flowbee-rick-1.jpg)
-
Maybe this is actually the real problem. Instead of thinking in terms of right and wrong, too many think in terms of what can they get away with vs what are there consequences for. Thus, people who think along those lines, who may be those in positions of power in their own lives, extend that to their children. If that's the case, I can only imagine situations like those you speak of become more and more frequent as these children become the leaders in the future.
You basically just described Kohlbergs Theory of Moral Reasoning. An alarming number of people get stuck in the earliest stages of moral development
https://www.education.com/reference/article/kohlbergs-moral-reasoning/
-
Can't help but laugh at the replies here.
A girl who did not consume a drop of alcohol is suspended and everyone here is fine with it.
I guess the law and order people are back. ::)
Pathetic.
-
Can't help but laugh at the replies here.
A girl who did not consume a drop of alcohol is suspended and everyone here is fine with it.
I guess the law and order people are back. ::)
Pathetic.
It’s pretty standard in high school codes of conduct that you can’t host a drinking party where underage people are drinking.
-
It’s pretty standard in high school codes of conduct that you can’t host a drinking party where underage people are drinking.
You're making things up. She did not host a drinking party. There were 12 guests and 4 brought alcohol - no one else consumed any.
From the replies here, I think most would prefer that she narc'ed on those 4.
-
You're making things up. She did not host a drinking party. There were 12 guests and 4 brought alcohol - no one else consumed any.
From the replies here, I think most would prefer that she narc'ed on those 4.
"Narc" sure... or you know, tell those 4 people she doesn't want to get in trouble and to get rid of it? We all know these kids are aware that what they were doing was not ok, and they chose to do it anyway. Most of us probably made similar poor decisions and may or may not have gotten caught. Regardless, there are consequences. They should accept those consequences and learn something from them, not file a lawsuit. What lesson is that teaching them instead?
-
You're making things up. She did not host a drinking party. There were 12 guests and 4 brought alcohol - no one else consumed any.
From the replies here, I think most would prefer that she narc'ed on those 4.
Uh. How am I making things up? She had a party at her house where others were drinking.
-
Uh. How am I making things up? She had a party at her house where others were drinking.
We know you are in trouble when you need to parse words.
-
"Narc" sure... or you know, tell those 4 people she doesn't want to get in trouble and to get rid of it? We all know these kids are aware that what they were doing was not ok, and they chose to do it anyway. Most of us probably made similar poor decisions and may or may not have gotten caught. Regardless, there are consequences. They should accept those consequences and learn something from them, not file a lawsuit. What lesson is that teaching them instead?
And if they didn't get rid of it?
-
We know you are in trouble when you need to parse words.
I’m not in trouble and I’m not parsing words. I literally said what she did. Twice now.
-
And if they didn't get rid of it?
Say "Get out of my house."
Most high school and college alcohol policies say that if you are in the same room as people consuming alcohol underage that you can be held responsible. She violated the rule.
-
And if they didn't get rid of it?
Well we can go into all sorts of what if scenarios here. What if they did? What if she associated with friends who listened to her? What if she had parents that she could be upfront with and talk to for guidance if they didn't get rid of it? We can play this game all night.
More important are the facts that we know. We know she hosted a party where kids were drinking. That by itself has always had repercussions. It's my belief that good parenting does not involve suing the school when their kid gets caught breaking the code of conduct that was agreed to. It's not like the kid is going to jail or getting expelled from school... she is being kept out of 4 soccer games. I believe parents should be teaching their children to accept the consequences of their actions.
-
Can't help but laugh at the replies here.
A girl who did not consume a drop of alcohol is suspended and everyone here is fine with it.
I guess the law and order people are back. ::)
Pathetic.
If you are driving a car, and someone else has an open alcohol container, you get arrested for an open container. Same thing if someone has crack on them. You get arrested for possession.
If people are doing illegal activities in your car/house, you are responsible, even if you didn't do anything.
-
Well we can go into all sorts of what if scenarios here. What if they did? What if she associated with friends who listened to her? What if she had parents that she could be upfront with and talk to for guidance if they didn't get rid of it? We can play this game all night.
More important are the facts that we know. We know she hosted a party where kids were drinking. That by itself has always had repercussions. It's my belief that good parenting does not involve suing the school when their kid gets caught breaking the code of conduct that was agreed to. It's not like the kid is going to jail or getting expelled from school... she is being kept out of 4 soccer games. I believe parents should be teaching their children to accept the consequences of their actions.
And teaching her what to do differently next time, so that she doesn't get suspended.
