<p>What makes you think that student suspended for cheating in high school would repeat that behavior in college? But, a cheating suspension would certainly be a “deal-breaker” at any elite college I can think of, barring some extraordinary rehabilitative circumstances. Yet, these very some colleges don’t even bat an eyelash at high school drinking sanctions. Why? Because cheating is “unacceptable behavior”, while drinking is not only deemed to be acceptable by elite colleges, but they often market to a drinking crowd with explicit promotion of exclusive social drinking clubs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Baloney. At many elite colleges, 25% of the students are frequent binge drinkers, i.e. more than once a week.</p>
<p>The correlation with high school drinking is unmistakable.</p>
<p>47% of the students who binge drink in high school become frequent binge drinkers in college compared to only 12% of the students who did not binge drink in high school.</p>
<p>If colleges really cared about reducing the destructive drinking on campus, looking at indicators of high school drunkeness would be one of their top admissions priorities.</p>
<p>IDad- are you mentally challenged, or just being dense? You have totally missed my point. Of course the high school drinker is going to drink in college. So what? This still doesn’t mean he or she is “a drunk”.<br>
Are you trying to say a college will admit a kid who is KNOWN to be the type of drunk you are describing? That is what your post says. You’re crazy.
I’ll try to say it again- A suspension for high school drinking is NOT an indicator of binge drinking in high school OR college.</p>
<p>I am saying that elite colleges specifically target, and market to, populations with atypically high rates of high-school and college binge drinking. I am saying that elite colleges ignore warning flags when presented and practice a tacit “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy with some of their targeted high schools. I am saying that elite colleges are unwilling to take obvious steps to significantly curtail the number of drunks being admitted to their schools.</p>
<p>thanks for the links, jasmom. I printed out the BAC chart for a friend who has struggled with alcohol abuse. I found this incident disturbing because I read lucifer’s posts about drinking after his death, but before I realized he was the student who died. It totally freaked me out! I don’t drink because of a history of alcoholism in the family and medications I’m taking, but I had thought I would probably drink moderately in college for social reasons. Now I realize there are better ways to overcome shyness.</p>
<p>InterestedDad, we simply are not on the same wavelength. You keep referring to high school “drunks”. I definitely think that kids with an ongoing problem or binge drinking and the like are a problem and I would imagine there are more than one flag in their record. But in any case, I do not see how you keep equating a kid who got caught with ONE drink and had ONE suspension as being a “high school drunk.” Believe me, I am NOT condoning drinking by high schoolers whatsoever and feel 99.999 % certain my kids did not drink in high school, nor truly had many opportunities to be in such situations. I am not saying “kids will be kids.” I’m asking you to read the roundtable discussion on CC by adcoms about how high school SUSPENSIONS are viewed on an application. For some students, this MIGHT derail their application but adcoms seem to discern about the nature of the infraction and when it took place, if there were repeat occurances, who it affected, and what retribution or improvements were made and other character references. I’m not condoning a kid who made a mistake. I told you my own niece got caught with a beer on a school trip and was dealt with severely. I felt she should have had consequences of course! She showed poor judgement and knew the rules. It was her first and only HS infraction and I think she paid dearly for it…because besides suspension, she couldn’t even attend her graduation. However, let’s not forget how many others who have had a drink in high school or made a mistake. Does that make it right? Of course not! But some get caught, some don’t. Adcoms will weigh the severity of the mistake a kid made in high school. Cheating will be viewed differently. One time being caught with a drink will be viewed differently than ongoing issues, passing out, driving drunk, etc. What a student did to turn that around also will be scrutinized. Believe me, a kid with no infractions is gonna do better with college admissions. But if you read what the adcoms say in that link I gave you, they don’t deny an applicant over one mistake on their record, depending on the mistake. Kids, even adults, make poor decisions and mistakes of judgement. I don’t think they need to have a huge consequence for one infraction, certainly not denied at college. That is DIFFERENT than taking on a kid with known alcohol or drug issues and so forth. I think a kid like that will likely have many flags on the app and the guidance counselor or others may say so. But please don’t equate every kid who did something wrong, such as be caught at a party (which IS wrong, yes) as being a “drunk”. My kids are now in college, and I know they have now had drinks but neither is interested in getting drunk, nor has the time or inclination. While I know they have had drinks socially at college, I certainly don’t think of THEM as “drunks”…I don’t think they have gotten drunk or sick from drinking, nor is drinking an important part of their life. I am cognizant that it is part of college social life but it doesn’t rule their life. They did not drink in high school. I am not saying drinking is OK but simply that a kid who has been caught having a drink, is not necessarily a kid with an alcohol problem or a “drunk”. I’m not condoning it but clearly your classification of all kids who ever had a drink as being a “drunk” is a big jump.</p>
