Students busted at prom

NJres · May 27, 2007, 1:44pm

The original story that I read is another example of “zero tolerance” = zero intelligence. The article doesn’t state that the kids drove before the prom or had any intention of driving after. It also states they blew below a .08, but doesn’t give the exact reading. So you want to suspend them, expel them, deny them graduation, give them a police record… for what? Splitting a beer in the parking lot before coming into the prom? OK, I don’t know exactly what they did, but if no driving was involved I think a zero tolerance policy is stupid because there is a big difference between 2 guys splitting a beer and a kid drinking himself to death with a quart of vodka.

At our hs prom (due to some prior bad incidents) they were very strict and all kids were greeted formally at the entrance by the school principal (look me in the eye test for signs of intoxication ) and all boys and girls were patted down by a same sex staff member. Apparently one of the old tricks involved the girls taping a small flask to their thigh under their billowing prom dress!

1of42 · May 27, 2007, 2:08pm

I’m not a parent, so feel free to ignore this, but:

As a Canadian, I have to say that I think America has an unhealthy relationship with underage drinking. The “zero tolerance” policies, the inordinately high drinking age, and the constant derision of kids who do any underage drinking as if it’s some kind of deep character flaw.

This particular story sounds a little bit absurd. Yes, it’s stupid that the parents are complaining that they weren’t notified, but at the same time, all of you are acting as if the students in question were driving around, drunk, with an open vodka bottle in their hands. All the article says is that they blew below the limit. As someone else said, for all we know they could’ve just had a beer before showing up. Not exactly a heinous crime, if you ask me.

At our prom, we have to walk a receiving line of teachers and administrators. But they’re not that strict. Some people who are obviously red-faced get in easily, and we’re not searched for alcohol at all. At the same time, our grade had no incidents with overly drunk people or anything - but everyone was drinking before and after, and the teachers knew this for sure, but as long as it doesn’t cause problems, whatever.

As for the statistic about binge drinking, does anyone realize what binging is defined as? More than 5 drinks in “a session” What could a session be? Well, a 5 hour party counts as a session, for example. Is that an absurd amount of alcohol? I don’t think so. I think the overreactions regarding statistics relating to binge drinking need to stop, and so does the demonizing - interesteddad, not everyone who “binges” is a drunk - some of the smartest and hardest-working, best people I know will party on the weekends, and god knows most weekends they’re “binging”. Are they drunks? I’d vehemently say they’re not.

conyat · May 27, 2007, 3:21pm

Thanks ID and mini.

I really don’t know what the answer is to underage drinking. At D’s college, it came up at Parents’ weekend. One parent wanted to know why she could walk through the freshman boys floor and see alcohol prominently on display in almost every room. Another parent (who had attended the some college back in the 60s) wanted to know why, if parents are being asked to back off and treat their freshmen as adults, that the school was parenting them with things like biking while intoxicated citations.

So I guess there’s no way to make everyone happy. But their basic approach is tragedy prevention. They don’t want the kids to drink, but if they’re going to, they want it with the door open so someone can help them if there’s an emergency. Same with parties, they don’t check ID at the party, because they found kids would just drink a lot of alcohol quickly before the party if they knew they couldn’t drink at the party, and this put them at more risk of dying from alcohol poisoning. They also have some kind of policy where they don’t expel kids whose friends get medical help for them (at least the first time), to prevent the kids from holding back for fear of getting someone kicked out.

b4nnd20 · May 27, 2007, 3:27pm

1of42, you’re essentially right. a little drinking really isn’t a problem. but the school can’t just stand by and do nothing when they find drunk kids. maybe suspension is too much but the school is obligated to discipline students for breaking the law and school rules, at least to some extent. sure, a couple red-faced kids don’t constitute a security threat, but leniency contributes to a drinking atmosphere…and that’s what causes the drunk driving, excessive drinking, etc…which are serious liabilities for the school.

1of42 · May 27, 2007, 3:35pm

Their BAC was under .08. I have yet to meet someone who was really drunk with a BAC that low. I think it’s more likely that they were acting a little bit rowdy, which incited suspicions, and they probably reacted badly to that, leading to the Breathalyzer.

As for leniency contributing to a drinking atmosphere, that’s true. But I guess it depends on what we define on the “little drinking that isn’t really a problem.” Personally, I have yet to encounter people who have really let their high school careers (or university, for that matter) slip because of drinking. Drugs (especially psychoactive drugs), yes, but not so much alcohol.

mini · May 27, 2007, 4:13pm

First of all, the federal government (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Addiction) redefined binge drinking on February 3, 2004 to 5 drinks within a two-hour period - actually, to be more precise, the amount of alcohol needed to bring blood alcohol levels to .08 <a href=“http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/Newsletter/winter2004/Newsletter_Number3.pdf[/url]”>http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/Newsletter/winter2004/Newsletter_Number3.pdf</a>
(Theoretically, one could do that with fewer drinks in a shorter timeframe, or more drinks in a longer one.) So the old canard about what is a “session” is old news. The interesting thing though is that when they field-tested the definition (very, very extensively, I might add) they discovered that the rates for “two hours” v. “session” came out virtually the same.

