<p>That article made my skin crawl. How could anyone look at this casually? A joke? Who’s laughing?</p>
<p>The “hazing as bonding” reference would only make sense in the context of a fraternity or sorority where pledges are hazed, but then smothered with love. Bullying has no later smothering in love. At Millburn, it would not appear that anyone reaches out to kids shoved into lockers, etc and then tries to bond with them.</p>
<p>For some reason, being hazed and then smothered with love doesn’t appeal to me either!</p>
<p>Forgive me if this has been answered and I just missed it but I’m curious if MHS or the school board had a written anti-hazing/harrassment policy in place? I thought just about all businesses and schools had such policies with spelled out consequences in place these days. I realize that doesn’t mean it’s enforced, but that’s why I’m curious if a policy was in place at the time? It’s also interesting to note how different schools take different approaches as far as tone and terminology.</p>
<p>These are a couple of examples that I pulled from websites of schools in our area:</p>
<hr>
<p>Harassment:
XXX School emphasizes to all students, faculty and staff members that harassment is prohibited behavior and will not be condoned or tolerated. All students must be treated with respect. This prohibition against acts of harassment applies to all people engaged in all school-related activities; all students, regular and temporary, part-time or full-time employees, volunteers, itinerant instructors and consultants.
Sexual harassment can include sexual advances, requests for sexual favors or any other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. This behavior includes unsolicited written or verbal statements, vulgar or obscene photographs, drawings, jokes or comments, gestures or physical contact of a sexual nature.
Verbal harassment can include derogatory remarks, jokes or slurs and belligerent or threatening words spoken to another.
Physical harassment includes unwarranted physical touching, contact, assault, deliberate impeding or blocking movements or any intimidating interference with normal school or work movements.
Written or electronic communication harassment includes communication of any threat of, or act of sexual, verbal and/or physical harassment.
Students are expected to treat each other, as well as members of the faculty and staff, with respect at all times.
Any student, faculty or staff member who believes this policy is being violated should report the same immediately to a member of the administrative team.</p>
<hr>
<p>Hazing is defined as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act that subjects a student to an unreasonable risk of physical, mental, emotional or academic harm. Hazing includes, but is not limited to, any type of physical assault or restraint; placement of an undesirable substance on or in the body; any type of physical activity, such as sleep deprivation, exposure to the elements, confinement in a small space, calisthenics, or other activity that subjects the student to an unreasonable risk of harm or that adversely affects the mental or physical health or safety of the student; any activity or expectation which is so time consuming as to significantly interfere with class work or study time; any activity involving
consumption of food, liquid, alcoholic beverage, drug, or other substance that subjects the
student to an unreasonable risk of harm or that is unpleasant; any activity that would subject a reasonable person to intimidation, shame, belittlement, humiliation, embarrassment or undue mental stress, including, but not limited to personal servitude, pranks, assigning or endorsing the wearing of apparel that is conspicuous and not normally in good taste, line-ups and verbal abuse; or any activity that induces, encourages, causes, or requires the student to engage in an activity that involves a violation of law or University policy.</p>
<p>Students who violate the prohibition against hazing are subject to sanctions in accordance with the procedures outlined in the code of student conduct. Sanctioning in no way precludes the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.</p>
<hr>
<p>Dr. Miron’s remarks from the 9/21 school board meeting: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, the principal was aware this had gone on for years, but it seems that he did go into his job as principal seriously trying to address the issue. I am open to the fact that I could be wrong, but so far I have seen nothing that convinces me that the administration ever tried to blow anyone off or has ever done anything other than to condemn the behavior. </p>
<p>The policy of the school is that the school has the discretion on a case by case basis as to whether suspensions are reported. From what I understand, students who have put others in danger fall under the category of people for whom suspensions are reported - such students are encouraged to write an essay to the colleges to which they apply addressing the incident. This seems to suggest that there are suspensions that go on the record. If a student is “encouraged” to write of an incident to a college, that person would have to be pretty stupid not to, since there might be teacher or GC recommendations that make reference to it. </p>
<p>Miron has also said that in the past there were some years that 5-6 students were suspended , including for having the “list”, or even for being in possession of post-its , and even one girl who was unfairly suspended for having post-its in her possession after taking them off a friend. However, this year, and as of now there are only about three names that he says “might be accurate” since there are conflicting reports. He went on to say that he cannot discipline students without proof and that nobody is coming forward. </p>
