<p>I’m going to repeat my post #344 because I really am curious and nobody addressed it. The issue comes up each time campus violence occurs and it seems the university’s hands were tied re talking to the family. How does this differ?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I, too, think the administrator of this college came up with a fair solution. The apology was additional and again the “right thing to do.” As I parent after an apology I would not pursue litigation. </p>
<p>This is where zero tolerance fails. Not every situation is identical. Not every person involved from RAs, campus cops, other students is going to follow “the letter of the law.” Who knows why we as a country are moving toward drawing lines in the sand on every little issue and removing commense sense and judgement from the equation. I find it all rather sad. My guess is college administrators find individual decisions far easier than zero tolerance. </p>
<p>I feel sorry for the pot smoking roommate, but at least he had the decency to take it outside like the cigarette smokes now do and I’m guessing that was his “habit.” I’m guessing kids think “we parents” are crazy…you can buy cigarettes at 18 I think, but you can’t drink alcohol until 21 and pot smoking will land you in jail. If you step back from the emotionalism it is terribly contradictory on the surface.</p>
<p>The 4th amendment doesn’t apply in a situation like this, the 4th amendment applies only to legal situations where police and criminal offenses are involved. If the school had called in the local police and they searched the room without a warrant, there could have been a case, but in the case of private property like this, the 4th amendment doesn’t apply, and there are tons of cases backing this up. It is identical to when they search lockers in a school after getting wind of possible drugs sales or whatever,the school has the right to search lockers because it is school property. Campus police are security, not law enforcement on most campuses, so they cannot be accused of violating rights.</p>
<p>Could we please try to get one thing straight. The 4th amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is applicable to government action (to explain it on a People’s Court level), not from action by private parties. As related here, this was a private school, and unless their “police” have been deputized in some capacity as governmental law officers, no constitutional rights could be at issue. This is not a public school or a state institution.</p>
<p>If a private person enters your room and searches it without appropriate authority, you may have a civil claim for damages and perhaps you could press criminal charges for trespass or theft (of a fake ID). You don’t have a claim for violation of the constitution. I think these potential claims are of dubious distinction- imho.</p>
<p>Per my reading of the posted campus policy, the school had every right to search the room once the rm was caught with marijuana out in the open, also jmho. They had reasonable suspicion that the policies were being violated, and the room is the room regardless of whether another person shared the room. AND, yes, in some schools the OP’s son might face the same punishment for the dope in the room as the roommate, since all occupants may be held liable for contraband, per school policy - good reasons to know the policies AND live by them.</p>
<p>^Cross posted re 4th amendment above - but the public school lockers may be a bit of a gray area, since public school officials actions are acting in a “governmental” capacity, but school rules also apply due to special nature of schools, which is not germane to the discussion of a dorm room on a private college campus.</p>
<p>“This is where zero tolerance fails. Not every situation is identical.”</p>
<p>Does “zero tolerance” necessarily mean the same punishment, regardless of the circumstances?</p>
<p>ignatius - although FERPA generally requires the consent of students over 18 in order for colleges to contact parents, I think there are some exceptions, for instance, activities involving alcohol where the student is under 21, or involving illegal drugs, or violent or sex crimes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, at a certain point in our history you would have supported reporting runaway slaves because it was the law? If you were staying at a friend’s house and became aware that they were sheltering people as part of the Underground Railroad, you would turn them in becuase if the “crime” wre discovered you might share in the blame? I doubt that anyone here would cop to that, but in reality I think that there are people who definitely would have persuaded themselves that it was the righteous course of action. </p>
<p>Let’s take a less charged example: it is Prohibition, and you become aware that your friend is making bathtub gin and selling it out the back door. Do you run to the police like a good little snitch? Afer all, they are breaking the law!</p>
<p>I think that just as there are individuals who naturally and avidly join in persecuting minorites when their society promotes or condones it, there are those who are natural snitches who will always kowtow to authority and experience pleasure in seeing others punished.</p>
<p>How things have changed:</p>
<p>My DH likes to tell the story of how he signed for a KEG of beer for a dorm party. About 1975…he wasn’t 21, but was organizing the beer for the party. The truck driver delivered it to the dorm loading dock, no questions asked. I mean, if the kid ordered it and signed for it, he must have the right to do so, right? :D</p>
<p>Ignatius </p>
<p>My point is this. Once college initated conversation with parents on a serious matter, they should return phone call promptly. They didnt.</p>
<p>I’m Coleytown’s husband and a first-time poster.</p>
<p>I’ve read through all the comments and am compelled by everyone’s insight and perspective. At the core, there are obvious legal, ethical, moral, and philosophical issues that I suspect all of us have had to deal with either growing up, or now as parents. And how do we responsibly impart our wisdom to our children while also allowing them to grow by learning lessons based on the decisions they make for themselves as they pass through adolescence and into adulthood.</p>