The data from Health Canada and the Canadian Campus Survey (2004) suggest that binge drinking in Canada among college students is about 20% lower than in the U.S., though alcohol use is slightly higher. However, most of that difference seems to be associated with a much higher percentage of students in non-residential settings and working at least part-time. There is a study underway to adjust for these differences, but the general assumption is that once this is taken into account, it is likely that binge drinking among younger Canadian college students will be found to be the same or actually slightly higher than in the U.S. (The reason for that, however, is that a much higher percentage of U.S. college students are African-American and Hispanic - with much lower drinking rates - or attend religious colleges where abstinence or something close is normative.)

As for the school, it was/is mostly a risk management exercise. They don’t want to be sued when an untoward event happens on what can be construed to be their watch. I wouldn’t be surprised if the testing/surveillance was required by their insurance company, along with stated consequences. As to whether it is “fair”, well, life isn’t.

As to what can be done, there are literally SCORES of colleges that have successfully lowered their binge and heavy drinking rates. Not eliminated - lowered. In fact, when it comes to binge and heavy drinking, many erstwhile similar institutions have more differences than similarities. Colleges claim to be filled with faculty who teach courses called “behavioral” or “social” psychology. If the colleges can’t read the research, or make use of their own resources, they have only themselves to blame. (Frankly, there are all kinds of schools - especially prestige ones - that would like to pretend that it doesn’t exist.)

In our state, we have ongoing implementation, testing, and evaluation of evidence-based practices in prevention/intervention, with pre- and post-test data extending back as far as two years before the intervention, and two years following. We have matched populations, and matched communities, and we know an awful lot about what works and what doesn’t. And, no, we won’t eliminate binge drinking among high school students. But we have also found out that there is a huge amount that can be done to make a difference.

Past-year alcohol dependence among individuals ages 12 and up in my state (which is a little bit above average) is slightly above 4%; need for treatment a little below 10%). Lifetime prevalence of alcohol dependence is about 15%. Virtually all of these were heavy drinkers in high school or college (note the link is between "heavy’ drinking, not “binge drinking” per se), with the single greatest association being age of first use. Yes, there are folks who do not drink in high school but do so in college (though I think there are all kinds of high school parents in denial).

citygirlsmom · May 27, 2007, 4:16pm

so what if it was uner BAC, they drew attention to themselves and voila got busted

if they were old enough to drink, they were old enough to deal with the consequences

mini · May 27, 2007, 4:35pm

To finish my thought, those (few) who do not drink in high school but do so beginning in college are much less likely to become alcohol dependent in their lifetimes.

conyat · May 27, 2007, 4:37pm

So what works? Are there any model programs set up that other schools can emulate?

mini · May 27, 2007, 4:44pm

Sure! It’s the weekend, so I’m not at my office, but you can go to my office’s website at www1.dshs.wa.gov/dasa/ and look for the 2006 Trends Report (I’m the author). If you go to the prevention section, you’ll find a list of proven evidence-based practices and programs. There are actually many more - these are just the ones we have in our state. (At my office, we have links to the federally funded Addictions Technology Transfer Centers, and entire prevention libraries that match evidence-based interventions with demographics of communities and targeted populations. In our state, communities are required to use at least 50% evidence-based practices in order to receive funding. Lots of DARE programs went out of business. ;))

interesteddad · May 27, 2007, 4:56pm

It is also somewhat variable from school to school. A college with a 50+% binge drinking rate has a different alcohol policy challenge than a college with a 30% binge drinking rate. There’s a point at which binge drinking defines the social scene.

I’m not sure there’s a one size fits all. For example, Earlham and Swarthmore have similarly low binge drinking rates, but diametrically opposite alcohol policies. Earlham mandates a totally dry campus, even for 21 year olds. Swarthmore makes no effort to regulate alcohol. It’s available to all at campus parties and not restricted from dorms. They do allow (I think encourage) the local police to park a cruiser outside of party venues on weekends and they do punish behavior infractions, whether alcohol fueled or not.

Two different approaches. Similar results. Probably has more to do with the admissions profile than anything else.

conyat · May 27, 2007, 5:16pm

Mini, thanks, going through your report now (wow!). I’m going to look more into the College Coalition for Substance Abuse Prevention your report talks about. I wish our area had something like your high school and child programs; there is so much need here.

As an aside, I couldn’t get any of the Word docs on the Prevention Site to open. <a href=“http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/dasa/services/media/resourcekit.shtml[/url]”>http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/dasa/services/media/resourcekit.shtml</a>

This is probably a function of all the popup blockers, firewalls, etc. SO has on my computer, though.

avidreader · May 27, 2007, 5:25pm

obviously you don’t need parental consent to be brethayized. like the police are going to bust a party and call every single persons parents before brethalyzing them. honestly. i dont necessarily think it should go on their transcripts or record, which it doesnt if you’re under 18, and can be erased if you are over, but definitely parental punishments should be enforced.

