<p>This article:
<a href=“Why Don’t Colleges Get Rid of Their Bad Fraternities? - The Atlantic”>Why Don’t Colleges Get Rid of Their Bad Fraternities? - The Atlantic;
is not generally surprising (fraternities + alcohol = high risk environments), but this bit may be worrisome to parents of sons who join fraternities:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Generally, homeowners insurance will provide a legal defense for lawsuits arising from negligence. Intentional acts, of course, are rarely covered. In my experience (as a claims adjustor for several years) attorneys generally plead their cases in such a way that insurance coverage will be triggered. They know insurance companies have much deeper pockets and are much more pragmatic about settlement than your typical homeowner.</p>
<p>At the very least, insurer generally has to defend until they can have a court declare that there is no coverage and no duty to defend. Most courts view duty to defend very broadly. </p>
<p>Obviously intentional criminal acts are NOT covered under any insurance as a matter of public policy. </p>
<p>If the student is over 18 and an adult, why would the parents’ assets be at risk? Is it only by choice? To fund defense??</p>
<p>If he still ‘lives’ at home, is a dependant for tax purposes and such, the kid’s actions are generally covered as a ‘family member’ of the ‘homeowner’. If the kid is emancipated and paying his own way, coverage probably wouldn’t extend. Usually, it is in both the plaintiff’s and defendant’s interest that coverage be extended. </p>
<p>Fascinating article. Well worth reading the entire thing.</p>
<p>^^^I completely agree. This should be required reading for anyone with a son who is a member of or considering membership in a fraternity.</p>
<p>I find the article fascinating, but in a way odd. The similar factor in every case is alcohol. You don’t have to be in a fraternity to drink, it is a huge problem across most US campuses today. I don’t have a solution, but from DUI to MIPs to assaults, rapes and falls, I suspect you will find alcohol is the common denominator in most cases on college campuses.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your suspicion is probably correct. But note that fraternities tend to be associated with higher drinking and binge drinking at college, although certainly there is variation between different fraternity chapters (some colleges and some national fraternities have forced their chapters to have dry houses, while some non-dry fraternity chapters on non-dry campuses probably still match the Animal House stereotype).</p>
<p>Perhaps some of the most important rules for safety and security for a college student are:</p>
<ul>
<li>Do not get drunk.</li>
<li>Avoid situations where many people are drunk.</li>
</ul>
<p>Granted, it appears that many college students cannot resist the temptation.</p>
<p>also, i had started a separate thread on this without realizing this was here first so I"ll bring my comments over here 
but wanted to note that, yes, it could affect the finances of a parent. But I believe the bigger issue is 1) putting your child in physical danger and 2) having him be part of a culture that is dangerous for others…whether its sexual assault or overdrinking. Honestly I didn’t like fraternities a million years ago when I was in college…but I believe they are more destructive now and don’t understand why any parent want their kid to join one. </p>
<p>" this bit may be worrisome to parents of sons who join fraternities" Err… how about the last bit of that article being worrisome to parents of daughters who even set foot in fraternities?</p>
<p>Here we go again…I forwarded the article to my son the alcoholic, racist, homophobic, anti-intellectual, classist, rapist to see what he thought of it.</p>
<p>Well, he <em>is</em> guilty of being white.</p>
<p>The author did not appear to look for instances of students injuring themselves while drunk in dorms or private apartments. But it is likely that both have to adhere to safety standards that fraternity houses seem to evade in <em>some</em> cases.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Believe it or not there are parents of young adult who treat their children like young adults. So it’s not so much that parents want their children to join one, but they trust their child’s judgment. </p>
<p>@Consolation, How many students have been injured in hazing incidents trying to get a spot in a college dorm?</p>
<p>“many prospective members don’t realize and are not informed of what the pledging process and hazing will entail because this information is shrouded in secrecy by the brotherhood. This, combined with the increasing severity of the hazing over the weeks and months of the pledging process places the pledge in a very vulnerable position and hence, more susceptible to victimization. Compounding these dynamics in fraternities and other male groups is the desire for the pledge or prospective member to “be tough,” “stick it out” etc. and prove his masculinity rather than risk being identified as a wimp or sissy”
<a href=“http://stophazing.org/fraternity_hazing/index.htm”>http://stophazing.org/fraternity_hazing/index.htm</a></p>
<p>Even “young adults” can be victimized by these well-oiled machines.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not sure how many people actually read the article, but Mr. Bum Rocket and his flying friend as well as the young women who fell from the sleeping porch were not fraternity members, so in their case, being in a fraternity did not elevate their risk. I stand by my earlier statement. All three were drunk and the bottom line is alcohol is the root cause of these issues.</p>
<p>@mathyone</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did you read the article? Because if you did you would have read:</p>
<p>Many people believe that violent hazing is the most dangerous event associated with fraternity life, but hazing causes a relatively small percentage of these injuries.</p>
<p>The basis of the article is that falls cause a great many issues in these houses. Here is the reality, if dorms allowed alcohol under their roofs, the results would be the same. Some co-eds would think they could jump from a window or put a rocket their a$$. As I stated above Mr. Rocket was not a fraternity member. He was a college student looking for a place to drink, he found it, he drank and he should be responsible for his poor decision.</p>
<p>I did read the article, and the fellow who sued in the incident was not Mr. Rocket, but his friend who fell off a fraternity balcony that did not meet building codes. Show me a University dorm that has balconies with no railings. Or one that doesn’t meet fire codes, as some of the frats mentioned…</p>
<p>The question is why colleges allow and support the operation of fraternities who routinely flout regulations on drinking, building codes, etc, If it’s a University-associated organization, it should conform to University standards.</p>
<p>It is called the Old Boys Network. Alive and well at every level in society. The fall guy wasn’t in a fraternity either. But the article makes it seem that by being in a fraternity your risk is elevated. I think risk is elevated by stupidity.</p>
<p>Hazing may not cause the majority of incidents, but unlike drunken stupidity, it is premeditated, and therefore more horrifying.</p>
<p><a href=“Family of NYC College Hazing Victim Plans to Sue”>http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/family-nyc-college-hazing-victim-plans-sue-n33966</a></p>
<p><a href=“College Drinking | National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)”>http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/special-populations-co-occurring-disorders/college-drinking</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are approximately 400,000 active fraternity men on campuses today. So to say all these assaults and injuries are all about the Greek system is ridiculous. Alcohol management is the biggest challenge to college kids today. Since there are almost 21 million undergraduates, the percentage of greeks is small, but the focus is huge. </p>
<p>In our legal focused world, when a fraternity is involved, it is just one more organization or person to put on a lawsuit. The problem in the USA is that we fail to understand personal responsibility. Yes, there should have been a rail on that balcony. But his guy was drunk, was filming a friend and if he can operate his phone, he can asses danger and if felt unsafe, he should have removed himself from the situation.</p>