Political & Elections

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

RE: Why do colleges accept and protect students with disciplinary/criminal issues?

Cartera · Guru

Just because the colleges ask, doesn't mean the schools tell. The schools are controlled by their internal policies so many do not report disciplinary problems. The following article is informative.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/10/04/discipline

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Jordcin,

Did your daughter fill out the Common Application? There is a whole section that the guidance counselor fills out "The Secondary School Report":

Here it the link:

https://www.commonapp.org/CommonApp/DownloadForms.aspx

There are two sections, the Student Application and the Secondary School Report that ask about violations. I would copy and paste but it won't let me.

Perhaps your daughter's prospective colleges don't ask about disciplinary history, but several hundred colleges in this county do, including Ivy League schools.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

soccerguy315 wrote:

all I am saying is that whenever a topic like this comes up, it is always females that get hurt by the mean males. I'm saying it goes the other way too, hence it goes both ways... and to only focus on females as the victims and males as the problem with society is misguided.

As I said before, every conflict goes both ways to some degree. The important matter is the extent to which it goes both ways.

Are more females victimized by males, or the other way around? Is there a heavy slant towards one direction, or is it roughly even?

Obviously, people will have different positions. My position is that male-on-female violence right now is a more serious issue than vice versa, despite a a handful of high profile cases of false accusations of rape.

You need to come up with a position of your own as well. Throwing out a "it goes both ways" adds little to the discussion: duh it goes both ways. To me, it seems like a petulant and non-committal way of downplaying male-on-female violence..

-- Edited by nbachris2788 on Wednesday 22nd of December 2010 12:23:26 AM

soccerguy315 · Guru

all I am saying is that whenever a topic like this comes up, it is always females that get hurt by the mean males. I'm saying it goes the other way too, hence it goes both ways... and to only focus on females as the victims and males as the problem with society is misguided.

BigG · Guru

I think "goes both ways" was not a reference to a single interaction between two individuals but rather to the entire class of interactions.

My queries were intended to be couched in a manner to indicate consideration of many cases, not percentage of culpability in one case.

I have both sons and daughters. I want them all to be treated fairly.

-- Edited by BigG on Tuesday 21st of December 2010 07:27:14 PM

-- Edited by BigG on Tuesday 21st of December 2010 07:29:13 PM

Jordcin · Veteran Member

SamuraiLandshark wrote:

That being said, schools and their counselors have different standards of what must be disclosed. If a student has drank at a school function, that must be disclosed to a college on an application along with the consequences.

I have helped by my daughter fill out applications for fall 2011. I haven't seen anything asking about drinking, suspension, etc. Also, my daughter's HS does not disclose any suspensions or troubles at school. So how would a college know?

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

BigG wrote:

What would be the magnitude of the differential that would obviate "goes both ways"?

90% vs. 10%?

95% vs 5%?

55% vs 45%?

Rarely is there a conflict between two parties where all the harm is done one way. For example, men make up the vast majority of domestic abusers and rapists, but certainly there are some women who abuse and rape men.

So to say that something "goes both ways" is a given, a meaningless duh statement unless it is used — as it usually is — to imply some form of balance and share of blame between the transgressions of two parties.

-- Edited by nbachris2788 on Tuesday 21st of December 2010 05:34:17 PM

berurah · Senior Member

blankmind wrote:

Is it just me, or do the cases mentioned in this thread all involve athletes?

This guy wasn't an athlete: http://www.californiainjurylawyersblog.com/2010/12/ucla-student-files-los-angeles-county-personal-injury-lawsuit-against-the-university-of-california-r.html (don't know how to post a link here)

This type of case really bothers me.

blankmind~

I agree with you...that is a very disturbing case. I don't think it's possible for colleges to prevent each and every incident or act of violence because not everyone who commits these types of crimes has a prior record of mental/behaviorial issues. But why colleges would take risks with known troubled students is beyond me. As I said, elite schools have their pick of highly qualified, highly talented prospective students from which to select a student body. There is no need to take a chance on someone who has demonstrated a lack of personal repsonsibility and an unwillingness to conform to the most basic rules--the red flags are already waving. No surprise if the behavior continues in a venue which combines the most freedom with the least responsibility (and the privacy protections offered students).