NJres · May 27, 2007, 5:57pm

avidreader, you apparently didn’t read the article if you think that “obviously you don’t need parental consent to be brethayized.” That is not obvious at all. (If the kid is not driving). In fact, the article states

So if that is correct, than to me it is obvious that in every state except Michigan a minor under 21 who is not driving can refuse a breathalyzer.

UCDAlum82 · May 27, 2007, 6:08pm

"so what if it was uner BAC, they drew attention to themselves and voila got busted

if they were old enough to drink, they were old enough to deal with the consequences"

Obviously, if they were old enough to legally drink there would be no consequences. There are very few kids in high school over 21. What they were doing wasn’t illegal, it was against the school rules.

I have seen a few good kids whose lives were seriously derailed by “no tolerance” rules. Is the goal is to ensure any kid that has half a beer before they turn 21 does not get a college education? I personally think that is harsh.

Going back to what I learned in college: Good people can lead virtuous and productive lives without necessarily following the straight and narrow. Students, even those under 21, can have a few beers on the weekends and still pull straight As. There are some people that can pull straight As while being stoned most of their waking hours. There are people that will be useless for coherent thought after half a glass of wine. And there are those that will fall off the deep end when they start drinking or doing drugs. But not everyone will fall off the deep end. Just because someone has a glass of alcohol it does not mean they are drunk. Or they are useless. Or they deserve to give up all chances in life.

So, I guess I’m wondering do we really want to stop young people from drinking, or do we want them to learn to drink responsibly while they can still do it in a safe environment? Do we want to heavily punish seniors for having a champagne toast before they get into the limo in their formal attire? What exactly are we trying to teach there?

b4nnd20 · May 27, 2007, 6:13pm

true, but the school’s job is to enforce the straight and narrow and it would promote a dangerous drinking culture if the school showed leniency.

i doubt these kids’ lives are ruined by one suspension. and i doubt they were breathalyzed for a “champagne toast.” LOL. kids who pre-game before prom are behaving inappropriately and, last time i checked, illegally, and deserve to be suspended. it’s not unreasonable. they know the rules.

i agree, it’s silly to walk the straight and narrow all the time. but if kids think they are smart enough to deviate, they should be smart enough to identify when they can deviate–like at home or at a private party, not at a school event.

ellemenope · May 27, 2007, 6:25pm

No police are usually involved in the “testing for alcohol at prom” stories I’ve read. The kids sign an agreement to participate in prom or other activities, in which they agree to take breathalyzer tests if they are suspected to be under the influence or acting weird. Punishment is all in house…no police record.

UCDAlum82 · May 27, 2007, 6:33pm

To get a police record they need to do something illegal. Unless they are drinking on campus they aren’t doing something illegal. You’d have to either catch them drinking or catch them driving after having drunk some alchohol. Unless they are falling down drunk, which would show up above the BAC, and then you might be able to get them on disorderly conduct.

interesteddad · May 27, 2007, 7:56pm

I do. Otherwise, you are penalizing the kids who play by the rules. You’ve got four or five or ten kids applying for every slot in elite college admissions. Why shouldn’t a high school drunk have a black mark on his or her transcript and pay a penalty in admissions? Give the nod to the kids who don’t drink in high school.

It’s so obvious that you have to ask why the high schools and colleges conspire to sweep it under the rug. I would conclude that the colleges want to enroll drunks.

1of42 · May 27, 2007, 7:58pm

mini: Thanks for all that information - and it’s good to interact with someone whose job it is to actually analyze this kind of stuff!

The binge drinking redefinition is great to hear, especially since everyone I’ve talked to about this keeps referring to the “session” definition.

I was interested in your comparison of drinking rates between Canadian and American colleges. What I’m understanding from what you said there is that, given that binging rates are (assumed to be) similar between Canadian and US students after adjusting for working students and off-campus residents, and given the prevalence of dry campuses and religious colleges in America, the binge drinking rates in what could be considered “normal” universities (with regards to drinking) might actually be higher. Is that correct?

As for your trends report, I found that very interesting. One thing I thought was odd though, and would love some clarification on, is the report’s definition of “problem drinker”. It seems like it is defined as either 6 days or more per month when alcohol is consumed, or 2+ binging episodes, either criterion being sufficient to be defined as a problem drinker. Is that correct? If so, I think all of the adults I know are “problem drinkers” - exlcluding Asians. Unless I’m misunderstanding something, I think that definition is a bit stupid, personally, since these people aren’t problems.

One last question: what defines alcohol dependence in that report? I found the comparison of adult alcohol dependence for people who started drinking at or before age 14 to those who didn’t fascinating, and would love to know what the criteria for dependence are.

Thanks.

Students busted at prom

CONNECT WITH US