20/20 Friday Night- Underaged Confidential Informants on College Campuses

[TranquilMind]

Anyone see this 20/20 episode the other night, about using underaged college students as confidential informants, in some cases without bothering to inform the parents?  Yikes!  It was terrifying. 

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/dangers-college-student-campus-police-drug-informant/story?id=28357345

[SKL]

I didn't see where they said anything about "underaged."  It seems to me that an adult is an adult, whether at the university or anywhere else.

[TranquilMind]

I didn't see where they said anything about "underaged."  It seems to me that an adult is an adult, whether at the university or anywhere else.

Sorry, that link didn't really tell the story, I see.

There were two main stories.  One was a girl who was attacked by her own boyfriend after she took a sleeping pill.  The police had her go in, wearing a wire, and get his confession on tape, which she did. She was underage, but I can't remember if the parents were informed of that situation.  They may have been. 

 

The other was about a 20 year old hockey player at Amherst, who got into drugs, and was arrested.  In violation of university policy to notify parents of any drug or alcohol offense, NO ONE told the parents, but the cops offered the kid a deal to be a CI, helping them to take down a higher level drug dealer, or be expelled and give back his $40,000 in scholarships. Of course, he became a CI.  The parents were never notified until he was found dead, after taking heroin. 

 

 

A brief story was told of a girl who was told to be a CI but she was burned on the way in to meet the dealer. They shot her dead right in the car, after discovering the wire. 

 

 

It was just a very eye-opening story about what kind of stuff is going on out there today.   I wondered if anyone else saw it. 

[regentrude]

I am wondering about the legality of a school's parental notification policy.

How can they notify an adult's parents without the adult's consent... while otherwise making a huge fuss over students' privacy?

I mean, heaven forbid they tell parents about the F in math (not even if the student is a minor), but they can tell them their adult son drank or had drugs?

 

[TranquilMind]

I am wondering about the legality of a school's parental notification policy.

How can they notify an adult's parents without the adult's consent... while otherwise making a huge fuss over students' privacy?

I mean, heaven forbid they tell parents about the F in math (not even if the student is a minor), but they can tell them their adult son drank or had drugs?

Yes, it is in the student manual (at least at Amherst) that the university policy is that a parent will be notified of drug use or drinking if the student is under the age of 21.  The students understand policy on alcohol/drug use going in.   This is an exception to the privacy protections, as it should be, in my view. 

 

Underage is underage. 

[mom2scouts]

Universities have to be very careful about what information they can release to parents.  Most students are legally adults and parents have no rights to information.  My son was at Army Basic Training and had NO access to phone or computer.  A time-sensitive issue came up and I was not able to resolve it for him or get any information unless I produced permission signed by him, but there was no way to get permission.  I was also told by a professor and department head that they will get in big trouble for releasing student information to parents without consent.

[Amy in NH]

Sad story, but I don't see how the school is at fault for a legal adult's drug problem.  He wasn't even living on campus.

[Jenny in Florida]

Each of my kids has begun college while still a minor. In both cases, they had to sign forms allowing us access to their records if they wanted us to have information about grades and whatever. Essentially, a college student is treated like an adult for pretty much all but a very limited number of purposes.

 

So, no, underage is not always underage.

[TranquilMind]

Each of my kids has begun college while still a minor. In both cases, they had to sign forms allowing us access to their records if they wanted us to have information about grades and whatever. Essentially, a college student is treated like an adult for pretty much all but a very limited number of purposes.

 

So, no, underage is not always underage.

If you aren't an adult for financial purposes, you aren't an adult, in my opinion.  That's something I find very strange about the whole college thing.  At any rate, that isn't the point of this thread.  It just seems that it might have been prudent to inform parents about drug use/selling and the arrest in the case of the hockey player. 

[Amy in NH]

If you aren't an adult for financial purposes, you aren't an adult, in my opinion.  That's something I find very strange about the whole college thing.  At any rate, that isn't the point of this thread.  It just seems that it might have been prudent to inform parents about drug use/selling and the arrest in the case of the hockey player. 

 

 

We also have no right to find out what reading materials our children check out of the library.