-- Edited by berurah on Wednesday 22nd of December 2010 09:26:17 AM

blankmind · Senior Member

Is it just me, or do the cases mentioned in this thread all involve athletes?

This guy wasn't an athlete: http://www.californiainjurylawyersblog.com/2010/12/ucla-student-files-los-angeles-county-personal-injury-lawsuit-against-the-university-of-california-r.html (don't know how to post a link here)

This type of case really bothers me. The violent person has mental illness issues that are known to the university, and is put out there in the middle of the unknowing, unsuspecting, innocent student body. This poor girl was visciously attacked by a fellow lab student, he just suddenly slashed her throat during a lab, no provocation, no warning. This could happen to any kid just minding their own business, going to class.

From the article:
"Rosen, who was stabbed and had her throat slashed, had to undergo surgery and was hospitalized for 10 days after"

'Rosen is contending that in the months leading up to her attack on Oct. 8, 2009, UCLA professors and officials had received reports about Thompson's behavior, which had been described as "strange, disturbing, erratic, angry, dangerous, threatening, and/or paranoid." The 21-year-old had even allegedly threatened teachers because of an "irrational belief" that other students were bullying and taunting him. Last month, Thompson, who admitted to stabbing Rosen, was found not guilty by reason of insanity and ordered to a psychiatric hospital."

BigG · Guru

What would be the magnitude of the differential that would obviate "goes both ways"?

90% vs. 10%?

95% vs 5%?

55% vs 45%?

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

soccerguy315 wrote:

I didn't say they were equal in number.

You said it went both ways, which strongly implied an equivalency.

soccerguy315 · Guru

I didn't say they were equal in number.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

soccerguy315 wrote:

well, Duke did the exact opposite of protecting their students. The administration and all the professors came out against these innocent students.

at my school, this girl got really drunk and had sex with multiple guys during and after a sorority formal, then she accused one of them of rape. The guy was kicked out of school until the girl graduated, even though he wasn't charged in court because there wasn't enough evidence. His name was in the papers and sent out in messages to the entire student body from the administration. The girl's name was not released. However, someone put up flyers with the girl's name all over campus... that got another message from the administration about how the girl should not be identified. Apparently they feel that it is fair to protect false accusers.

another time, a girl gave oral sex to 7 guys on camera. Then she cried rape when her bf found out.

another girl accused someone (a founder of '1 in 4', no less) of rape after providing the condom

this stuff goes both ways

Confusing sexual standards as well as personal irresponsibility that causes some women to falsely accuse men of rape is indeed a problem.

Nevertheless, the number of women who are harassed or abused by degenerate males — and forced to take it because "he doesn't mean it" or "he's such a catch since he's captain of the swim team" — is far greater than the cases of falsely-accused rape. It's a false equivalency.

soccerguy315 · Guru

well, Duke did the exact opposite of protecting their students. The administration and all the professors came out against these innocent students.

at my school, this girl got really drunk and had sex with multiple guys during and after a sorority formal, then she accused one of them of rape. The guy was kicked out of school until the girl graduated, even though he wasn't charged in court because there wasn't enough evidence. His name was in the papers and sent out in messages to the entire student body from the administration. The girl's name was not released. However, someone put up flyers with the girl's name all over campus... that got another message from the administration about how the girl should not be identified. Apparently they feel that it is fair to protect false accusers.

another time, a girl gave oral sex to 7 guys on camera. Then she cried rape when her bf found out.

another girl accused someone (a founder of '1 in 4', no less) of rape after providing the condom

this stuff goes both ways

Cartera · Guru

Steroids are a huge problem, but other drugs are involved too. Abuse of prescription drugs such as Adderall is a problem. In certain sports, cocaine is prevalent. The abuse of alcohol contributes to the use of the uppers.

As a side note on the Hugueley case, they have revealed that Yeardley Love had alcohol and Adderall in her system - a dangerous combination. I think Huguely's blood test will be very revealing.

BigG · Guru

In many cases the aberrant behavior is caused by a combination of steroid abuse and "spoiled child" social development exacerbated by observation of a history of leniency for older peers with athletic talent.

Steroids do nothing for the performance arts. Well maybe a little for dancers...