<p>Regardless, hazing is awful and it needs to stop. I am certainly all in favor of increasing the consequences for anyone caught participating . And with all the publicity, by next year, there will be nobody who can claim they were in the dark as to what will happen if they are caught. As for this year, if they haven’t by now I’m doubtful that anyone, including the victims, will give up the names of the girls who were involved.</p>
<p>Roshke</p>
<ol>
<li><p>You pick and choose what Dr. Miron said. He started off with the definition of hazing as a “culture of temporary harassment traditionally to create bonds”. IMHO that set the table telling all that hazing is really not that bad, and can be good.</p></li>
<li><p>One can not overemphasize the failure to report suspensions to colleges. How in the world anyone can regard suspensions as punishment if they are not reported to colleges is ludicrous. It’s just a few days off. In fact the school has been rewarding hazing. </p></li>
<li><p>Dr. Miron has spoken more about what punishments won’t happen, not so much about asking people to come forward, or what will happen. And after he starts off with defining hazing in a nice way, who will come forward and complain?</p></li>
<li><p>I think the hazing will continue, if not checked immediately. Not next year. Now. Even some on the Millburn Board of Education have concerns. From the Board meeting, Board member Michael Brinberg: </p></li>
</ol>
<p>“Like drinking, if you’re not against hazing, you’re for it,” he said. “I wish I could share the optimism I’m hearing, but, I don’t. I believe this will continue. I hope and pray I’m wrong, but my prediction come next September is we’ll be having this same discussion. I hope I’m wrong.”</p>
<p>Board member Fox does want action. It shows her concern for the good students of MHS. Because it is the right thing. Because lack of action will leave a taint on all students names. </p>
<p>But Roshke I do agree with you, no one will come forward, Dr. Miron has made it clear he doesn’t want anyone to come forward. So all the hazers can sit back and laugh some more at everyone else. And go off to college and ultimately work with their mindset of hazing as apporpriate. And the younger girls will have been trained to the effect the that same pattern of behaivor is appropriate, if not celebrated. That the school administration resents the publicity, not the actions of the hazers. Is most concerned about its Number 1 ranking and think that people are jealous. </p>
<p>Magnolia – yes the school has an anti-hazing policy. It has apparently been “enforced” mostly through suspensions not reported to colleges, as required by the Common Application, and most other college apps. In addition, NJ has pretty strong criminal law against hazing. </p>
<p>Laris, post #21, identifies herself as a MHS parent, and said hazing was conducted by about 12 senior girls and involved about 12 freshmen. Not what the NY Times says, which now has a copy of the list, – “The list is in the form of each girls first name, “nickname,” and last name, which often rhymes with the nickname. Two of the handful of printable nicknames include “my thick, bushy eyebrows can’t cover up the fact that I look like I’m nine” and “unfortunately I am stuck with my sister’s looks but I hope that I am not as sexually attracted to my brother to the point where it aches.” The rest are worse, including a couple homophobic terms. If you or someone you know well is one of the 23 girls on the list, we would like to hear fro you about what effect it has had on you “</p>
<p>I don’t know if parents are minimizing the problems because they just don’t know (do they not read the NY Times?) or if they think the problem is publicity not hazing.</p>
<p>We lived next door to Millburn for several years, and looks like their high school rating is still number one in the state as it was then. Can’t help thinking that the Principal has no intention of exposing these athletic/academic “achievers” (who happen to be hazers) who’re going to keep Millburn #1 in test scoring and college placement. If these kids were lower on the achievement totem pole their butts probably would have been booted out by now.</p>
<p>Heah, dke, it really helps with college placement when the school isnt honest on college applicaitons.</p>
<p>Doesn’t Millburn have one of the most prestigious college placement records in the state? Ivies here we come?</p>
<p>Yes, dke it does. I’ll guess we’ll see if that continues in the face of hazing and the school and students lying on applications. Are these the things the Ivies want to support?</p>
<p>Couldn’t agree more, Kayf. These kids are replaceable with comparable others NOT from Millburn High at the top schools.</p>
<p>But why would an Ivy drop MHS’ students from consideration if that college’s experience with MHS’ students is that the students performed well academically and behaved while students were at said Ivy?.</p>
<p>This thread makes me very glad I didn’t become a high school principal, or a superintendant.</p>
<p>"Board member Fox does want action. It shows her concern for the good students of MHS. Because it is the right thing. Because lack of action will leave a taint on all students names. "</p>
<p>In regards to the above, I agree that Board Member Fox wants action, but disagree with her concern for the good students of MHS. She suggested that ALL senior girls be punished so that they give up the names. What a ridiculous idea. Just because a girl is a senior does not mean that she knows the names, hangs out with these list-makers or should be punished for something she didn’t do. It’s punishing the good kids who stay away from trouble. Are we in Communist Russia or Iran? Punish everyone to weed out the bad? </p>