 

My 16yo's doctor wouldn't even talk to me without ds's consent.

 

Your opinion doesn't matter.  The law is the law, and unless it is changed you have no right to lots of information about your children.

[Jenny in Florida]

If you aren't an adult for financial purposes, you aren't an adult, in my opinion.  That's something I find very strange about the whole college thing.  At any rate, that isn't the point of this thread.  It just seems that it might have been prudent to inform parents about drug use/selling and the arrest in the case of the hockey player. 

 

The thing is, this "kid" was legally an adult. If he had been arrested on the street in his hometown, his parents would not have been notified. Under those circumstances, he might still have been offered the opportunity to become an informant in order to lessen his sentence or expunge his record. And his parents would not have been informed, because he was legally an adult. 

 

It's not as though the campus police failed to protect him or did anything to encourage the young man to keep using drugs or that he was killed in the line of duty as an informant. He was using drugs. He struggled with addiction. He overdosed and died.

 

It's very sad, but I honestly don't see how the campus police or the university is in any way culpable.

[TranquilMind]

We also have no right to find out what reading materials our children check out of the library.

 

My 16yo's doctor wouldn't even talk to me without ds's consent.

 

Your opinion doesn't matter.  The law is the law, and unless it is changed you have no right to lots of information about your children.

Nobody is talking about "lots of information" here, nor what books the kids check out, or even what the doctor says to you about whether the 16 year old asked for contraceptives. 

[TranquilMind]

The thing is, this "kid" was legally an adult. If he had been arrested on the street in his hometown, his parents would not have been notified. Under those circumstances, he might still have been offered the opportunity to become an informant in order to lessen his sentence or expunge his record. And his parents would not have been informed, because he was legally an adult. 

 

It's not as though the campus police failed to protect him or did anything to encourage the young man to keep using drugs or that he was killed in the line of duty as an informant. He was using drugs. He struggled with addiction. He overdosed and died.

 

It's very sad, but I honestly don't see how the campus police or the university is in any way culpable.

I don't think they are culpable.

But if anyone would have told the parents, he might be alive today.  That is sad. 

[skimomma]

I don't think they are culpable.

But if anyone would have told the parents, he might be alive today.  That is sad. 

 

It may be very sad but an adult is an adult.  The law is the law.  It doesn't matter if the person in question is 18 or 75.

 

And the financially dependent argument does not hold water either.  A 65 year old parent might be living in their adult child's house and be 100% financially dependent on said adult child, but the police still have no obligation to inform the adult child.  The same applies to a spouse that is 100% financially dependent on their husband or wife.  

 

I teach at a university so I have had this argument with parents over the years.  They believe that since they are paying the bills they are entitled to grade information.  While, I understand how they feel, the actual contact of service is between the university and the adult student.  If the parents want in on grade info (or legal info or medical info or mental health info), they have to make that arrangement with the adult student.

[MBM]

UMass-Amherst is ending the practice of using students as confidential informants.

 

http://whmp.com/news/160061-umass-ending-confidential-information-program/

 

The ACLU has written about the problems with using confidential informants if anyone's interested in learning more.

 

Also, an 18 year old might be considered an adult legally (age of majority is not 18 in all states) but neurologically they are still an adolescent. Nowadays adolescence runs from about 12 to 25. (Interestingly, artificial light seems to play a role.) Adolescence is not immaturity. it is a time of neurological reorganization that is influenced by experience and genes. Laurence Steinberg, who is considered an expert on adolescent development, did a short interview with NPR discussing adolescence:

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2014/10/04/351187049/q-a-plumbing-the-mysteries-of-the-teenage-brain

 

In Age of Opportunity, he argues that in the last decade, neuroscience has established that the brain remains "plastic," that is, changeable, well into the early 20s. His experiments have shown that adolescents respond differently to rewards, are more likely to take risks and are more sensitive to peers than adults. But he argues that our education, legal system, and our parenting have yet to incorporate these insights.

 

 

We stubbornly hang onto the old myths of adolescence. IMO, that is what hinders the most.

 

(The brain is plastic all throughout life, btw.)

