So I see the list is public now: 55 Schools Face U.S. Federal Sex Assault Probe

[creekland]

Weren't we just discussing this topic a couple (maybe more) months ago?

 

It's interesting (and sad) seeing so many big names on the list... scroll to the bottom of the article for the list:

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/55-schools-face-u-s-federal-sex-assault-probe-n94996

 

And, of course, they aren't necessarily guilty.  They're just being investigated.  However, it wouldn't surprise me if they wanted to "save" their name as we mentioned in that past thread.

[swimmermom3]

I have heard so much about this over the last couple of days, yet when I started to do some search for sources, so much of the information was not new and the investigations had been ongoing - sometimes for years. I have to check for a time warp. Is this really 2014? Have we learned nothing?

 

One of the articles I read talked about a major university whose sexual harassment code had been copied and pasted from another college's policy. That wouldn't have been so bad except that the code told students to contact nonexistent offices to report problems.

 

All of this just makes me furious and I have a difficult time looking at it all rationally.

[mommymilkies]

I'm very unsurprised to see the University nearest us on that list. 

[FaithManor]

I am not the least bit surprised to see U of M and MSU on the list. They are ridiculously slow to respond to ANYTHING! I want to see them get some fear and clean up their acts.

[swimmermom3]

Columbia University

 

USC, Occidental

[bettyandbob]

Did they say how they chose the schools? It seems like other schools would have just as many problems.

[creekland]

I have heard so much about this over the last couple of days, yet when I started to do some search for sources, so much of the information was not new and the investigations had been ongoing - sometimes for years. I have to check for a time warp. Is this really 2014? Have we learned nothing?

 

One of the articles I read talked about a major university whose sexual harassment code had been copied and pasted from another college's policy. That wouldn't have been so bad except that the code told students to contact nonexistent offices to report problems.

 

All of this just makes me furious and I have a difficult time looking at it all rationally.

 

It surprised me to see this make the news now knowing we talked about it a couple of months ago, so it's hardly new.  I think what is newer is that they officially released the list to the press.  It makes me think they hit a wall with these schools and want the press to assist.  I hope it helps.

 

I'm very unsurprised to see the University nearest us on that list. 

 

Sad, isn't it?  There are some good PA schools on the list too, and of course, Penn St, which, based on the football fiasco, really doesn't surprise me.  Their "reputation" apparently trumps all.

 

Did they say how they chose the schools? It seems like other schools would have just as many problems.

 

From what I understand (no source to link, so it's just FWIW), they investigated all schools that take federal funds (this does eliminate some) and many have reached the 2000s by having a good plan in place for those with complaints (and even procedures to let women know where to go/what to do) - generally involving authorities outside of campus.  I know when I used any ladies restroom at U Rochester there were signs giving info in case anyone needed info.  (U Rochester is not on the list.)

 

Those making the list appear to have had students who made complaints who were not happy with what happened next (in some form or another), and, since it's been years in some cases, my GUESS, is that investigators aren't happy with progress being made by the school(s).

 

It's definitely not surprising - sad though.  As stated before, I hope getting the press involved gets the fire lit.   This is 2014.

[creekland]

Adding to my last post... our local news said a local college made the list back in March when a student filed a federal complaint with Title IX.

 

I imagine all schools on the list had to have had at least one student make a formal complaint about how things were handled in their case.

[Jane in NC]

Given that we have a family friend who is currently on leave from one of the listed schools as she recovers from the trauma of a sexual assault, all I can say is that I truly hope some change comes out of this probe. (And I pray that both she and her family find peace.)

[MIch elle]

My ds is afraid to approach girls on his campus because his U. has made such a big deal of this issue. 

 

How do I know?  Because when he moved into his dorm this soph. year, I told him to approach/introduce himself to the girls on his floor (because he's not the most outgoing person) and he told me why he will not do that.  So he stays away from the girls (he has no sisters and went to all boys high school). He's going back to an all boys floor next year (like his freshman yr) because there was very little social interaction on his mixed gender floor this year.

 

Yes, his very large univ. is on the list.  The university is trying to get it right by informing students of their rights and responsibilities. 

[creekland]

Michelle, do you think it's a problem with the way the school is dealing with it, or mainly because your son is not used to interacting with girls?

I find it very odd that there would be little interaction on a coed floor.

 

I was wondering too.  My guys both live in co-ed dorms and haven't had problems interacting.  They are both more outgoing though, so that could make the difference.

[Nan in Mass]

I think education needs to start lower, like in middle school, with a huge emphasis on no-means-no, not no-means-coy. 

Nan

[swimmermom3]

Given that we have a family friend who is currently on leave from one of the listed schools as she recovers from the trauma of a sexual assault, all I can say is that I truly hope some change comes out of this probe. (And I pray that both she and her family find peace.)

 

Jane, I am so sorry. May your family friend find peace of mind, healing, and justice.

