<p>Where I live admin people are paid top dollar. They are not delivering. Its time for a change. </p>
<p>I think this admin failed. Big time. For not being available. You tell someone you need to talk to them. On a serious matter. You take the call. At least where I work.</p>
<p>NE, I agree with seperating the kids. I dont agree with a 5 day suspension. Did I not say in my post 5 day sus*****on?</p>
<p>Neil Diamond songs 24/7?! That’s where I’d draw the line–go directly to the authorities!
;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m a bit confused. Can administrators at the college level talk to parents without the explicit consent of the student? Isn’t that under debate: can administrators notify parents with concerns re mental health issues, etc? Universities treat students as adults - unless given student permission to circumvent that, right? Can a parent call and expect an immediate call back - even given the stated circumstances?</p>
<p>“So it’s ok now to ignore the 4th amendment that was so important earlier, now that it is known the punishment is small?”</p>
<p>No, it’s okay to ignore the 4th amendment because we have no desire to pursue an expensive and contentious legal battle with a school that our son is still very happy attending.</p>
<p>kayf, yes, you did say 5 day suspension. I don’t know why the school decided on that. I don’t know the kid and I don’t know the district. I am commenting that as a parent, I would want something done. As a parent, I also know that I would want to have a person with a hit list away from my kids because it is a warning sign or a cry for help/attention and I don’t know if that child would be capable of violence. In our district something was done about it.</p>
<p>northeast…i agree with you…and glad your child isnt in that situation any more… and i would suggest that the suspension should have lasted as long as it took to have a professional work with the child to determine why they had a hit list, or what their intentions were.</p>
<p>Parent 56 “i would suggest that the suspension should have lasted as long as it took to have a professional work with the child to determine why they had a hit list”</p>
<p>So you would destroy a kids life over what they wrote in notebook, even if they took no action. I would suggest if this kids parents had money, they would have a lawyer, and there would be nosupsension. Do you know what the effect of a suspension is on college acceptance?</p>
<p>What happened to not guilty until proof?</p>
<p>obviously i dont know the kid…but i would rather have a suspension for that student than a death of another. All I know is you say she didnt take action UP to that point in time. sorry kayf, we’ll have to disagree on this one too. Who knows maybe a therapist would have said she was fine and back to school in 1 day</p>
<p>That is the way the system works. “Life is not fair”. There was another incident in our district where a student was expelled and apparently the family got a lawyer. Bottom line is that within a few “personal mental health days” (call it what you want, but that was the term told to me by 2 peers) he was back. Can’t go into reasons for the expulsion on the board.</p>
<p>Parent 56 – there is a big.big difference between school and parent agreeing that kid should take some mental health days and a suspension. Suspension means the kid is likely going to CC.</p>
<p>sorry kayf…i’m more worried about why a kid would have a “hit list” than about cc vs college. Maybe the young lady has some real issues, maybe it was just a stupid thing she wrote in a notebook, maybe she was a victim of bullying and these were her bulliers, either way… why are kids making hit lists!?</p>
<p>“I don’t think the 21 age is a good idea. I favor a graduated drinking age. 19 for beer and wine. 21 for hard liquor. I’m not going to change my mind. But, I really don’t think anyone else on here is going to, either.” </p>
<p>You are one smart Poetgrl, and I’m not going to change my mind about that. Though I would add that one is never old enough to drink tequila.</p>
<p>Again, Parent 56, the admin people have made the punishments so severe, they can not expect any parental cooperation. Maybe you dont care if your kid ends up in a CC, but many people do. Maybe what you were saying was that you dont care if some other kid ends up in CC v. colllege. Bottem line – if admin just cared about seperating kids, they might get parental cooperation. BUT THEY RAISE THE ANTE, and then their is no cooperation.</p>
<p>Something to consider, in certain schools, especially those without Greek life and in cities, the option for students to go out on weekends to socialize is limited to nightclubs, and you have to be 21 to get in. It’s not always all about drinking, and I’m sure many students have fake ID’s just so they can go hear music and/or socialize.</p>
<p>I think all schools should make a greater effort to provide entertainment and social venues for the majority of the student body who can’t legally even go out to dance or hear bands playing. </p>
<p>I altered my ID when I was 16 not so I could buy alcohol, but because it was the disco era and my friends and I wanted to go dancing. Another evil.</p>
<p>Even with some sort of “graduated” drinking age, colleges could still choose to ban ANY alcohol from their campuses - and, for legal/liability reasons they would still choose to. Binge drinking, in particular, is a big issue on many campuses and being allowed to drink certain kinds of alcohol has little to do with that. The real issue is not so much the age but the prevailing drinking culture and attitudes about drinking (which is seen more among those under 21. And, it could be argued that the drinking culture is a result not so much because of the drinking age laws but more because of where they are at developmentally, given everything we currently know about brain development).</p>
<p>By the way, in many states underage teens/adults CAN drink in their parent’s home if supervised by the parents. Which is perhaps where learning to drink responsibly SHOULD start instead of with one’s peers. So why not start there to help create a new culture of responsible drinking, rather than the prevailing one? I don’t think our drinking laws should be changed until that happens and we are more confident that we can trust more young people to drink responsibly than we see now (I know, I know - each of our kids is one of those who, if allowed to drink, would do so responsibly - until, as my own experience has shown, they don’t. Darn frontal lobes).</p>
<p>And by the way, the law was changed to 21 primarily to reduce drinking while driving. And in that respect, the law worked…</p>
<p>I am glad things worked out with Coleytown’s son. I think the “probation” part of the punishment is a little over the top, but after all the possible outcomes posted in this thread, I guess that does not seem like a big deal.</p>
<p>One question I have about the RM- if they suspend or expel him, will they let him finish out the semester? There is only 4-5 weeks left. I know he is on scholarship, but if he was paying $25K per semester that would seem harsh.</p>
<p>Thank you for the explanation, Coley of why you will not be pursuing legal action against the school. You just don’t have the money to pursue what you believe is an unconstitutional, unlawful invasion of privacy. That makes perfect sense.</p>
<p>And that reason is completely honorable unlike other reason(s) not to pursue it.</p>
<p>"I know he is on scholarship, but if he was paying $25K per semester that would seem harsh. "</p>
<p>Harsh and 100% avoidable. Here’s how you do it:
Person A: “Excuse me sir, would you like to buy some marijuana?”
Roommate: “No.”</p>
<p>Nancy Reagan took a lot of crap for the “just say no” campaign, but it’s really the ONLY way to avoid drugs. It is both a necessary condition and a sufficient condition for avoiding drugs. It was genius in its simplicity and brevity, but so many people wanted to make it a complicated issue to smokescreen the power and responsibility each person has in avoiding the damn stuff.</p>