<p>In your last post, you talked about colleges not admitting drunks or binge drinkers. I would say that is a good point but that is DIFFERENT from earlier when we were discussing a kid with one suspension for being caught with a drink at an event or party and how you were appalled a college would admit a kid who got that suspension. You made a leap calling someone in that situation a drunk or a binge drinker. Let’s not mix up that we originally were discussing a kid who appeared to have had issues with alcohol. We have that information but the college may only have known of one suspension for being caught with a drink. Those are not the same bits of information. Someone caught with one drink on ONE occasion does not imply that person is a drunk or binge drinker. Even I have a drink now and again and I’m not a drunk or binge drinker! True, I drink legally and that is an issue, of course and not comparable but still the use of the word “drunk” is comparable and so is the jump to binge drinking as a classification of all kids caught with a drink and a suspension.</p>
<p>By the way, you keep talking about this with relation to elite colleges but in my neck of the woods, lots of kids attend UVM which has been known to be a party school though over the years they have worked very hard to move away from this reputation and have done a lot of work in that area. But my point is that kids who drink in college are not just kids at elite colleges, nor just kids from certain affluent communities. My kids’ peers in high school were NOT affluent.</p>
<p>MOWC, in press interviews, lucifer’s grandfather has stated that lucifer had a known drinking problem.</p>
<p>I have to say, a 10 day suspension, a child compelled to repeatedly post pro-binge drinking comments on a parent’s board–these are warning signals–as is a DUI, an arrest for possession and so on.</p>
<p>Yes, kids drink. They often drink too much. When they do drink too much, it helps if they are able to distinguish the risks. It helps if they are honest about the drinking and drug problems of their buddies. Parents can really help in that department.</p>
<p>A kid with a drink in his hand and his head in the sand is a bad combination. A kid with a flask in his hand who is pounding his head into the sand, a la lucifer, is the most frightening combination of all.</p>
<p>I want to hear the stories. I want to say that when you, or so and so throws up, that qualifies as binge drinking. I want to say to my teens that ALL binge drinking is a worry. It’s amazing how many 17 to 19 year olds don’t know that ALL binge drinking is a worry.</p>
<p>I know that, Cheers, but I doubt it was known to Cornell at the time they admitted him. Besides, ID is not talking about Lucifer- he is saying that any high school kid who has a drink would poison the community at whatever college is negligent enough to admit him or her.</p>
<p>Well, idad has one brilliant perfect daughter and no sons. He lives in a dream world, lucky man.</p>
<p>However, since Cornell would roll over and die before they admitted a girl with a 10 day drinking suspension, I too find that admit suspect. Again, it shows the shallow depth of the pool of academically able 17 year old boys.</p>
<p>Before you singe me about my kids drinking, idad, one of mine is legal and the other will be legal in six months–in their home country.</p>
<p>Cheers, the point I think MOWC and I were making is that WE know this kid had alcohol issues (just read his posts for starters) but we are commenting that if all Cornell knew was he had one suspension for one infraction in high school, that doesn’t mean they had the whole picture. Based on JUST that information on ANY kid, one suspension, one time getting caught, is not the same as knowingly admitting a “drunk” or “binge drinker”. The fact that the suspension was ten days does not mean so much because each school has different policies and consequences for a first offense. For instance, the consequences my niece got…several days suspension, no prom, no graduation, among other things was harsher than a FIRST offense at our school which has a pretty strict policy as it is. I don’t know the case at Lucifer’s school but we were simply commenting that one infraction, one school disciplinary consequence does not equate to a “drunk”. Now, this person may have had huge alcohol problems but we were just saying that the only information on record being discussed was one suspension and why fault Cornell for admitting a kid with one disciplinary suspension…that is not the same as them admitting someone with all these flags and poor recs and what not. InterestedDad WAS talking about any kid who had a drink in HS (again, I do NOT condone that behavior) would be a poor college admit and such a kid was also equated with “drunk” and “binge drinker”. Whatever else we may know about this kid or another kid was not the point but merely what Cornell knew and if they only knew of one infraction wtih one suspension, that is not always a deal breaker for college…note the adcoms’ take on this on the roundtable discussion I posted a link for on CC. </p>