-
Words have meanings and there are consequences for one's actions. This isn't very hard unless you're hellbent on being ignorant for ignorant sake.
-
Yeah man, 100% four burnin' dem a knew won. O, butt if kin are involved, dat's a horse of another color. Dey wereant drinkin', just present. Don't touch mine 'cuz don't wanna negatively affect da college app. Parents, hey?
I have no idea what this says, but I'm sure I agree with every word (at least the parts that are actual words).
Seriously, I have little to no sympathy for those facing the consequences. Suing is absolutely ridiculous and I hope the lawsuit doesn't get dismissed immediately so the parents have a bunch of legal costs to pay.
And yes, I imagine the reactions of some folks (not necessarily here on Scoop but in the community there) would be different if the offending parties were not lily-white.
-
Chalk me up as also thinking the school meted out the right sentence.
She wasn't kicked off the team, she was suspended for 4 games. Heavens to Betsy, what an injustice, call the lawyers.
-
Kids will be kids. And actions have consequences. And lessons need to be learned.
-
Kids will be kids. And actions have consequences. And lessons need to be learned.
Depends who you are.
But, generally, actions SHOULD have consequences
-
And yes, I imagine the reactions of some folks (not necessarily here on Scoop but in the community there) would be different if the offending parties were not lily-white.
There’s a couple of ways to take that. Curious what you meant by that.
-
There’s a couple of ways to take that. Curious what you meant by that.
I mean plenty of white folks in a ritzy community would be shaking their heads at black athletes who were suspended for the exact same reason. Probably some of the same folks who are suing here.
-
I mean plenty of white folks in a ritzy community would be shaking their heads at black athletes who were suspended for the exact same reason. Probably some of the same folks who are suing here.
Nothing worse than stupid people with money.
-
I mean plenty of white folks in a ritzy community would be shaking their heads at black athletes who were suspended for the exact same reason. Probably some of the same folks who are suing here.
on the flip side is the kid from Milwaukee that got to play in the state tournament while he was waiting for his sentencing for felony armed robbery.
http://www.wisn.com/article/convicted-felon-will-participate-in-state-basketball-tournament/18929984 (http://www.wisn.com/article/convicted-felon-will-participate-in-state-basketball-tournament/18929984)
I'm guessing this dude was more important to his basketball team than the girl was to her soccer team.
For the record, IMO both of them should have been suspended.
-
on the flip side is the kid from Milwaukee that got to play in the state tournament while he was waiting for his sentencing for felony armed robbery.
http://www.wisn.com/article/convicted-felon-will-participate-in-state-basketball-tournament/18929984 (http://www.wisn.com/article/convicted-felon-will-participate-in-state-basketball-tournament/18929984)
I'm guessing this dude was more important to his basketball team than the girl was to her soccer team.
For the record, IMO both of them should have been suspended.
Based on the little bit I know about each situation (just from reading the links provided here), your conclusion seems correct.
-
It is none of the school's business what I am doing during non-school hours at a non-school function. That's my take on the situation.
When I was in high school a million years ago, a gym teacher at our school saw me (age 16) and a few of my 17 year old teammates in a bar (I didn't turn 17 my senior year until second half of school year). Drinking age was 18 but the world was a lot less strict about everything back then (late 70s). He told our basketball coach. No suspensions. Coach called a practice for 7 AM New Year's day and ran us like dogs for two hours. He was obviously hungover himself (I'd bet he rolled straight in from a New Year's Eve party himself). I'll admit it didn't teach me any lessons, but it did keep me from drinking on New Year's Eve. During my senior year of high school there was at least beer at every party, often with parents in attendance or at least aware of it. Much different world now.
-
It is none of the school's business what I am doing during non-school hours at a non-school function. That's my take on the situation.
When I was in high school a million years ago, a gym teacher at our school saw me (age 16) and a few of my 17 year old teammates in a bar (I didn't turn 17 my senior year until second half of school year). Drinking age was 18 but the world was a lot less strict about everything back then (late 70s). He told our basketball coach. No suspensions. Coach called a practice for 7 AM New Year's day and ran us like dogs for two hours. He was obviously hungover himself (I'd bet he rolled straight in from a New Year's Eve party himself). I'll admit it didn't teach me any lessons, but it did keep me from drinking on New Year's Eve. During my senior year of high school there was at least beer at every party, often with parents in attendance or at least aware of it. Much different world now.
So you think that the guy that was waiting for his armed robbery sentence should have been eligible? Unless he robbed the school or was cutting class to rob the place it would be none of the schools business, based on your reasoning.