 

[FaithManor]

It may be very sad but an adult is an adult.  The law is the law.  It doesn't matter if the person in question is 18 or 75.

 

And the financially dependent argument does not hold water either.  A 65 year old parent might be living in their adult child's house and be 100% financially dependent on said adult child, but the police still have no obligation to inform the adult child.  The same applies to a spouse that is 100% financially dependent on their husband or wife.  

 

I teach at a university so I have had this argument with parents over the years.  They believe that since they are paying the bills they are entitled to grade information.  While, I understand how they feel, the actual contact of service is between the university and the adult student.  If the parents want in on grade info (or legal info or medical info or mental health info), they have to make that arrangement with the adult student.

For what it is worth, we agree with this completely, but also with a finite amount of dollars to give each child for college, maintain that we have a right to some standards. Now this is not the university's problem, but our adult child's responsibility. So, if said child wants a check each semester, he or she must provide end of semester grades to us to show that a 3.0 GPA and is being maintained, as well as not getting into trouble with the school or the law.

 

The nice thing about U of Michigan is that they have a "proxy/guest" option on student accounts. The student can volunteer to allow their parent to access their financial account and grades (no medical information, that is kept entirely separate) online. They dutifully tell their prospective students that they are not legally obligated in any way to release that information to their parents and the school will observe the law and not disclose it without permission or in the case of criminal investigation, a warrant. But, that college is an investment and that the student does not have any legal right to his or her parents' money so a good faith relationship is an open one in which mom and dad are assured that their money is not being wasted. I think that's pretty awesome of the financial aid and admission's department to take that stand with the students. It encourages a good practice. They also remind the kids that while you may have turned 18, you didn't magically come into possession of wisdom, and parents still need to provide some guidance, and occasional advice, so be on good terms with your mom and dad throughout your college years because it will go much smoother for you and be less stressful. I wanted to give a standing ovation to the financial representative that gave them that little lecture, but refrained! :)

 

When it comes to police matters, "age" is not as much of a factor as one would like to think. At the point at which the student would be old enough to be tried as an adult for specific crimes, one can expect the police to treat that "child' as an adult. In terms of rape, as gut wrenching as it is and as much as any parent would want to be there to support their child, it falls under HIPPA plus other privacy laws and policies and as such, if your son or daughter says, "Please don't tell my parents!", if that child is 16 or older, likely the police are going to comply with the request, and medical personnel have no other choice in the matter.

[kroe1]

Interesting that all 3 stories involve drugs in some form. But, only one student was underage, right?

Perhaps a better thought is "don't do drugs including sleeping pills".

[SKL]

The university doesn't have a choice to ignore the privacy laws regardless of what it thinks about the adolescent brain.  Parents need to understand the university's constraints and, if they feel their kid needs a more open relationship with the parents, work it out with the kid directly.  For example, don't provide support unless the offspring does x, y, and z.

 

And this is why I try to remember that I have to target age 17.999 for completion of raising my kids to adulthood.  After that I will do what I can, but without any actual control over the individual, that might not be much.

 

My kids will probably be 17 when they begin college, but I assume the same rules generally apply, since the vast majority of students are adults.  I do not expect them to keep a list of who is still 17yo today.  If my kids aren't ready for independence at 17.5, I'll have to figure out what to do about it.

[Jenny in Florida]

My kids will probably be 17 when they begin college, but I assume the same rules generally apply, since the vast majority of students are adults.  I do not expect them to keep a list of who is still 17yo today.  If my kids aren't ready for independence at 17.5, I'll have to figure out what to do about it.

 

I've had one kid start college at 16 and another start at 12. In both cases, with certain glaring, legal exceptions (drinking, for example, and needing to sign permission forms to have them treated at the campus medical clinics), the colleges they attended made it extremely, painfully clear that the same rules applied even to minors.

 

Our position is that if our young person is not prepared to handle being treated like a college-aged adult, that student is not ready for college. 