<p>I do not think that every kid who ever had a drink in HS is a poor choice for a college admit (we’d have to deny admission to a lot of kids too). I do think a kid with many problems on record where adults have raised an issue is a potential problem and I am sure some of those kids with such records do have a harder time with admissions. But some kids who have made a mistake such as had a drink at a party but who then did some things to learn from that mistake is simply a kid growing up who has done something not too good but has also turned the situation around. I don’t think every mistake a kid ever made should then mar their chances of ever doing something down the line like getting into college. It depends on the severity of the mistake and the improvements since that time and how others who work with him think of him. I’m not talking at all about Lucifer now but just about kids with a mistake or blemish or suspension on record. Yeah, they truly are not the same as the kids who managed to do everything right and they did pay a price but how big that price is should be relative to the infraction. One time getting caught is not necessarily a bad bad kid with a big problem. It could be but it may not be. And for the kid who made one poor decision, does he not get accepted to college but some of the many of the other kids who did the very same dumb thing but who did not get caught get to go to college? I just do not equate a kid who had a drink in HS, (again, NOT a good thing, and not condoned) should then be damned forever for that mistake, particularly if he/she got a wake up call and didn’t do it again. That is why I was saying that one suspension may not be cause to keep someone out. Just because we know MORE information about a kid who had an alcohol problem, doesn’t mean the college knew all of that information too. This is hindsight a bit because we know the story more (and not really all of it of course) but colleges only know what is presented to them by the student, the teachers, the guidance counselor.</p>
<p>For all we know Lucifer didn’t even disclose his suspension to Cornell!<br>
It is not necessarily something the school would mention- it is up to the student applicant to answer the question truthfully.</p>
<p>I never said anything even remotely like that. </p>
<p>When I talk about “drunks”, I’m talking about drunks. You know, kids who say that 10 drinks in a night is no big deal. Kids who chug hard liquor. Or line up 21 shots on their birthday. Kids who vomit in their hall. Kids who blackout. Kids who smear feces. Kids who binge drink multiple times per week. Kids who end up in hospitals with 0.40 BAC levels. I don’t know what else you can legitimately call these kids but “drunks”. What do you guys call them?</p>
<p>We aren’t talking normal drinking behavior here. By their own survey numbers, Dartmouth says that 51% of their students vomited from alcohol in a private setting (bathroom) in a year. 19% vomited in public. 11% vomited so they could drink more. 27% that year had blacked out from drinking.</p>
<p>Think about those numbers. Did half the people you know vomit from alcohol last year? Did one out of five vomit in public? Did one out of four have an alcohol blackout?</p>
<p>We aren’t talking about a kid having one drink! We are talking drunks. As in Otis the Town Drunk drunk. We are talking a situation where elite colleges need to take a very hard look at the students they are admitting because they are admitting a staggering number of drunks.</p>
<p>I refer to elite colleges because they are in the eviable position of having five to twenty applicants for every slot in the freshman class. They don’t have to enroll the drunks if they don’t want to.</p>
<p>C’mon friends…look at some of these statements…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>IMHO these statments are harsh and overly critical of someone who is making some VERY valid points. </p>
<p>I am NOT “crazy.” I am NOT “mentally challenged” or “dense,” and I have three kids of each gender who are decidedly NOT perfect, and I stand in FULL agreement with much of ID is saying here.</p>
<p>Silly me, I <em>thought</em> even ONE blemish on my son’s record would put his chances of acceptance to a good school at risk, so I basically told him to NOT DO ANYTHING that could result in such a scar on his disciplinary record. But I really didn’t HAVE to tell him, as he was very careful with both his academic and disciplinary record for his own intrinsic purposes. </p>
<p>Like ID, I do not understand WHY a school, ANY school, would choose to admit a student who had received a drug/alcohol related suspension over an equally qualified applicant who had not. We all know that in most cases, the ONE suspension only reflects getting caught the ONE time…not that the behavior has only taken place the ONE time.</p>