As for your drinking stories, I think that just goes to show how we as a society have grown more strict about underage drinking (as we should have) as I can say that if that happened today, if your only reprimand was running and the coach knew that, he would be fired if the administration found out.
-
Chalk me up as also thinking the school meted out the right sentence.
She wasn't kicked off the team, she was suspended for 4 games. Heavens to Betsy, what an injustice, call the lawyers.
Agreed. The punishment is really a slap on the wrist. And will be concluded before they even see a judge. 4 games is like 2 weeks. Nothing on her permanent record. No school suspension. Nothing that will impact her future (college, jobs, etc.)
It is a relatively light punishment, which is appropriate for the action in question.
-
It is none of the school's business what I am doing during non-school hours at a non-school function. That's my take on the situation.
Generally, you're correct of course. Except that student athletes agree to a code of conduct which includes things off premises and during non-school hours.
Playing high school sports is a privilege. You are held to a higher standard than a normal student.
Call me old school, but when I played HS sports I knew I was representing the name on that jersey at all times. I took pride in that. And if I messed up (which of course I did, I was a teenager), I owned up to it. I didn't get my parents to sue the school.
-
It's Arrowhead, so that tells you something about the students/parents involved. This is a great example of white, upper-middle-class privilege. Every single time I hear a story about a high school drinking party (including one that got a huge portion of the junior class at the school where I teach suspended), it is always rich white families who just assume that they can get away with everything. On top of that, the whole idea of "suing the school" is an option that is only available to the most affluent of parents. This is a crap lawsuit. Take your suspension, learn your lesson, and don't let underage kids drink in your house anymore (that's on the parents).
The only privilege stronger in schools than white-rich privilege is really-good-athlete privilege, but that's another story entirely.
My daughter is a junior at Arrowhead. She played/plays two sports. I don't know who this student is or even if I know the family.
As soon as I saw the headline a few days ago my only thought was, "here we go again". I'd like to think it might say something about me but I've never had contact with parents that fit the stereotype that every single person outside of Hartland/Merton think every Arrowhead parent is like. It might also have something to do with the fact, although we are not poor by nearly any definition, that I don't live on a lake and every vehicle we own is at least 11 years old with at least 150,000 miles on it.
I'm not sure what goes through the minds of parents who would bring a suit like this. Maybe they think their daughter is good enough to get a soccer scholarship and the mean old Arrowhead administration is ripping from her mitts. I'm not suggesting that is a legitimate reason for the lawsuit, I'm just trying to comprehend the situation.
I have no point to this post other than to say, we aren't all like what you think we are like. Carry on.
-
It is none of the school's business what I am doing during non-school hours at a non-school function. That's my take on the situation.
When I was in high school a million years ago, a gym teacher at our school saw me (age 16) and a few of my 17 year old teammates in a bar (I didn't turn 17 my senior year until second half of school year). Drinking age was 18 but the world was a lot less strict about everything back then (late 70s). He told our basketball coach. No suspensions. Coach called a practice for 7 AM New Year's day and ran us like dogs for two hours. He was obviously hungover himself (I'd bet he rolled straight in from a New Year's Eve party himself). I'll admit it didn't teach me any lessons, but it did keep me from drinking on New Year's Eve. During my senior year of high school there was at least beer at every party, often with parents in attendance or at least aware of it. Much different world now.
There is much higher legal risk to having coaches dish out their own punishment for these types of things. That's why it's a different world.
-
I don't know enough about this case to opine about it being an indictment of white privilege, or an isolated nutball parent, or a genuine miscarriage of justice, but I will say this:
If I were these parents, and I won a judgment, I would buy a boat and name it Frivolous Lawsuit just to f#ck with people.
-
I’m not in trouble and I’m not parsing words. I literally said what she did. Twice now.
So if you host a dinner party at your house for 5 couples (assuming for the sake of discussion that you have no alcohol in your house), then if one couple brings a bottle of wine it means you are hosting an alcohol party?
-
So if you host a dinner party at your house for 5 couples (assuming for the sake of discussion that you have no alcohol in your house), then if one couple brings a bottle of wine it means you are hosting an alcohol party?
yes, it does actually.
-
So you think that the guy that was waiting for his armed robbery sentence should have been eligible? Unless he robbed the school or was cutting class to rob the place it would be none of the schools business, based on your reasoning.
If I pretend that drinking a beer and threatening someone's life are the same thing, then your comment makes a lot of sense.
Kids in high school are gonna drink. Accept it or don't. But don't make out like they are a bunch of unruly punks who should be punished at every step. It's part of the growing up process.
Obviously, I'm not a rule guy. I only had 2 simple rules for my kids when they were in high school.