[MBM]

The university doesn't have a choice to ignore the privacy laws regardless of what it thinks about the adolescent brain.  Parents need to understand the university's constraints and, if they feel their kid needs a more open relationship with the parents, work it out with the kid directly.  For example, don't provide support unless the offspring does x, y, and z.

 

And this is why I try to remember that I have to target age 17.999 for completion of raising my kids to adulthood.  After that I will do what I can, but without any actual control over the individual, that might not be much.

 

My kids will probably be 17 when they begin college, but I assume the same rules generally apply, since the vast majority of students are adults.  I do not expect them to keep a list of who is still 17yo today.  If my kids aren't ready for independence at 17.5, I'll have to figure out what to do about it.

 

I am not suggesting the university ignore its privacy laws. 

 

[TranquilMind]

It may be very sad but an adult is an adult.  The law is the law.  It doesn't matter if the person in question is 18 or 75.

 

And the financially dependent argument does not hold water either.  A 65 year old parent might be living in their adult child's house and be 100% financially dependent on said adult child, but the police still have no obligation to inform the adult child.  The same applies to a spouse that is 100% financially dependent on their husband or wife.  

 

I teach at a university so I have had this argument with parents over the years.  They believe that since they are paying the bills they are entitled to grade information.  While, I understand how they feel, the actual contact of service is between the university and the adult student.  If the parents want in on grade info (or legal info or medical info or mental health info), they have to make that arrangement with the adult student.

You are speaking of independent adults, such as wives or elderly people, who do not become dependent because of their circumstances, and I agree with that.

 

I'm talking about still-dependent young people who have not yet achieved independence.   If even one friend had bothered to tell the parents, he may still be alive.  And in that case, the university violated its OWN policy to inform parents. 

 

I don't believe a school or professor is required to tell me if the student is doing well.  If I'm paying the bill, then the agreement between myself and my offspring is that I will be apprised of such facts.   I agree with you and do have necessary information.  It's only wisdom to keep your parents in the loop about your life.  I think mine get that, as one texted me before doing a cross-country drive to check out a facility, and then again upon return.  Same reason I don't just disappear but let my husband know where I'm going and what is going on.  Wisdom, not dependence.  If something happens, someone needs to know where to look. 

[skimomma]

And in that case, the university violated its OWN policy to inform parents. 

 

 

I really question the legality of this policy.  I can see it if the students sign something releasing such info to parents, which very well may be the case.....does anyone know?  But otherwise, this is illegal.  At the university in which I teach, parents would not have been informed about any legal matter.  Campus authorities or counseling personnel would likely highly encourage the student to contact their parents but they would not do so without consent.  

 

Unless we redefine adulthood, this will not change.  It does not matter how crucial the information might be, it is simply illegal to share that with anyone without the (legal adult) student's consent.  It sounds like you would like to see adulthood redefined which would be more on the law-making side and less on the university-policy side.  Or you could advocate for more universities to have permission-to-share-with-parents policies.  But that would always have to be voluntary, of course.  Adults are adults....even if they don't act like them.

[mom2scouts]

If you aren't an adult for financial purposes, you aren't an adult, in my opinion.  That's something I find very strange about the whole college thing.  At any rate, that isn't the point of this thread.  It just seems that it might have been prudent to inform parents about drug use/selling and the arrest in the case of the hockey player. 

What makes you think college students aren't adults for financial purposes?  I did not pay college expenses for any of my adult children and there are many students who do not get any financial support from their parents.  Are universities supposed to keep track of who is paying their own way through work and loans and who is getting it paid by their parents?  If the student is 18 or over, they are legal adults and sharing information with their parents is up to them.

[LucyStoner]

I was on my own in college. I'd have been pretty upset if my college involved my parents in anything.

 

I think it is a big stretch to say that had the parents known, this young man wouldn't have ODed. Addictions don't go away just because mom and dad find out.

[Joker]

Yeah, my parents had zero money to help any of us with college. It was all grants, loans, and work. It seems rather ridiculous that the college would report back to them about anything.

 

I also agree with LucyStoner about the parents possibly not changing the outcome. Sometimes parents help, sometimes they make it worse, and sometimes they can do absolutely nothing.