<p>The sad thing is that the “names” are really not a mystery; every kid in that school knows exactly who put together the list. Some of them have even been on TV. But alas, there is no hard proof and no one wants to mess with kids whose parents may be attorneys, etc. And while Dr. Miron did read the riot act before school this year, like every year, no punishment (other than missing school for a few days) is ever enforced. Colleges do not find out about these incidents. All they read about is the volunteer work some of these girls did in Costa Rica, Indonesia or wherever Putney Volunteer Tours go. That being said, I still believe the media has gone out of control with this and should have used it as a way of examining other schools/communities and “hazing” rituals. The local bloggers who released the “details” of the list certainly have gotten their 15 minutes of fame as well. And while the Patch insists it did not provide the actual list to the TV stations, why else would Today Show, GMA, etc. cite it as the source for obtaining the list? It’s all shameful from start to finish, unfortunately.</p>
<p>Tom, I think the Ivies, and the other highly selective schools receive many more qualified candidates than they can admit. Adcom people have been quoted as saying a large % of applicants, most of whom are not admitted, are qualified. How can they justify asking other candidates if they have been suspended when MHS publicly states they don’t. </p>
<p>Dadx, I don’t think they’ll be any shortage of candidates for superintendent or principal jobs. </p>
<p>SC – so you don’t want to punish all, for even a short time period, to get names. Especially as you say that “everyone” knows the names, dont you think this goal could be accomblished quickly. And you say that would be like Iran or the Soviet Union. So what is MHS now like for hazees? I guess that doesn’t bother you. The only thing that does seem to bother you is the media focus on this. You say some of “them” have been on TV. If you mean the hazers, are you saying that they identified themselves as such on TV? I find that hard to believe.</p>
<p>kayf I agree they receive way more qualified candidates but if the Ivy has a track record with MHS students and it is a good track record what do they care that some small number of MHS kids are misbehaving and the school is not dealing with it. In the Ivy’s experience it has not caused them a problem.</p>
<p>Tom, there are two issues to me. The hazing is one, but the school deliberately lying on the Common Application (and almost every other application I have heard of) where it asks if the applicant has been suspended and the Principal admitted in the NY Times article that the school did not report suspensions. I dont see how any college can condone lying. Dont all the adcom people go ballistic about kids lying. The other issue, the hazing, maybe it hasnt created a problem before, but a number of people who say they are from Millburn say it got worse this year.</p>
<p>There is nothing wrong with a little bit of hazing. To be honest getting hazed and doing hazing are some of my fondest memories from being on sports teams and other groups. </p>
<p>Hazing creates a good bond between the new and the old of a given organization. I loved every minute of it. People need to grow up and stop taking everything so seriously. If you cant take the hazing then just don’t join the group.</p>
<p>Excuse me Millburn, I do not believe any parents wanted their driveway spraypainted. And one kid she got pushed around for just talking to a girl on the list. She didnt volunteer for anything. The school supposedly has a no-hazing policy. And it is never right for a principal to condone and the school participate in lying on college applications.</p>
<p>"SC so you dont want to punish all, for even a short time period, to get names. Especially as you say that everyone knows the names, dont you think this goal could be accomblished quickly. And you say that would be like Iran or the Soviet Union. So what is MHS now like for hazees? I guess that doesnt bother you. The only thing that does seem to bother you is the media focus on this. You say some of them have been on TV. If you mean the hazers, are you saying that they identified themselves as such on TV? I find that hard to believe. "</p>
<p>kayf - No, I don’t agree with punishing “everyone” to get names. Why would you assume that just because a girl is in the same grade, she knows and HAS PROOF of who the culprits are? I know who they are. Punish me. My sophomore knows who they are. Punish her. My child who graduated two years ago and is at college knows who they are. Punish her. It even sounds as though Dr. Miron knows who the hazers are. Punish him. Naming the hazers is not the only issue; it’s having proof. And as Dr. Miron has pointed out, that without evidence (meaning the victims coming forward and specifically identifying the girls who hazed them, sent them texts, ), he can’t punish on heresay. So is the point to add to the heresay? We think we know who it “may be” from past experiences, facebook walls, talk in the hallways. But that is not proof. That is called rumor. I don’t know if you have children or not, but if you had a 6th grader, let’s just say for argument’s sake, and out of the 300 plus kids in that grade, there was a clever “anonymous” bully… a kid who was verbally abusing others, but none of the kids would come foward with his/her name. Would you want your child punished? Maybe you don’t understand how large each grade is at MHS, and just because a girl shares a graduating year, does not mean that she can prove a handful of girls as culprits. Even the teachers claim they did not see anything odd. Should we punish them for being in the building too?</p>