1. When you are away from home, I want to know where you are at all times.
2. Never drink and drive. Ever. No mulligans on this one. I'll be up when you get home and if I even suspect it, your keys are mine until I arbitrarily decide to give them back to you. If you are at a party or a friend's house and even have one beer or wine cooler, you call your mother or I to pick you up.
Funny thing happened. They were usually the designated driver. Even though according to almost everyone here, they were simply rule breakers.
-
yes, it does actually.
So, all actions are defined by alcohol?
Wow. Who knew?
-
Funny thing happened. They were usually the designated driver. Even though according to almost everyone here, they were simply rule breakers.
Well if those were your only 2 rules for them than they weren't rule breakers as it related to you and it wouldn't have been right for you to hold them accountable.
They most likely were rule breakers of their school's rules and if the school found out they would have been well within their right to hold them accountable.
I don't think anyone is saying that this young woman is a horrible delinquent. She simply made a choice and is now being asked to accept the consequences of that choice. I don't think anyone wants her locked up but I don't think a 4 game suspension from an extra curricular activity is an overally harsh punishment. If it was a suspension from school I might think differently but not from an extra curricular.
-
So, all actions are defined by alcohol?
Wow. Who knew?
Your couple in question hosted the dinner at their home. That means the hosted the party.
If you, me and TAMU go to dinner at Sultan's house, and it's BYOB, sultan is still the host (a cheap-ass mf'er, but still the host). The 3 of us aren't the host, it's Sultan's crib.
Now, does that mean that legally Sultan is liable for TAMU getting drunk and killing someone in his car? Probably not, but there still is some vicarious liability on his part. He owned the home that the drinking occurred at, therefore he has some liability. Just like you and me have some liability for waking up that morning and going to Sultan's crib with some hootch of our own.
If the girl and her parents wanted to avoid the responsibility of hosting underage drinking, as soon as those other kids pulled out the beer, the girl and her parents should have tossed they asses out on the street. Not saying that that is the right thing to do, some parents want their kids to be drinking at home, that way the parents know where their kid is. Doesn't make it right or legal. Doesn't make the girl or her parents "cool."
But if you want to avoid things like suspensions for hosting a drinking party when you are a high school athlete that signed a code of conduct, then you got to put your foot down.
And God help me if me, Sultan, you and TAMU would ever drink together. That would be insufferable.
-
If I pretend that drinking a beer and threatening someone's life are the same thing
Rarely do high school kids stop at one beer. And so, if we're going to be realistic (accept it or don't) a high school kid after many beers can be threatening someone's life, whether it be others' or his/her own. about 2,500 people die every year because of an underage drunk driver. Several thousand more underage people die of alcohol poisoning every year.
Kids in high school are gonna drink. Accept it or don't. But don't make out like they are a bunch of unruly punks who should be punished at every step. It's part of the growing up process.
This is true. It's also true that responsible adults shouldn't condone, sanction or permit it.
Funny thing happened. They were usually the designated driver. Even though according to almost everyone here, they were simply rule breakers.
Pretty sure no one here said that.
-
So if you host a dinner party at your house for 5 couples (assuming for the sake of discussion that you have no alcohol in your house), then if one couple brings a bottle of wine it means you are hosting an alcohol party?
LOL. Are you serious? You are hung up on "drinking party?"
"We know you are in trouble when you need to parse words."
-
Well if those were your only 2 rules for them than they weren't rule breakers as it related to you and it wouldn't have been right for you to hold them accountable.
They most likely were rule breakers of their school's rules and if the school found out they would have been well within their right to hold them accountable.
I Agee TAMU. But, those 2 rules were not created in a vacuum. There were many discussions about alcohol and drugs as well as right and wrong as they grew up. They knew what was expected by my wife and I.
I think maybe where my disagreement with everyone here is that I don't equate rules with right and wrong. Rules are often simply there for the convenience of the rule maker.
But I hope no one here is taking this as an endorsement of alcohol use by minors. As I said, it was discussed many times before they reached high school age.
-
I definitely agree that rules are not always about right and wrong. If a rule is unjust, it should be challenged. I don't find this rule unjust.
-
My kids sign an athletic code that calls for complete abstinence for the school year for all athletes. The school has the right (not a US school) to take a urine, blood, or hair sample at any time. The policy is zero tolerance - immediate expulsion - and if drugs are involved - reporting to the authorities.
I think this is an awesome policy.
Actually saw a family in Singapore asked to leave the country a day after their international school kid got caught with drugs. They really didn't have a choice...your kid did this, here's the proof, you have been terminated from your job, your work permit expires today, and you have 6 hours to leave the country...