Tradition is big for the Ivies. That is why they play football. It also gives the impression they share typical American values.

When you consider all NCAA Division I sports, the "elite schools" are fairly competitive.

-- Edited by BigG on Sunday 19th of December 2010 06:22:48 PM

-- Edited by BigG on Sunday 19th of December 2010 06:25:59 PM

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Is it just me, or do the cases mentioned in this thread all involve athletes?

Or is there a cadre of criminally-violent theatre majors that we haven't heard of?

The fact seems to be that commercialism (in the case of schools of like ND) and pointless homoeroticism (in the case of elite universities with hopeless athletic programs) drive some schools to go to great lengths to be extra-lenient and forgiving towards male athletes.

Cartera · Guru

Doing things to get elected has taken down many - Nifong included.

BigG · Guru

Very sad indeed...

Nifong and Mangum severely damaged the justice system.
Prosecutors are reluctant to press a case involving alleged sexual assault.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
My criteria for fairness and justice;

My son is the accused.
OR
My daughter is the victim.

Ahead of time, I don't know which is the circumstance.

How do I set up the justice system?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prior to the Nifong debacle, I had thought the "system" was pretty good.

Now I just don't know.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

The sad fact is that sexual assault is an under-reported crime. Even if the woman does report to the police, it's possible that no charges will be filed.

I can't imagine what led this young lady to think that she had to end her life over it. It's a very sad case.

Cartera · Guru

I agree that a lawsuit is probably pointless. The family seemed to want most of all to be recognized and to be supported in some way by the school they thought of as an extended family. No doubt, ND was doing what was told by legal counsel, but perhaps someone there should have listened to the higher power invoked in other situations. There should have been an immediate investigation. The outcome would perhaps have been the same with regard to the athlete - "he said, she said" would have gone in favor of the accused. However, we will never know whether there would have been a different outcome for the young woman had there been a proper investigation and that is the pity.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

At the beginning of the year, a woman at my U accused two basketball players of raping her. There haven't been many details released, but we do know that the prosecute refused to prosecute saying "lack of evidence" and the university didn't even launch an internal investigation. It's sickening and a whole collation formed around this.

Here's a quick synopsis. I admit, I haven't watched the video in the article: http://lansingonlinenews.com/community/coalition-against-sexual-violence-protests-msu-basketball/

poetgrl · Senior Member

thank you for the link.

I have to be a flip-flopper and just state that I am a big believer in innocent until proven guilty. It is way too bad there was no investigation.

True shame.

But, the issue with athletes is society-wide, and not just in high schools and colleges.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

This football player hasn't been charged with any crime, yet.

The incident was reported to the police and I am not sure if she filed charges.

Last time I checked, our legal system was built on the "innocent until proven guilty" mantra.

Here is the press release from the Prosecuting Attorney's office:

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2010-12/272335660-16095122.pdf

I would be shocked out of my mind if the Seeberg's win any kind of wrongful death suit in this case based on this press release. Most likely, it will be assumed that this young woman was distraught and suffered from depression.

The St. Joseph County Prosecutor's Office has decided not to press charges against any students in Lizzy Seeberg's case. Michael Dvorak, writing on the Office's behalf, said that there were conflicts in the witness testimonials, and that subpoenaed phone records conflicted with Seeberg's complaint. He also pointed out that "Ms. Seeberg's statements -- as a consequence of her untimely death on September 10, 2010 -- would be found inadmissible in a court of law because of evidentiary rules involving hearsay."

As I said earlier. There is more to this story.

-- Edited by SamuraiLandshark on Saturday 18th of December 2010 10:42:32 PM

berurah · Senior Member

poetgrl wrote:

The only way to change the culture is to hold the culture responsible.

This is pretty much what I've been saying and sums up my feelings on the matter.

poetgrl · Senior Member

Well, the parents' should sue. They should bring civil action.

The only way to change the culture is to hold the culture responsible.

Cartera · Guru

I seriously doubt if we have heard the last of the ND player. Some other woman will very likely be or already has been hurt by him. Since she'll know how seriously allegations will be taken, we'll probably not hear anything until he kills someone.

