What exactly happens if you back out of Early Decision?

Parents Forum
281

<p>I have gotten enough PM’s to know people don’t really understand my position. Since the system is set up for colleges (ED helps them more than students) I personally don’t take it too seriously.</p>

<p>Every student should receive the consideration of an ED student, and I find righteousness about “the rules” more disturbing than the OP’s behavior.</p>

<p>That said, I would not allow my kids to behave as the OP, but I don’t understand the level of condemnation. It just sit well with me.</p>

<p>I probably overstated my position a good deal, but I don’t care if a kid tries to do this. </p>

<p>And I think people have given OP good advice about what might happen if this course of action is followed.</p>

<p>I was responding to the seriousness with which posters were taken a paper offense, at least it is to me.</p>

<p>I probably shouldn’t have expressed myself at all, but there it is.</p>

282

<p>I do not believe the OP is from the US, or if so, is from a non-native-english household. </p>

<p>Several posts 2-3 pages ago demonstrate a word choice more common with native Spanish speakers. “advices” is what first caught my eye.</p>

<p>The OP may in fact not be as savvy or premeditated as many here presume.</p>

283

<p>MM–I just don’t see how you call it a “paper” offense. It’s basically linecutting, when the line is leading to something very much wanted, which many people on the line won’t get.</p>

<p>It’s not that it’s an offense against the college; it’s an offense against the students who chose to follow the rules.</p>

<p>If you wouldn’t allow your own kids to do this, why would you think it’s okay for others?</p>

<p>Cheating in order to gain something at the expense of others; that’s what doesn’t sit well with me. if that makes me self-righteous, I say fine, and I say that puts me in a lot of good company over the years.</p>

284

<p>I would agree, Dunnin, about the OP not being a native English speaker. But that doesn’t mean s/he isn’t savvy and his/her actions aren’t premeditated. If you just run through the thread and read the OP’s posts only, the picture is fairly clear.</p>

285

<p>

Really??
Seems to me that she knows EXACTLY what she’s doing:

</p>

286

<p>I find I don’t really have the language to express my feelings about this. Unusual for me, so I guess I’ll give up trying.</p>

<p>As to garland’s point that I wouldn’t let my kids do it so why others? As a young mother I was never exercised about what other kids did to my kids. That was their parents’ job. My children wouldn’t dream of doing something like the OP, so not much parenting needed there.</p>

<p>I think for one, we’re too scared about consequences. For two, both my kids are very ethical, but to the extreme.</p>

<p>I guess I am, too.</p>

<p>However, “the rules” have very rich kids at elite LAC’s and unis they didn’t earn. “The rules” just don’t happen to be fair IMO, including the rules of ED, so once a context is unfair, I don’t much fault someone for trying to play the situation to his advantage. And then, other people’s morality just much interest me unless the impact on my life is massive.</p>

<p>For instance, I’m handicapped, and if a non-handicapped person takes a spot I am not one of those who really cares and gets upset. Even if there are no other spots left. I wait, find a close non-handicapped spot, decide today’s the for a great effort, or park illegally myself. Heaven forbid.</p>

<p>I’m sure, I am being as unclear as ever, so I should stop.</p>

287

<p>MM–you certainly are a more forgiving person than I am! When I was on crutches with a couple broken legs, I did tell off at least one person who’d taken the only handicap spot because, as she told me, she was “in a hurry.”</p>

<p>I certainly don’t want to be in disagreement with you. Perhaps our contexts are different. I live in a less affluent area, so the kids i’ve known who applied ED are not the stereotypical rich kids of CC notariety. They’re just ordinary middle to lower middleclass kids who took the schools on their word on meeting EFCs, crossed their fingers, and stuck by their own word. It has seemd to work out okay for them.</p>

<p>I do worry, maybe over worry, about the fluidity of integrity, and how others I don’t know might be affected by it. I can’t assume that those who will be injured are rich, privileged, or otherwise not needed to be worried about. Basically, I worry about everyone. That’s my nature, no sense trying to change it.</p>

<p>but I certainly don’t want to be at odds with you, and respect that your position, though different from mine, is nuanced, thought out, and heartfelt. And I always think of you as one of my CC friends. :)</p>