Moral of the story (to me) - this is a FAMILY thing, not just a "teenager" thing, and the whole family is responsible for the success or failure of the teenager. Actually the community, not just the family.
-
I definitely agree that rules are not always about right and wrong. If a rule is unjust, it should be challenged. I don't find this rule unjust.
Funny thing is - I don't either. But all is not black & white in our world. If she asked them to bring beer, and they got caught, well too bad. Take the punishment.
If they brought beer and she didn't know they were going to do it..... and, didn't partake, then the rules need to be changed.
-
Nah, coulda said to her friends, "either the beer goes, or you do."
-
Funny thing is - I don't either. But all is not black & white in our world. If she asked them to bring beer, and they got caught, well too bad. Take the punishment.
If they brought beer and she didn't know they were going to do it..... and, didn't partake, then the rules need to be changed.
Nah, coulda said to her friends, "either the beer goes, or you do."
Exactly
-
Funny thing is - I don't either. But all is not black & white in our world. If she asked them to bring beer, and they got caught, well too bad. Take the punishment.
If they brought beer and she didn't know they were going to do it..... and, didn't partake, then the rules need to be changed.
I personally believe that the rules, the code of conduct and the consequences in this case were all sound. However, I can at least understand why a parent may disagree, as you do. Perhaps these parents believe their child did the right thing by simply not partaking and even justifies their belief by saying that at least their child didn't let them drink and drive perhaps (I made that detail up, but just saying they probably have ways of justifying it as right).
However, none of that explains why they'd go to the lengths they are by filing a lawsuit. You take a teachable moment about social contracts, discussing underage drinking, standing up against your peers when they're doing something you know is wrong (or at least can get you in trouble) and so much more and instead turn it into a lesson that you can do whatever you want and mom and dad will always back you up.
It could have been a real growing up moment for this girl and instead she's come down with a case of affluenza.
-
If I pretend that drinking a beer and threatening someone's life are the same thing, then your comment makes a lot of sense.
Kids in high school are gonna drink. Accept it or don't. But don't make out like they are a bunch of unruly punks who should be punished at every step. It's part of the growing up process.
Obviously, I'm not a rule guy. I only had 2 simple rules for my kids when they were in high school.
1. When you are away from home, I want to know where you are at all times.
2. Never drink and drive. Ever. No mulligans on this one. I'll be up when you get home and if I even suspect it, your keys are mine until I arbitrarily decide to give them back to you. If you are at a party or a friend's house and even have one beer or wine cooler, you call your mother or I to pick you up.
Funny thing happened. They were usually the designated driver. Even though according to almost everyone here, they were simply rule breakers.
That's all well and good.
But if a kid signs a code of conduct, they should be expected to abide by it. It is really as simple as that. Or are we teaching them that their word means nothing?
I was by no means anti-drinking in high school. I had friends (non athletes) who drank year round. I just avoided social situations where it could land me on the bench for a few games. I drank (though not often) or went to parties where there was drinking (more often) during the summer between my junior and senior year, and after I graduated, when I knew the code of conduct was not in force. Hanging out with my teammates and not drinking was honestly way more fun anyway, as those were my closest friends. Any sacrifice I made in this regard I more than made up for during my time at Marquette.
If you want to be able to drink, or hang out with people who do, don't play sports, don't sign the code of conduct. You have a choice. No one is saying this girl should be tarred and feathered and dragged through the streets. But sitting four games is a great teachable moment. The fact that the parents come down on the side of suing the school is insane.
I had fun as a kid. But I honored my commitment to my team and the code I signed. My word meant something to me.
-
Nah, coulda said to her friends, "either the beer goes, or you do."
Bingo
-
That's all well and good.
But if a kid signs a code of conduct, they should be expected to abide by it. It is really as simple as that. Or are we teaching them that their word means nothing?
I was by no means anti-drinking in high school. I had friends (non athletes) who drank year round. I just avoided social situations where it could land me on the bench for a few games. I drank (though not often) or went to parties where there was drinking (more often) during the summer between my junior and senior year, and after I graduated, when I knew the code of conduct was not in force. Hanging out with my teammates and not drinking was honestly way more fun anyway, as those were my closest friends. Any sacrifice I made in this regard I more than made up for during my time at Marquette.
If you want to be able to drink, or hang out with people who do, don't play sports, don't sign the code of conduct. You have a choice. No one is saying this girl should be tarred and feathered and dragged through the streets. But sitting four games is a great teachable moment. The fact that the parents come down on the side of suing the school is insane.