<p>While I’ll try to keep the discussion relevant to college, life constantly confronts us with decisions. We make choices and must live by the outcome of our choices, and ultimately (as I tell my sons) we are responsible for our actions, and we (my sons) must be accountable. Whether our children are deciding where to attend college, or what they do while in college, I think stays relevant to OP’s (my wife) original post. And that is RM smoking and in possession of pot (and hiding it in dorm room without disclosure to son) and b) my son having a fake ID. I will address only my son’s infraction here: As I told him, what he did is wrong and yes, illegal. In fact, it is falsification of a state and/or federal document. Whatever the consequences are (we now know appropriate for his infraction) he and only he is accountable and he’d have to live by the punishment doled out by his Jesuit university. He understands that, and was/is ready to to accept whatever the outcome was. To me the key takeaway here is not so much the mistake he made, rather the lesson he learned. And for anyone on this forum who either has a child in college or one who is about to enter college, my hope is that the lesson learned here will be communicated so that others too, may learn from this. It may also provide a bit of perspective into which kind of school you and your child determine is the right one for them. My son’s university is one of high standards, one he loves and is proud to attend, and I think his university handled this situation to my satisfaction.</p>
<p>Sometimes in cases like this, the best lessons learned are created from the mistakes we make. And if the person accepts responsibility as my son did for his fake ID, and it causes him to think very carefully about future decisions, and thus helps make him a better person in the long run, then there is much to be gained from this experience.</p>
<p>I wish all your college age children much success and wisdom.</p>
<p>Promptly? This was not exactly an urgent life or death situation. Or one that necessarily required phone contact. Most colleges would take more than 24 hrs just to do the paperwork…</p>
<p>well said misterdad!!</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>I agree. Well said, misterdad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks for the answer. I’m glad to know there are exceptions - though I wish it could extend to mental health issues that could possibly endanger other students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t mean to call your particular post into question - though I realize I quoted you when asking my question. I really wanted to know the answer. I got it somewhat when I looked back and saw the dean was present when the son made his phone call home. Still in general I wanted to know the answer and I’m thinking it’s when the behavior crosses legal lines. Again, thanks scansmom.</p>
<p>FERPA also states that if parents are financially responsible for a student (claim as a dependent on the tax return) then the parents also have the right to the student’s record, and that’s the case with most parents.</p>
<p>Well done, MisterDad, well done.</p>
<p>Respect!</p>
<p>MisterDad - your post reminds me of the old saying “cooler heads prevail”. I’ve read all of the posts on this thread with interest and it feels like some posters were reacting to the posts of others with a lot of emotion… normal human behavior but some were right on the edge of being over the line.</p>
<p>Fwiw, I was able to drink legally at 18 and my friends and I were drinking much earlier (since we had older friends in HS). What I can tell you is that EVERY year while my older sister and I were in HS (so a span of 7 years), there were multiple drunk driving accidents that killed kids we knew. My two DDs are the same distance apart in age so I’ve been a HS parent for 7 years and there has not been ONE drunk driving accident at their school in that time. I know this is completely annecdotal but I’ve said for years that I think raising the legal limit had good effect.</p>
<p>…On drugs, deception and almost anything else…the dose makes the poison.</p>
<p>@ consolation, post 367: YOU conveniently reposted only part of my original post 223, and HERE is what you omitted</p>
<p>“I do think it is a personal choice to report infractions of the law or not, and that I respect the choice made, either way, even if I would do differently. Law abiding, does not mean perfect. No one is perfect.”</p>
<p>I WILL thank you in advance to NOT distort what I have said by leaving out important parts of it. I will also thank you not to ascribe to me any behavior, since I did not say what I would have done in this situation or any other, especially not what I would do if someone’s life was at stake, or whether I am a persecuting minority or a persecuted one. I think your post was too personally disparaging.</p>
<p>Coleytown and MisterDad, please pass this one on to your DS:</p>
<p>I spoke with DW and DD regarding your son’s (and your) plight. Not one of us knew that the patriot act (passed when DD was 8) had the effect of making a fake ID a felony – serious risk. After much discussion, DD said: I did not know that I could lose EVERYTHING because of a law that I did not know about, or a room mate doing something illegal?</p>
<p>Because you shared, we all learned. And, maybe, just maybe, you haved saved many (my family included) from great loss. Thanks.</p>
<p>@anothermom2 - I read the post 367 having remembered your post quite well and post
367 generated an eye roll. </p>
<p>I personally do not even think drugs should be illegal, but equating reporting someone under those circumstances with reporting a runaway slave is just silly and somewhat insulting. </p>
<p>While I do not think OP’s son had a responsibility or was wrong not to report his roommates activities, I do not think the person that did, if there was even such a person
should be considered a “snitch”.</p>