<p>I think the reason that ID mentions elite schools in particular (and feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, ID) is because of the unique and highly competitive nature of those admissions. Those schools have vast pools of qualified applicants from which to choose their classes, and to me, it would make good sense to pick not only the most qualified academically, but also the “least risky” socially…the ones who have NOT demonstated early abuse of alcohol. </p>
<p>The fact is, parents who have NOT (yet at least) had kids who have abused alcohol are equally qualified to speak on this matter. Our having been spared this particular heartache does not render us “in denial” or “blind” or “dense” or “smug.” I think I can speak for many of us when I say that I am NOT just concerned about MY kids and my kids’ safety. I am concerned with EVERYONE’S kids and with the safety of the environment into which I have entrusted my beloved child for four years. This problem is ALL OF OURS. Please don’t encourage friction between the “been theres” and the “haven’t been theres.” We need to work together to solve this most perplexing and dangerous problem.</p>
interesteddad, count me as one who thinks you do make some valid points. </p>
<p>But what I want you to know is this. Kids who do the things I have excerpted from your posts may be kids like mine - one-timers, first timers, whatever you want to call them.</p>
<p>Agreed that if they binge multiple times per week, agreed that if they defend the idea that 10 drinks are ok, maybe we can accurately call them drunks. But what I emphatically and violenetly disagree on is that kids who get into the terrible terrible troulbe of high blood alcohol level, kids who vomit, kids who blackout are kids who are drunks, kids we can identify beforehand.</p>
<p>Kids who chug liquor, kids who end up lying in a bed of vomit, kids who fall down stairs, kids who end up in the ER with alcohol poisoning could be kids like Alumother’s and mine. Kids who do something very very foolish for the first or second time. Kids like Your kid. It can happen. It did happen to Alumother and me. There but for the grace of god could go you. And you had really better believe it.</p>
<p>Here’s the deal…You are right. ABSOLUTELY right with what you said above. No doubt. But, here’s where we differ…I tell my children, </p>
<p>“There are some mistakes you can afford to make. Mistakes are a part of life, and we ALL make them, adults included. BUT…there are some mistakes that you simply CANNOT afford to make–such as, driving drunk and taking the life of an innocent person. THAT is an irreparable mistake. It cannot be fixed, and no amount of regret or punishment will provide restitution.”</p>
<p>There is NOTHING wrong with a kid’s having to endure the consequences of a serious mistake. It is how we LEARN. If my son had acquired an alcohol-related suspension in h.s. and had been denied acceptance to an elite school because of it, I would have told him, “Well, learn from that mistake. Go to a different school for undergrad, and then try for a more elite grad school.” THAT would have made an impact on him. THAT would have shown him that serious mistakes can have dire consequences. </p>
<p>What does it tell our kids when they can do this stuff repeatedly and it has NO EFFECT on their college acceptances? And we wonder WHY this behavior continues?</p>
<p>ID…well, I certainly agree with you about admitting known drunks. But that is not what I was reading in earlier posts and so it seems like we might be misreading one another, I don’t know. </p>
<p>Berurah, I’m with you on a lot of what you are saying. Afterall, I also had kids who did not engage in these behaviors in high school and so of course, I think a kid with a record with no blemishes should be a more attractive candidate than one who has a discipinary infraction (and THAT was what we were discussing, not drunks, but simply if a college only had on record a suspension for being caught with a drink). Kids with suspensions ARE going to be less attractive on paper. But not every mistake or suspension is looked in the same way and sometimes there are still compelling reasons to accept a student who has one negative thing, one disciplinary action and nothing else (not talking drunks now or known problems). Colleges will look at the whole picture. Perhaps the student wrote thoughtfully about the mistake and did some counseling and others vouch for a clean record since the infraction. I’m just saying that a suspension doesn’t always derail an applicant. Before we were talking about that. That is not the same discussion as a college knowing of an ongoing problem with a student who is an alcholic and so forth. Sometimes, when a student has made a mistake and has articulated the lessons learned, that student is forgiven and there is hope the child has taken from that mistake and started over. </p>