The UVA lacrosse coaches deny knowing about Huguely's arrest at W&L, but I will never believe they did not know. I have very good friends who are entrenched in the lacrosse culture througout the east coast and each and every one of them says it is inconceivablee to them that the coaches did not know. People turned a blind eye to his violence until he killed someone.

-- Edited by Cartera on Saturday 18th of December 2010 10:12:33 PM

poetgrl · Senior Member

Did UVA have the information about Hugely's arrest while at UVA?

Do they have an honor code? Does it include things like "this?"

I wonder if colleges even get these kinds of records once the kids are enrolled?

I don't think so. In the interest of privacy for all of our kids' sake, I really don't think colleges should have access to information I can't get because of privacy laws.....too big-brotherish, for me.

I guess, in the end, all of our kids are going to go out into the world and they are going to be faced with all sorts of people who have done all sorts of things and some bad things are going to happen and some really good things are going to happen.

I feel awful for the parents of these kids, truly, truly awful. I sincerely hope my daughters would not become overly involved with a guy with this type of temper.

A mother can hope.

But, in this case, I'm not sure the school was negligent unless they "knew"

In the case of the ND athlete? The fact that there was NO investigation and they knew? Sounds a LOT like what happens in the world with all sorts of athletes. Arrests all over the place and cover ups too. We need to teach our daughters to spot guys like this from down the block and MOVE ON.

If the school is involved in a coverup, the parents should sue. It happened in Colorado, and their whole system changed after what happened there. Universities need to learn that.

-- Edited by poetgrl on Saturday 18th of December 2010 10:11:23 PM

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

But B,

That arrest happened when he was a student at UVA. Not when he was in prep school.

It's not exactly a flattering portrayal of high school guidance counselors, either.

I totally disagree with you on background criminal checks for college applications. A large amount of these students will be minors when they apply for admissions, and some even minors when they walk through their college campuses for the first time.

As the mother of a daughter and two sons, I understand and empathize with your viewpoint.

berurah · Senior Member

SamuraiLandshark wrote:

So I guess I ask, since I don't know much about the details of this case. Did he have a long track record of discipline in high school and college?

I don't know any high school counselors that would write a recommendation for any kid that had violent tendencies. Do you?

Sure...a high school counselor at an elite private school might write such a rec...for the right price.

Here an excerpt from an article about George Huguely:

Wednesday's Washington Post detailed Huguely's prior arrest, which began when Lexington police officer R.L. Moff found Huguely stumbling into traffic and asked him if there were anyone who could come and get him to prevent his being arrested. His response, the paper quoted Moff as saying, was: "I'll kill you. I'll kill all of y'all. I'm not going to jail.'' He also shouted racial and sexual slurs and other vulgarities at the officer, a woman.

Call me harsh, but that would have been enough for me as a college admissions counselor.

Eating a pot brownie = youthful indiscretion

Yelling threats of "I'll kill you. I'll kill all of y'all" to a police officer? Being a nasty and mean drunk? Resisting arrest and needing to be Tased? Yelling racial and sexist slurs? Not so much.

I think schools should perform background criminal checks. I have two beautiful, lovely daughters in college. They...and all of our kids...deserve that small measure of protection.

-- Edited by berurah on Saturday 18th of December 2010 09:18:01 PM

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

The thing that concerns me about this original case of the young girl who took her own life is that, in an attempt to get answers for the girl's family, there is a rush to judgement with regards to this young athlete.

He may be a bad boy or thug. I don't know.

But isn't this what happened with the Duke Lacrosse case? A rush for answers and in the meantime three young men's lives were ruined?

I't easy to lodge accusations and to feel sympathy for this family. It's devastating.

But there may be more to this story.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Berurah,

You bring up the Yeardley Love case.

Did George Huguely have a long criminal past? As far as I can see, he had one arrest, for which he was swearing in public, drunk and resisted arrest. He swore profanities at the officer and threatened to kill them. He was tasered. Fined, was given probation and a jail sentence and had to perform community service. The probation and jail sentence were suspended.

This is bad, but I am not seeing how UVA could have done anything. He didn't self-report the incident according to school rules.

So I guess I ask, since I don't know much about the details of this case. Did he have a long track record of discipline in high school and college?