[KidsHappen]

 (age of majority is not 18 in all states) 

 

In which states is 18 not the age of majority?

[MBM]

In which states is 18 not the age of majority?

 

 

19 -- Alabama

19 -- Nebraska

21 -- Mississippi

 

Certain events, like graduating high school early or getting married, can also change age of majority in some states.

[MBM]

 

I do not know much about the privacy laws regarding college students who are not yet 21 but here is a short CNN article that explains a bit more what colleges can and cannot do. It's from 2012, so laws could have changed in the meantime.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/09/opinion/etzioni-colleges-parents/

 

The Higher Education Amendment, passed by Congress in 1998, allowed colleges to share information about students under the age of 21 with their parents in certain cases, including the violation of policies regarding drugs and alcohol.

[FaithManor]

19 -- Alabama

19 -- Nebraska

21 -- Mississippi

 

Certain events, like graduating high school early or getting married, can also change age of majority in some states.

As well as having a child.

 

But the problem is, I am pretty certain that the college has to observe the policies for the state in which it resides so therefore, if a 20 year old from Mississippi comes to Michigan State for college, he became a legal adult at 18 when he began attending college. As long as he or she remains in the state, the legal age here will apply regardless of the student's parents' residency status in another state.

 

The lack of a federal statute makes things inconsistent between states. The federal law regards voting age in national elections, but does not constitute a legal age of majority.

 

That makes everything even more convoluted. Of course, we have many laws that are nutsy in this regard. In my state a student can join the military, a decision that I think everyone will agree is a major adult, life altering decision, and buy cigarettes, but can't buy a beer until 21!

 

"Here you go boy...This is your shoulder AK 47 so you can lay your life down for you country, but sorry, we can't trust you with a beer." I personally believe that if they are old enough for their country to hand them a weapon, they are old enough to buy a beer and the law should reflect this. Michigan can try juveniles at 17 as adults, but the same 17 year old can't purchase cigarettes or sign their name to have a planter's wart removed from their toe! So, there are a lot of mixed legal messages for parents and teens to navigate.

 

Bottom line though is that colleges are not babysitters. If the student enrolls, the student will be held to the same standard as everyone else, and the same policies will apply even if that student is not the majority age of his or her home state, or that of the college.

[maize]

As well as having a child.

 

But the problem is, I am pretty certain that the college has to observe the policies for the state in which it resides so therefore, if a 20 year old from Mississippi comes to Michigan State for college, he became a legal adult at 18 when he began attending college. As long as he or she remains in the state, the legal age here will apply regardless of the student's parents' residency status in another state.

 

The lack of a federal statute makes things inconsistent between states. The federal law regards voting age in national elections, but does not constitute a legal age of majority.

 

That makes everything even more convoluted. Of course, we have many laws that are nutsy in this regard. In my state a student can join the military, a decision that I think everyone will agree is a major adult, life altering decision, and buy cigarettes, but can't buy a beer until 21!

 

"Here you go boy...This is your shoulder AK 47 so you can lay your life down for you country, but sorry, we can't trust you with a beer." I personally believe that if they are old enough for their country to hand them a weapon, they are old enough to buy a beer and the law should reflect this. Michigan can try juveniles at 17 as adults, but the same 17 year old can't purchase cigarettes or sign their name to have a planter's wart removed from their toe! So, there are a lot of mixed legal messages for parents and teens to navigate.

 

Bottom line though is that colleges are not babysitters. If the student enrolls, the student will be held to the same standard as everyone else, and the same policies will apply even if that student is not the majority age of his or her home state, or that of the college.

 

I have assumed that later ages for alcohol relate to the higher/more lasting impact that drinking can have on the adolescent brain. I would think the same should go for cigarettes...

 

I would be in favor of a later age for military enlistment except that I have seen it give positive direction and structure to kids who otherwise were drifting.

[MBM]

As well as having a child.

 

But the problem is, I am pretty certain that the college has to observe the policies for the state in which it resides so therefore, if a 20 year old from Mississippi comes to Michigan State for college, he became a legal adult at 18 when he began attending college. As long as he or she remains in the state, the legal age here will apply regardless of the student's parents' residency status in another state.