<p>Colleges ask for this information and assess it. SOME students with one blemish may very well be worthy candidates who have actually benefitted in some way from their mistakes. Others may not have. These situations are weighed and honesty is what they want to see and what has been done about changing behaviors. THAT was what I was discussing. That was originally being discussed on this thread…if a college should have denied a kid with a suspension, NOT about colleges knowingly accepting an alcoholic or binge drinker or “drunk”. I would not use those words to describe a kid who had one suspension necessarily. As I said before, a clean record wins every time. A really bad record with lots of infractions and poor recs, is gonna have trouble getting admitted. But a kid with one mistake that has been turned around, may be admitted.</p>
<p>I don’t know how we got from a report of one suspension to accepting “drunks”, knowingly. We may know more information about the deceased boy but that does not mean that the colleges did. Any school suspensions need to be noted on an application and explained. We do not even know if this boy admitted them. But even if he did, that is all the college likely knew about. Most candidates would keep any other problems from their application materials. Colleges do not know EVERYTHING about a candidate. That’s all I was saying. Earlier posts here were just not on my wavelength as jumps were made from kid with one infraction to “drunk”. Now, ID is simply talking drunks and binge drinkers and I have never disagreed with that. But that is not the information that was presented to the college and nor is it fair to label each kid who ever had a drink or got caught as a drunk. That is what I read in earlier posts but perhaps the meanings intended were not what I interpretted.</p>
<p>No, berurah, we DON’T differ. I, too, spoke with my child about drinking. Even now, I cannot imagine my child ever drinking and driving. I spoke with my child about alcohol poisoning, about how you might not realize the combination of factors that could raise your blood alcohol concentration (dehydration plus drinking etc). I was SURE my child understood the dangers and would not make such mistakes. WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IT.</p>
<p>That doesn’t do it, berurah. It does not make us immune. Absolutely, colleges cannot be let off the hook for pretending to want to eliminate alcohol abuse on their campuses. They look the other way. I have seen it myself. But to continue with the Parental Delusion which says that “we can tell who these kids are; they’re the Drunks; they’re not like our kids; let’s just clean out the colleges of these dangerous at-risk kids; make them safe places for Our Kids - you know, the IMMUNE ones.” It’s not like that. That’s waht I want all us parents to know.</p>
<p>I AM in agreement with you on this. I, too, think there is a vast difference between someone who partook of an undesirable activity ONCE, learned from it, and then moved on in a more productive direction. However, I don’t think it’s a big secret that getting CAUGHT once does NOT mean that the activity was only DONE once…If I were an admissions officer, I would definitely want to get more information about an applicant with that sort of blemish on his/her record.</p>
<p>My larger concern in this whole issue is the rather casual attitude of many of the parents around this drinking issue…that overindulgence with alcohol is a sort of “rite of passage” and a “given” with all teenagers/college students and that those of us who have the nerve to even <em>think</em> that our kids will go through college and NOT do this are somehow strangely deluded. I don’t believe this for a minute, and I clearly communicate that to each and every one of my children.</p>
<p>I believe it. I know a college student who had to place the 911 call for a friend who pre-gamed and passed out at a party. I understand that kids make mistakes and I know that most kids will learn from those mistakes, particularly when the school is aggressive in response.</p>
<p>That’s still not what I am am talking about. I am talking about chronic drunks. Binge drinking more than once a week. This group is 25% or more of the campus at some colleges. And, the colleges could very easily whittle this number down if the admissions office were properly motivated to do so, simply by altering their admissions profiles.</p>
<p>You know, I’m sorry if a kid with an alcohol suspension doesn’t get accepted to an Ivy League college. But, if the colleges really wanted to cut down the number of drunks they enroll, then they might have to get as tough on alcohol suspensions as as they are with cheating suspensions. How would you feel if your son, with a clean record, got rejected in favor of a candidate with a booze suspension…and who was Otis the Town Drunk from the moment he set foot on campus?</p>
O.K., butforthegraceofgod…I’m sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying…</p>
<p>I think I see now what you were saying, and I <em>DO</em> agree with you. PLEASE <em>know</em> that I DO NOT feel immune or safe or “smug” about my child’s current lack of desire to experience alcohol. I <em>KNOW</em> that could turn around in a heartbeat. I hope and pray that it DOESN’T, but that doesn’t mean that I have my head in the sand and that I think it could NEVER happen. I <em>know</em> it can.</p>
<p>Again, though, I think if kids are not made to feel the consequences of these actions, even if it’s just a ONE-TIME action ('cause sometimes, ONE TIME is all it takes to do some serious and irreparable damage), the behaviors are being tacitly condoned and they will only end up escalating.</p>