288

<p>Yea! Me too.</p>

<p>I’m sure we feel more similarly than this little debate would indicate, that we want the best for the most deserving and often over looked.</p>

289

<p>Just to chime in…Do you all think this is unusual? Maybe I am a little jaded and cynical with this process, but as much as it absolutely kills me that this would happen, I think that it is MUCH more common than you think…(I have already “caught” others on CC on accepted ED threads AND accepted RD threads…a limited group … .maybe exaggerating, but nevertheless)</p>

290

<p>

</p>

<p>garland: I agree with your first statement, and I have great respect for you. Your second statement, however, disturbs me. Plenty of students who could be categorized as “rich and privileged” have high ethical standards, would never dream of acting in the selfish and deceitful way the OP has, and could be the very students who will be directly harmed by the OP’s conduct. “Rich and privileged” is not synonymous with immoral.</p>

291

<p>It’s not always easy to find, or even possible to find for some instutitions, but where I have been able to see admitted and enrolled numbers for ED, I have never seen a difference of more than a couple students (and usually no difference at all). My conclusion is that, while people talk about this all the time, and while some colleges say explicitly that the binding nature of the ED commitment is contingent on acceptable financial aid, very, very few students renege on ED commitments for any reason, much less for dishonorable ones. Tens of thousands of kids are admitted somewhere or another ED every year, and if the slippage is 1% I would be surprised. Most kids who apply ED seem to understand and to accept the bargain, and are happy with the result if admitted. Instead of stewing in what might have been, they put on the t-shirt or hoodie and start researching dorms and courses (not to mention smirking at their friends who are still trying to complete essays for RD applications). </p>

<p>Maybe where you guys live the system looks like it’s on the verge of collapse because of kids with an integrity deficit playing games. I only encounter such things on CC. In my real world, ED is enormously popular, not only with wealthy kids, but also with un-wealthy kids who have a fair amount of sophistication about the financial aid track record of their target colleges. </p>

<p>Furthermore, in the face of such popularity, it’s hard for me to call it unfair. The kids I see have no trouble figuring it out, usually with the help of parents and guidance counselors. The basic ED bargain is perfectly reasonable.</p>

<p>My emotional response to the OP included a number of elements that others seem not to share: </p>

<p>I felt bad for her, as I feel bad for anyone in pain. She came across as conflicted and unhappy, lacking good advice, not understanding what her situation really was. I wanted to treat her they way I hope other people would treat my children if they brought a problem to those others rather than to me for some reason. </p>

<p>I don’t condemn people for wanting what they want. What matters is doing the right thing in the end. I don’t like to treat someone as a bad person until he or she definitively acts like one. Especially someone who is, in my mind, a kid, and still learning how to be a real person. And, since it is often the case that some days pass between the time I give my children advice they don’t want to hear and the time they accept it, I didn’t get upset when the OP didn’t immediately bow to the tsumami of advice and criticism she got.</p>

<p>The fairness of the ED system depends in large part on kids understanding it, and getting good advice about how they fit into it. As far as I was concerned, the evidence suggested that the OP didn’t understand it – not complete miscomprehension, but a pretty serious error about Harvard’s position, something that is often reinforced by posts of the “jaded” variety on CC – and that she had not understood her market position at all. Neither makes reneging OK, but I think I can manage some sympathy for them. Furthermore, even knowing anything about the LAC in this equation, I think it’s obvious that the OP fundamentally misapprehends the difference between it and Harvard. And I KNOW that the OP lacks good tactical understanding and advice, because if she had either she would never, ever have started this discussion on CC.</p>

<p>Finally, I have some legal context, too. In point of fact, if push came to shove I cannot imagine a court enforcing the ED agreement. No court would order a kid to enroll in a college she didn’t want, or enjoin her from enrolling in a different college, and no court would make her pay significant damages for breaking the contract. Enforcement of the ED contract depends entirely on colleges other than the ED college respecting it. Of course, they do. But if they didn’t . . . well, that would be part of the “rules” too. That’s why the OP didn’t think she was such an awful person – she thought she was playing by the real rules.</p>