 

The lack of a federal statute makes things inconsistent between states. The federal law regards voting age in national elections, but does not constitute a legal age of majority.

 

That makes everything even more convoluted. Of course, we have many laws that are nutsy in this regard. In my state a student can join the military, a decision that I think everyone will agree is a major adult, life altering decision, and buy cigarettes, but can't buy a beer until 21!

 

"Here you go boy...This is your shoulder AK 47 so you can lay your life down for you country, but sorry, we can't trust you with a beer." I personally believe that if they are old enough for their country to hand them a weapon, they are old enough to buy a beer and the law should reflect this. Michigan can try juveniles at 17 as adults, but the same 17 year old can't purchase cigarettes or sign their name to have a planter's wart removed from their toe! So, there are a lot of mixed legal messages for parents and teens to navigate.

 

Bottom line though is that colleges are not babysitters. If the student enrolls, the student will be held to the same standard as everyone else, and the same policies will apply even if that student is not the majority age of his or her home state, or that of the college.

 

 

From the little I've read about legal ages, they are intricate to say the least. My point about legal age definitions is that they differ from what a biologist or neurologist might use but that people like Steinberg use the latter when they advise legislators and government. I (unclearly) brought it up as a discussing point not a declaration. :)

 

It does appear, though, that legally a university can contact a parent/caregiver in certain cases, which I did not know despite our two oldest kids going all the way through grad school. Who knew? My husband was a professor who taught undergrad and MBA classes and he never contacted parents and only had one instance of an irate parent who contacted him. That is saying something because when he initially taught he was called the Flunkinator. Maybe times have changed, though. I know my kids would rather die than to have had my husband and me dig into their college life much. Heck, my senior in high school is like that already. We have only talked with his teachers for 5" at most all throughout high school and only at teacher conferences. He makes it known to us that school is his responsibility. Hey, I'm not complaining! LOL.

 

Anyway, I thought the CNN article was thoughtfully written and agree that a gradual breaking away from home is usually the best. I think many families do that anyway.

 

[FaithManor]

Yes, I do think that in terms of actual development, the laws are out of sync with current neurology. I'm not certain how to roll them back. In the 1800's, majority was established in many states and territories as 21 though parents had the right to emancipate them sooner as often was the case for girls who married young. I am doubt much can be done about it because I'm pretty sure that there would be a riot of 17.5 year olds that went ape in this country if the laws were suddenly changed, LOL!

 

But, I also wonder if the neurological aspect is unique to American culture. I wonder if our approach to parenting prevents frontal lobe maturity because Western Europeans and Asians raise their children so much differently from ours and in general, they seem to do well with adult responsibilities at much younger ages. I wonder if our hyper vigilant, do not let them be independent, fear everything society prevents the brain from maturing because so many things like walking to school, or riding public transportation alone at 10, or staying home alone, or being responsible for any number of things that in this country are not turned over to the child until late teens, keeps the brain from maturing. Free range parents are generally regarded with disdain, but on the other hand the kids that romp the woods, walk to the corner market and buy a gallon of milk before they are teens, ride the city bus in their elementary years, assist with the more complicated chores around the house once they are physically developed enough to lift or what not, operate machinery before 16, take a few calculated risks, etc. do appear to mature earlier and handle responsibility better. I speculate that IF there were preserved 18 year old brains dating back to say 1950 and those were scanned, the shocking results would likely be that the vast majority were fully matured.

 

I wish someone would do a comprehensive study on this across continents and cultures. Maybe I'm wrong, but I suspect that I am probably right, and of course the worse thing for parents is that our high schools infantilize teenagers, and our culture demonizes parents who do try to make their kids grow up. We have been regarded harshly for allowing our kids to hike trails on state land - even at times when all three teens are together, have compasses, water, snacks, first aid kit, and 30 mile walkie talkies so they can get a hold of us, or ride their bikes to the next town even though their route is extremely low in traffic, it's daylight, and there are wide shoulders on those roads, etc. There seems to be a current in both school policy, social work policy, and community culture that says that when they turn 10, they should continue to be treated as 10 until their 18th birthday, and then we should magically make the accountable for everything. Sigh...but I still do not blame colleges. They need to only be dealing with the ones mature enough to handle and should organize their policies thusly. The ones that can't handle it need to go do other things until they are ready. Otherwise, college becomes nothing but extended high school, and we can all think of some colleges, in particular community colleges, that have become practically that. It's a bad trend!