I am not trying to be difficult - I honestly have never heard of ANYONE IRL who had a long history of suspension and expulsions and discipline issues being admitted to elite schools. This is not to say that it hasn't happened in the past, present or future. I am sure there are cases - but it's not the norm, IMO.

None of us want violent students to go to college with our sons and daughters. I am not arguing in defense of rotten, angry, violent kids getting into elite colleges. I just don't think the numbers are that significant in terms of percentages.

I don't know any high school counselors that would write a recommendation for any kid that had violent tendencies. Do you?

berurah · Senior Member

poetgrl wrote:

I don't really think colleges "should" be held liable for admitting students who have had past problems. I think, however, they should be held liable for not investigating when problems arise with students once they do get to campus.

A kid who has had a few problems in the past and has gotten his act together is just as worthy of an education as a kid who has not ever been caught doing anything wrong. Do we really want to doom kids to having no college education if they have had some issues when they were teenagers? Kids do stupid things from time to time, which have no bearing on what they will become as an adult. I mean, if I had to live the life I was destined for at 15 years old, I would not be here right now talking to all of you.

I don't see how society would benefit from creating a sub-educated class out of impulsive teenagers.

But, as I said, once they are on campus, any kind of cover up is really reprehensible. JMO

I am in no way advocating that impulsive and rule-breaking teens be segregated into a "sub-educated" class--not by any means. Not all colleges are equal--some are much more elite with supposedly higher standards of admissions. One might ask, "Should we create a less-elite educated class of people simply because they do not score as well on the SAT or the ACT as others? Why should THOSE kids not be admitted to HYPS, etc.?" We already "discriminate," if that is what one wants to call it, by saying...if you do not score highly enough on these tests (or do outstanding enough extracurriculars), you will not be among the elite educated in this country.

What is so different about holding these kids to some decent kind of standard of behavior? Sure, kids do foolish things, and most of those kids mature. I am not in any way advocating that those who have youthful indiscretions be blocked from elite admissions. But there is a major, major difference between kids who do one or two typical-teen type things and ones who have long, documented records of suspensions, expulsions, and incidents around selling drugs, angry and violent behavior, and an overall disregard for authority and for their peers. That's why we have admissions committees--to distinguish between these two types of situations.

I do not understand the position that a prospective student who has a long history of questionable behavior be given the same consideration as an equally bright, equally accomplished student who has demonstrated a long history of personal responsibility and no evidence of problems around personal conduct. What is the motivation, then, for toeing the line and being a decent responsible student?

Unfortunately, many kids with long histories of behavioral issues have never been made to take responsibility for their actions. There SHOULD be consequences for poor choices--it is part of what motivates good choices and responsibility.

Denying someone with a long history of disciplinary issues an elite education does not equal denying them an education. There are many, many less selective schools (although I would be against any school admitting some of these students, esp. if they have been dangerous to others). Higher education is not a right. It is a privilege that should go along with some measure of responsibility. People make all sorts of choices that affect their futures. To protect truly delinquent or criminally-inclined kids from the consequences of their actions is to encourage them to continue in their same patterns of behavior and to show disregard for everyone who must share a campus with them.

If I were Yeardley Love's parents, I'd be devastated and angry if I found out that her killer was admitted with huge red flags on his personal conduct record!!

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

I don't believe that any student has a right to see any other student's disciplinary file, particularly if it happened in the past. It's a slippery slope.

If they are committed of a crime, it will be decided whether or not this information is relevant to the case, and at that point will be part of the public record.

Like Poetgrl, I would like to say that what happens in high school should stay in high school. My adventures weren't huge, but I was suspended from school. Sure, just once. But it happened and I am pleased that it didn't ruin my life.

I am no fan of zero tolerance policies, either.

Kids do mature. Even good and freaking amazing kids do incredibly boneheaded things. I had a two-fer in my house. Both of my sons did something really, really dumb and we got that phone call from the police. Thank goodness they were minors. Nobody was in any danger, there was no property damage, but what they did was stupid and against the law.

We went to court several times. Cost us money in fees and lost work time. The juvenile judges basically hope they never see you again. Their goal is to make sure these kids don't become problems to society.