I had fun as a kid. But I honored my commitment to my team and the code I signed. My word meant something to me.
As a society, we demonstrate over and over and over again that someone's word doesn't mean anything. And has no significant consequences.
Why should this girl be punished when others go without punishment?
(I actually do believe she should be punished. Just like I believe others should as well)
-
As a parent I have had very real and painful experiences with respect to forcing my kids to face consequences of their actions - some that have involved schools, of course, but also courts, temporary institutionalization and forcing one kid out of the house (at 19) because I could not guarantee the safety of my other children (or myself) with him living there. At the same time, I worked tirelessly on their behalf to get them any help that they needed to resolve their problems and face their realities.
As a society it seems that people work very hard to shift blame to someone other than themselves. Don't get me started on tort reform, but when a woman can get $ millions from McDonald's because they should have warned her that her coffee was hot before she put it between her legs to drive off, we have gone too far. We see this kind of thing day after day and it marginalizes cases where people were truly and badly damaged by someone else's negligence.
My husband always urges me to fight every parking or speeding ticket that I get (not that many, but over 35 years they add up...), but my reasoning has always been, "Why? I was speeding, and paying this fine is a small price to pay for all the times I have exceeded the speed limit and not been caught."
I think all parents want to save their kids from the consequences of life, whether it's burning their hand when they touch a hot stove or performing 100 hours of community service when they are caught shoplifting. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Suing because your kid broke a rule that was likely clearly discussed prior to the season and getting a suspension that was also likely discussed as a consequence is teaching your kids to ignore rules.
God I feel old writing this. "Kids these days.....!"
-
As a society it seems that people work very hard to shift blame to someone other than themselves. Don't get me started on tort reform, but when a woman can get $ millions from McDonald's because they should have warned her that her coffee was hot before she put it between her legs to drive off, we have gone too far. We see this kind of thing day after day and it marginalizes cases where people were truly and badly damaged by someone else's negligence.
I agree with your comments on accepting responsibility, but the coffee case has been badly misrepresented. Regardless of the merits of the case, she didn't get $ millions. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants
-
So you think that the guy that was waiting for his armed robbery sentence should have been eligible? Unless he robbed the school or was cutting class to rob the place it would be none of the schools business, based on your reasoning.
Something that happens in your home where there are no consequences and basically someone had to "tell on" the attendees for the school to find out is Big Brother crap we don't need. I think forcing kids to sign those behavior documents to participate in sports is BS. Keep your grades and attendance where it needs to be and no behavioral problems in school, OK. It is your parents job to teach you right from wrong. I will say that my stance would change for a felony. But kids being kids is different. What's a girl's soccer season? 12-15 games? Taking a way a third to a quarter of her season to me is harsh punishment.
If I was that girl's parents I'd have gone to the school to argue her case and try to work out an alternate punishment, but I certainly would not have sued.
As for getting caught in my first foray into a bar as told above, our coach did tell us if he heard about that stuff happening again, that would be it for any of us. As far as I know, my parents never found out. They'd have meted out a tougher punishment than any school would.
-
Something that happens in your home where there are no consequences and basically someone had to "tell on" the attendees for the school to find out is Big Brother crap we don't need. I think forcing kids to sign those behavior documents to participate in sports is BS. Keep your grades and attendance where it needs to be and no behavioral problems in school, OK. It is your parents job to teach you right from wrong. I will say that my stance would change for a felony. But kids being kids is different. What's a girl's soccer season? 12-15 games? Taking a way a third to a quarter of her season to me is harsh punishment.
If I was that girl's parents I'd have gone to the school to argue her case and try to work out an alternate punishment, but I certainly would not have sued.
As for getting caught in my first foray into a bar as told above, our coach did tell us if he heard about that stuff happening again, that would be it for any of us. As far as I know, my parents never found out. They'd have meted out a tougher punishment than any school would.
The lawsuit does not state how officials found out about the party, but if all attendee's were friends I doubt any student narced, which would suggest that the police would have been contacted. That may have been just a noise complaint initially, but once the police show up, I would be very concerned if they turned a blind eye, so the response was appropriate.
Being on a team is a privilege, not a right, so any behavior documents are absolutely the right way to go about it. If people know that there are real consequences, they are less likely to commit violations.
The season is 16 games long and the suspension was issued on Feb 23rd, which means that she would have missed a quarter of the season, and have been back by any postseason. Very reasonable if you ask me.