292

<p>wjb–you misunderstand me (I didn’t write clearer). I was responding to the idea that since ED is characterized as being in favor of wealthy or “elite” students, it’s not so necessary to respect its tenets. My point was, rich or not, the students who follow it have a right to the respect of being treated fairly by their fellow students, and also that it’s wrong to assume they are “rich” in the first place. </p>

<p>As i said above that statement, I “worry” about everyone.</p>

293

<p>Got it. Thanks for the clarification.</p>

294

<p>Wow - this has turned into a huge thread.
After all this, I wonder if he still plans to go through with it(?)</p>

295

<p>

But what is argued about ED is not that students are compelled to attend but that their application choices are unreasonably restricted by the contract - this is what one poster considers “unconscionable”, which would void the contract. The implication is that other schools have no legal basis to require adherence to that contract. That is, should the OP be admitted to a school RD, that admission cannot be rescinded if/when the prior ED admission is uncovered (nor could the ED admission!).</p>

<p>

I’d suggest there is enough evidence that the OP is actively manipulating the process (e.g., the mid-year transcript submission) that this condition is fulfilled.</p>

296

<p>I would not like it, not at all, if S were denied admission to the LAC solely because he had the misfortune to 1.) apply ED to the LAC when the OP had – the OP takes up a spot she doesn’t intend to use in the ED round; or 2.) attend the same HS the OP did – the OP’s actions lead to the LAC retaliating against students at the HS.</p>

<p>The OP’s actions may affect students at her HS for years to come. This is not a “paper” issue; it’s one that could have negative repercussions for others.</p>

<p>There is nothing inherently unfair about the ED process; no one made her apply ED, after all. It was her choice. If she didn’t want to play by ED’s rules, she shouldn’t have grabbed a spot in the game. She did, however, and now, she should demonstrate strength of character in living up to those rules.</p>

<p>I don’t think for a minute that she will, however.</p>

297

<p>The ED contract isn’t even in the ballpark of “unconscionable”. To be “unconscionable”, it essentially has to be an agreement no reasonable person would make absent utter ignorance, coercion or fraud. There’s nothing like that here. </p>

<p>I think it’s unenforceable in court, but that’s really because there is no appropriate judicial enforcement remedy. It would be a waste to compel a teenager to go to college where he didn’t want to go, or to keep him from attending one that was willing to enroll him and where he wanted to go, and in any event courts don’t like to enjoin individuals except to prevent a compelling harm to the other party, which wouldn’t be the case here. As for damages – there are no damages, assuming the ED college can find someone to take the reneger’s place. Most jurisdictions do not permit punitive damages for breach of contract. In terms of public enforcement, the student would lose his deposit, and that’s about it.</p>

<p>As I said, the system thrives only because competing colleges are willing to enforce it. If ED were really unconscionable, that wouldn’t happen. Seven out of the top 10 USNWR private universities, and five out of the top five public universities, do not have any ED option of their own to protect. If they wanted to end ED, they could.</p>

298

<p>Yale and Stanford both have Single Choice Early Action, which impose a considerable restriction on kids who choose to apply. </p>

<p>If it were not for the SC part of SCEA, many kids could have applied EA to their second choice school, in many cases greatly increasing their chances of getting in there. Instead, they followed the rules, and most of them were deferred SCEA. They then faced the RD round with significantly reduced chances elsewhere.</p>

<p>It ticks me off that thousands of kids, including my own, honorably observed these rules and ED rules at other schools, and that the OP plans to cheat and take a place away from one of them.</p>

<p>I would agree that forcing someone to attend an ED school would be foolish and would be unenforceable in court. But the other part of the deal–refusing to admit a student found to have applied after signing an ED agreement–would indeed be enforceable, I would think. I doubt that a court would say that one of the schools that the OP–oh so innocently [SNORT!]–refers to being “on the table” cannot rescind an acceptance if they find out what she has done.</p>

299

<p>It’s been a couple of days since ITHINKTHEREFOREIAM posted… I hope she is withdrawing her RD apps.</p>

300

<p>P.S. shouldn’t there a latin phrase which says:</p>

<p>“I act with honor, therefore I am”?</p>