[Those judgements get sealed for a reason, once the minor is an adult and has complied with the terms of what the judge decides.]

One week before, one of those amazing kids won a scholarship valued at $200k. The guidance counselor considered writing a letter to the colleges and ROTC. I have no idea what would have happened if she decided to go through with this. Perhaps it wouldn't have made any difference. Perhaps he would have lost the scholarship or had his admission rescinded.

Can you imagine what this bright, smart kid would have done if he lost his chance for an education? Not just an education, but his future career? It's too horrible a thought for me to ponder.

Did my kids learn from this? Yes. Will they do it again? Hopefully not. Could they? Absolutely.

Where is the difference though from a kid who has been suspended a couple of times and receives detention? Kids have fights and do pranks and there is a wide variety from a repeat offender to one who is on the edge and a danger to himself or herself or others.

I know a wonderful kid that did drugs in high school when he was 18 and a senior. Because of this, his family is ineligble to receive Federal financial aid. It's a struggle for the family financially. Never done anything wrong again.

I just don't know a lot of kids who have the grades to go to college that have big disciplinary files. Maybe our school is an outlier. I don't know.

Anyone read "The Gatekeepers?" Remember that young lady who loses her chance to go to one of her top colleges because of the pot brownie incident?

There is a huge difference between dealing drugs on campus and smoking a joint. Yet, for all intents and purposes, the result can be the same for a college applicant.

It IS a competitive world in college admissions. One incident reported on those forms can be the difference between a kid getting in, and not.

If there is a situation on campus, I also agree with poetgrl. It should be investigated and dealt with according to the terms of the college.

poetgrl · Senior Member

Yes, nice avatar. We seem to be a dog bunch over here.

I don't really think colleges "should" be held liable for admitting students who have had past problems. I think, however, they should be held liable for not investigating when problems arise with students once they do get to campus.

A kid who has had a few problems in the past and has gotten his act together is just as worthy of an education as a kid who has not ever been caught doing anything wrong. Do we really want to doom kids to having no college education if they have had some issues when they were teenagers? Kids do stupid things from time to time, which have no bearing on what they will become as an adult. I mean, if I had to live the life I was destined for at 15 years old, I would not be here right now talking to all of you.

I don't see how society would benefit from creating a sub-educated class out of impulsive teenagers.

But, as I said, once they are on campus, any kind of cover up is really reprehensible. JMO

longprime · Guru

I got an Avatar!

Like me?

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

What is delinquent? What is criminal? Where does youthful indescretion turn into a deal breaker for a college or for that young man or woman?

When you are dealing with minors, most court systems will err on the side of either incarceration or forgiveness.

Colleges do try to avoid those with large disciplinary files. I would be surprised if this list of admits is large for any specific college.

That being said, schools and their counselors have different standards of what must be disclosed. If a student has drank at a school function, that must be disclosed to a college on an application along with the consequences. Other school disciplinary issues, yes. You will find this done at the guidance counselor's discretion.

I know a lovely young lady who drank at a school function, didn't get caught but turned herself in to her school administration and ended up at one of the most prestigious universities in the country. And she deserved to be there. Her counselor disclosed her mature response to this situation and it didn't harm her application.

If a kid is in the principals office more than class in high school, than I would doubt he or she is going to make it to the ivy leagues. But that kid might fall under the cracks with a public college who is not going to require several recommendations. A kid might not check a self-disclosed discipline box on the college app for these schools.

With regards to violence against others or sexual assualt, likely the courts will have intervened and that student isn't the one who is applying for admission.

More often than not, it's going to be the kid who has a history of drug or alcohol abuse or even mental health issues, such as bipolar disorder or depression.

I don't think it's always so cut and dry when it comes to this issue.

berurah · Senior Member

I would love to see the colleges start to be held accountable for the actions of students whom they admitted with KNOWN histories of delinquent and criminal behavior. I do think that a differentiation should be made between one youthful indiscretion and long, consistent, spotty discipline records with multiple suspensions and expulsions. Clearly those sorts of students are a huge risk for colleges and for the other students entrusted to their care.