-
I personally believe that the rules, the code of conduct and the consequences in this case were all sound. However, I can at least understand why a parent may disagree, as you do. Perhaps these parents believe their child did the right thing by simply not partaking and even justifies their belief by saying that at least their child didn't let them drink and drive perhaps (I made that detail up, but just saying they probably have ways of justifying it as right).
However, none of that explains why they'd go to the lengths they are by filing a lawsuit. You take a teachable moment about social contracts, discussing underage drinking, standing up against your peers when they're doing something you know is wrong (or at least can get you in trouble) and so much more and instead turn it into a lesson that you can do whatever you want and mom and dad will always back you up.
It could have been a real growing up moment for this girl and instead she's come down with a case of affluenza.
I agree with all you say.
-
That's all well and good.
But if a kid signs a code of conduct, they should be expected to abide by it. It is really as simple as that. Or are we teaching them that their word means nothing?
I was by no means anti-drinking in high school. I had friends (non athletes) who drank year round. I just avoided social situations where it could land me on the bench for a few games. I drank (though not often) or went to parties where there was drinking (more often) during the summer between my junior and senior year, and after I graduated, when I knew the code of conduct was not in force. Hanging out with my teammates and not drinking was honestly way more fun anyway, as those were my closest friends. Any sacrifice I made in this regard I more than made up for during my time at Marquette.
If you want to be able to drink, or hang out with people who do, don't play sports, don't sign the code of conduct. You have a choice. No one is saying this girl should be tarred and feathered and dragged through the streets. But sitting four games is a great teachable moment. The fact that the parents come down on the side of suing the school is insane.
I had fun as a kid. But I honored my commitment to my team and the code I signed. My word meant something to me.
This is not meant as an attack, but rather as a serious question.
Why did you feel it was OK to break the law, but wrong to break a code of conduct? I bring this up simply as a way to point out that the issues are not always black & white as others here seem to think (your response seems more reasoned) and we all have to make our own judgments.
-
Don't get me started on tort reform, but when a woman can get $ millions from McDonald's because they should have warned her that her coffee was hot before she put it between her legs to drive off, we have gone too far. We see this kind of thing day after day and it marginalizes cases where people were truly and badly damaged by someone else's negligence.
I am someone who absolutely hates frivolous lawsuits and verdicts; am a big proponent of tort reform; and also happen to be a defense attorney that has spent most of my career fighting frivolous lawsuits against businesses (although admittedly, not products liability). Having offered that prefatory statement: pretty much everything you said about that case is incorrect. I spent many years complaining about the McDonald's coffee case...then I read about it. There are many, many examples out there of an utterly broken tort system. In my personal opinion, Liebeck v. McDonalds isn't one of them.
-
This is not meant as an attack, but rather as a serious question.
Why did you feel it was OK to break the law, but wrong to break a code of conduct? I bring this up simply as a way to point out that the issues are not always black & white as others here seem to think (your response seems more reasoned) and we all have to make our own judgments.
This really isn't that hard. I've already alluded to it multiple times. It has to do with integrity, not laws or rules.
A code of conduct was willingly entered into. It was an agreement. Yes, it was the price to play high school sports, and perhaps it is an unfair price, but everyone who agrees still has a choice. No one is forced to play high school sports and abide by a code of conduct.
The law was imposed on me. According to Aquinas, an unjust law is no law at all. A law that says a person can die for their country but not have a beer is an unjust law (I did not serve in the military, but my feeling on the law is the same for being old enough to vote, enter into a contract, etc.). Thus I have no moral qualms about breaking it, so far as I am not harming anyone else.
Breaking an agreement I freely and willingly entered into is a breach of my word. It is a breach of my integrity. It is going back on a promise to my coach and teammates.
I don't think this girl is an awful person. She's probably a normal teenager. I just wish her parents used this as a learning opportunity rather than turn it into a lawsuit.
-
I am someone who absolutely hates frivolous lawsuits and verdicts; am a big proponent of tort reform; and also happen to be a defense attorney that has spent most of my career fighting frivolous lawsuits against businesses (although admittedly, not products liability). Having offered that prefatory statement: pretty much everything you said about that case is incorrect. I spent many years complaining about the McDonald's coffee case...then I read about it. There are many, many examples out there of an utterly broken tort system. In my personal opinion, Liebeck v. McDonalds isn't one of them.
agreed. most of the "headline" grabbing jury verdicts for insane amounts of money are reduced on appeal.
-
This really isn't that hard. I've already alluded to it multiple times. It has to do with integrity, not laws or rules.
A code of conduct was willingly entered into. It was an agreement. Yes, it was the price to play high school sports, and perhaps it is an unfair price, but everyone who agrees still has a choice. No one is forced to play high school sports and abide by a code of conduct.