 

 

 

[MBM]

Yes, I do think that in terms of actual development, the laws are out of sync with current neurology. I'm not certain how to roll them back. In the 1800's, majority was established in many states and territories as 21 though parents had the right to emancipate them sooner as often was the case for girls who married young. I am doubt much can be done about it because I'm pretty sure that there would be a riot of 17.5 year olds that went ape in this country if the laws were suddenly changed, LOL!

 

But, I also wonder if the neurological aspect is unique to American culture. I wonder if our approach to parenting prevents frontal lobe maturity because Western Europeans and Asians raise their children so much differently from ours and in general, they seem to do well with adult responsibilities at much younger ages. I wonder if our hyper vigilant, do not let them be independent, fear everything society prevents the brain from maturing because so many things like walking to school, or riding public transportation alone at 10, or staying home alone, or being responsible for any number of things that in this country are not turned over to the child until late teens, keeps the brain from maturing. Free range parents are generally regarded with disdain, but on the other hand the kids that romp the woods, walk to the corner market and buy a gallon of milk before they are teens, ride the city bus in their elementary years, assist with the more complicated chores around the house once they are physically developed enough to lift or what not, operate machinery before 16, take a few calculated risks, etc. do appear to mature earlier and handle responsibility better. I speculate that IF there were preserved 18 year old brains dating back to say 1950 and those were scanned, the shocking results would likely be that the vast majority were fully matured.

 

I wish someone would do a comprehensive study on this across continents and cultures. Maybe I'm wrong, but I suspect that I am probably right, and of course the worse thing for parents is that our high schools infantilize teenagers, and our culture demonizes parents who do try to make their kids grow up. We have been regarded harshly for allowing our kids to hike trails on state land - even at times when all three teens are together, have compasses, water, snacks, first aid kit, and 30 mile walkie talkies so they can get a hold of us, or ride their bikes to the next town even though their route is extremely low in traffic, it's daylight, and there are wide shoulders on those roads, etc. There seems to be a current in both school policy, social work policy, and community culture that says that when they turn 10, they should continue to be treated as 10 until their 18th birthday, and then we should magically make the accountable for everything. Sigh...but I still do not blame colleges. They need to only be dealing with the ones mature enough to handle and should organize their policies thusly. The ones that can't handle it need to go do other things until they are ready. Otherwise, college becomes nothing but extended high school, and we can all think of some colleges, in particular community colleges, that have become practically that. It's a bad trend!

 

 

What might also make a difference between countries is that some 40% of US children do not have secure attachment with even one caregiver; however, I do not know the stats for other countries or even if they have them. Secure attachment is important to develop because without it, children's brains wire in a way that isn't emotionally healthy. For example, impulsivity is much more common and as a result, kids tend to have behavioral problems that are seen year after year unless they get the proper intervention.

 

I think either Dan Siegel or Laurence Steinberg has written about the differences between adolescents in the US and other countries. Steinberg is often considered one of the go-to experts on adolescence so I think it might be him. If I run across anything, I'll try to post it.

 

[TranquilMind]

What makes you think college students aren't adults for financial purposes?  I did not pay college expenses for any of my adult children and there are many students who do not get any financial support from their parents.  Are universities supposed to keep track of who is paying their own way through work and loans and who is getting it paid by their parents?  If the student is 18 or over, they are legal adults and sharing information with their parents is up to them.

For FAFSA purposes, they are not adults. 

 

I paid my own way too, with my wages, a couple of grants and Child of a Disabled Veteran benefit.  I was a self-supporting adult with my own place. 

 

Today, parental information is required for aid to a person under age 24 (with a few exceptions, military, married, etc).  At $50K a pop for many schools, few are able to make it without parental information.