I don't understand the concept of elite college as "finder of diamond in the rough." There are too many clearly shining diamonds to choose from, and in very, very few cases (from the college's perspective) are these "gems" irreplaceable. Fact is, there are many, many more qualified applicants to colleges, particularly elite colleges, than there are spots for them. I cannot think of one single reason to waste a spot on someone who is a poor risk from the beginning.

If any college student is assaulted/hurt/raped/killed by a fellow student, the injured student's family should have access to the records of the offender. If the student was a clear risk, the college should be held accountable. Money talks in both directions. If colleges had to answer for their poor choices, maybe they would be much more selective.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

This is kind of a side issue, but one that leads to a bigger problem.

Let's say your child is having problems in college - depression, violence, chemical dependency, etc...FERPA rules place huge restrictions from the college notifying family members. FERPA did change some of these rules in 2009 to help with dealing with in particular with safety and violence issues.

I have been lucky with my kids not having any issues. But what if they did? What if I sent a borderline kid to college who was a little fragile or had a serious medical issue? Or one that has recovered from drugs or alcohol abuse and trying to get a fresh start?

It would be hard to know if there were problems because the college would likely not inform you until it was a HUGE issue or something bad happened. When would a college RA notify a parent if they suspected something was wrong? You gotta wonder.

My cousin has a child who is a recovering drug user. He has been clean for two years and would like to move on with his life. Hard to do, because without a strong support system added to stress, they are concerned it will be a monumental task to keep him on the right path.

jazzy · Senior Member

I believe the lacrosse player who killed his girlfriend --- beat her to death --- at UVa had had skirmishes in the past as well.

Athletic skill, and wealthy parents, can help smooth over any trouble spots and I think college officials are easy to sell on the notion that young people can turn their lives around under the influence of their fine institutions ---- provided the institution is getting something in return of course.

Tom1944 · Senior Member

Because the college feels that student brings them something- athletic success, access to money etc. that over rides the safety and security of the other students.

Artemis · Senior Member

That is such a tragic case, and, sadly, not an anomaly.

As long as parents, coaches, principals, or others who should be holding these children accountable for their actions see fit to sweep bad behavior under the carpet for whatever reason (athlete, "good" family, politically connected family, dysfunctional family, etc), the child has it reinforced time and again that the rules do not apply to them. Bad behavior is bound to escalate.

"The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior"...

Politics Daily has also confirmed that the accused player was suspended in high school for aggressive behavior towards a teacher, according to a newspaper account published at the time because he was a star player. The mother of a former classmate of the accused told me that after years of complaints that he regularly bullied other students, he was expelled from middle school in the 7th grade for threatening a girl.

Every day of elementary school, this woman told me, her daughter would come home in the afternoon complaining about something the boy had done. "She'd come home saying, 'I hate him! I hate him!' and I'd say, 'You can't speak about anyone like that.' Then one day in the fifth grade she told me he had picked up a girl in their class and thrown her -- tossed her like you'd toss a piece of paper. He was bigger than everybody else, and violent.

-- Edited by Artemis on Friday 17th of December 2010 12:42:31 PM

berurah · Senior Member

I don't get it....

High schools give the appearance of "zero tolerance" and rule enforcement. Nevertheless, students with disciplinary records get accepted to good colleges and students who are out-of-control at colleges are protected.

My heart goes out to this family who lost a precious, beautiful daughter.

Tom and Mary's daughter Lizzy, a 19-year-old freshman at Notre Dame's sister school, Saint Mary's College, committed suicide in September, 10 days after reporting that she had been fondled against her will by a Notre Dame football player whose aggressiveness terrified her so much that she froze, cried, and broke out in a rash.

No surprise at this kid's behavior...he was a huge problem in high school!

The accused, a star whom head coach Brian Kelly has publicly praised in interviews both before and after Lizzy's death, has a history of behavior problems that continued even after he was recruited by Notre Dame; he was suspended during his senior year in high school for throwing a desk at a teacher who'd taken away his cell phone. Yet after Lizzy's allegations, he never sat out a single game, during a time that he could not have been "cleared," because he was not even interviewed by authorities until five days after she died -- 15 days after she'd filed her complaint.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/17/lizzy-seebergs-family-feels-violated-notre-dame-football-star/

-- Edited by berurah on Friday 17th of December 2010 08:50:16 AM