The law was imposed on me. According to Aquinas, an unjust law is no law at all. A law that says a person can die for their country but not have a beer is an unjust law (I did not serve in the military, but my feeling on the law is the same for being old enough to vote, enter into a contract, etc.). Thus I have no moral qualms about breaking it, so far as I am not harming anyone else.
Breaking an agreement I freely and willingly entered into is a breach of my word. It is a breach of my integrity. It is going back on a promise to my coach and teammates.
I don't think this girl is an awful person. She's probably a normal teenager. I just wish her parents used this as a learning opportunity rather than turn it into a lawsuit.
Thanks for the reply
-
Fine with it provided they would uphold the same standard to a Star football or basketball player. I think it's harsh, I believe ours was a two game suspension at my high school, but it's the rules and she agreed
-
Fine with it provided they would uphold the same standard to a Star football or basketball player. I think it's harsh, I believe ours was a two game suspension at my high school, but it's the rules and she agreed
That would be an interesting wrinkle. What if the lawsuit was alleging discrimination by the school because they let star male athletes get away with the same infraction but not their female soccer player? Would people think that lawsuit is less frivolous?
-
Nah, coulda said to her friends, "either the beer goes, or you do."
coulda been a lot worse-how many games for drinking beer in a hot tub, eyn'er? better call saul![ /color]
-
coulda been a lot worse-how many games for drinking beer in a hot tub, eyn'er? better call saul![ /color]
Huh?
-
Fine with it provided they would uphold the same standard to a Star football or basketball player. I think it's harsh, I believe ours was a two game suspension at my high school, but it's the rules and she agreed
Our punishment was a game for the first offense and it gained severity from there. Perhaps this was not her first time breaking their code.
-
Deerfield couple convicted for allowing underage drinking in the home
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-07-22/news/0707210566_1_sara-hutsell-underage-drinking-drinking-game
-
Huh?
does the name mark chmura ring any bells? hartland arrowhead post prom party
-
does the name mark chmura ring any bells? hartland arrowhead post prom party
You’re surprised that no one got your vague reference to an incident from nearly 20 years ago?
-
My daughter is a junior at Arrowhead. She played/plays two sports. I don't know who this student is or even if I know the family.
As soon as I saw the headline a few days ago my only thought was, "here we go again". I'd like to think it might say something about me but I've never had contact with parents that fit the stereotype that every single person outside of Hartland/Merton think every Arrowhead parent is like. It might also have something to do with the fact, although we are not poor by nearly any definition, that I don't live on a lake and every vehicle we own is at least 11 years old with at least 150,000 miles on it.
I'm not sure what goes through the minds of parents who would bring a suit like this. Maybe they think their daughter is good enough to get a soccer scholarship and the mean old Arrowhead administration is ripping from her mitts. I'm not suggesting that is a legitimate reason for the lawsuit, I'm just trying to comprehend the situation.
I have no point to this post other than to say, we aren't all like what you think we are like. Carry on.
MUENG, you're right, I shouldn't have made such a biased assumption.
That said, suing the school over a four game suspension is white (or at least wealth) privilege, and I stand by that.
Students at my school got busted last fall for a drinking party (they got caught because students were talking about how a girl blacked out in front of a teacher who was concerned about the girl's safety...not narcs). The group of students involved were nearly all white, middle-class, tuition-paying honors students. I think they got one day suspensions from school and a few got sports suspensions. They acted like it was the end of the world. Kids were crying in the hallways, parents came in to complain, students worried about not getting in to college. It was a huge drama-fest.
When your biggest concern in life is a one-time drinking party suspension (where you got your friend so drunk they blacked out...), while there are other kids dealing with dads in jail, homelessness, domestic abuse, parenting their siblings, or living with a dying grandmother (all issues I see in my current students), that is white/wealth privilege.
There's only one privilege that goes beyond white/wealth privilege in schools, and that's "really really good at sports" privilege. We have a student with Div 1. scholarship offers who basically forced an ex-girlfriend to transfer out, got caught sexting pics to dozens of students, and had weed in his locker that has amazingly not been kicked out. But hey, those football games don't win themselves.
-
does the name mark chmura ring any bells? hartland arrowhead post prom party
Catholic Memorial not Arrowhead.
-
You’re surprised that no one got your vague reference to an incident from nearly 20 years ago?
nope-glad i could help though
-
Catholic Memorial not Arrowhead.
sorry, you are correct the incident happened out in hartland. the girl at least was from memorial-my oldest son's class as a matter of fact