 

 

Many of the schools that made the list have already been in violation of the Clery Act.  Many of the fines are in the hundred thousands for failure in most cases to report crimes like sexual assault. The idea is that there should be more transparency in reporting because, basically as the customer, the students and the parents have the right to know.

 

Some universities that are in violation of the Clery Act have gone further and interfered with the victim's rights.

 

When you think that in one of those big undergrad classes like say, Personal Health, with a class of 250 students, that 50 of those students will be victims of sexual assault, it's staggering!  And yet, so often, those 50 victims get swept under the table, occasionally even having to attend classes with their assailant.  If you want to look at it another way, that means that there are potentially 50 (probably fewer given repeat offenders) assailants wandering the campus and we are only talking about one large class.

 

As the mother of two sons, I am well aware of the concern for unjustly accusing a promising young man of rape, just because some silly drunk girl wants to extract a little revenge with a rape charge. How often do we really think that happens statistically versus the number of young women that are raped, sodomized, and traumatized for life?  As the mother of a daughter, do I really want to let many be victimized for the protection of the few and the university's administration and their football program?

 

Jeanne Clery, for whom the Clery Act was named was a freshman at Lehigh University when a drunken young man slipped into her dorm and brutally raped and murdered her. Her parents had no idea that Lehigh had experienced 38 violent offenses in 3 years, which was significantly more than Penn State, which was significantly larger.

 

As a parent sending off a young person that you have put 18 years of love, sweat, and effort into, wouldn't you want to know these things?  Wouldn't you want to know that if your daughter was assaulted, there was a plan in place to help her towards maximum comfort and justice, and not just some piece of paper that instructs her to report to a non-existent office?

 

 

[MIch elle]

Michelle, do you think it's a problem with the way the school is dealing with it, or mainly because your son is not used to interacting with girls?

I find it very odd that there would be little interaction on a coed floor.

 

Oh, no doubt it's my son.  He's an introvert and a worrier.  His response tells me that he's heard the U. talk on sexual assault probably more than once. 

 

His U. has  2 online classes (non-credit) that they MUST take prior to attending their freshman and sophomore years on drugs/alcohol and health/body which probably included sexual conduct (along with freshman orientation & dorm floor talks).

 

I know that this U. does their best to try to prevent sexual assault through education.  I believe it's our sexual and male dominated culture (tv, movies, etc) that imbues the men with the sense that it's ok when it's NOT. 

[swimmermom3]

Creekland,

 

I hope it's okay to link a letter that a young woman sent to the Harvard Crimson entitled, "Dear Harvard: You Win."

 

Warning: Potential trigger for assault survivors.

 

For me, this letter highlights why it is so very difficult to handle sexual assault cases on a college campus - not that we always do much better off campus.

 

If my previous posts sound angry, it's not because I believe all men are true assailants, all women are true victims, and that all college administrations are "good old boys" that would pat the female victim on the butt on her way out the door, but I am mad because the situation is tough to deal with and so administrations have slid around corners, avoiding the issue altogether. It's like letting gangrene go so long that all that is left to do is amputate.

 

When we let injustices go too long and things get out of hand, the backlash is usually ugly.  Good guys like Mich elle's son worrying about talking with girls and other guys work to appeal their rape accusations under Title IX, saying that the whole review process is discriminatory in favor of the victim. :confused1:

 

 

[Nan in Mass]

nt

[raptor_dad]

So looking at the list and seeing many "elite" schools highlights a complex issue. Honor code school's have many benefits, but once things go pear shaped they also have many problems. Non-confrontational judicial systems support the status quo even more than confrontational ones. They may work great for academic issues and public drunkeness... for sexual assualt, political issues, or other minority rights issues they are much less effective. These schools also tend to believe these issues don't effect them... A non-confrontational judicial process makes it much easier to sweep these issues under the rug. There is a reason America has enshrined due process over weregild  or other majoritarian judicial approaches.

 

 

[angela in ohio]

The number of assaults at U of M and their handling of them influenced our decision about where dd went to school. Just as an example, the day she and I visited, last week, to walk around campus and peek into classes one last time before she decided for sure where to go, there was a "forcible fondling" at 1:00 pm in the middle of the campus. There are thousands of drug and alcohol offenses reported in the dorms each year, and hundreds of assaults of one type or another. An athlete rapist was given a pass until a year later when pressure built to act.

 

Honestly, though this was a big concern for my dd, I am just as concerned for my ds when he goes to college based on some of the stories I have read. I can't imagine he would want to have casual sex anyway, but we plan to tell him never to do it, never to be anywhere with any drunk young women present, and never to be totally alone with any young woman. The stakes are just too high.

 

And though parents blame the universities, they are trying to handle the students whose parents allowed them to spend years watching rape, violence, and the objectification of women glamorized on TV, in video games, in music, etc. while the parents were too busy to have conversations to mitigate the damage. I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by the way some 18-22 yo men react to this input.

[swimmermom3]

Rereading my post upthread, I realize that I only conveyed my tangential thoughts, not my feelings on the main issue.  I hope everyone assumed that I TOTALLY agree that this is a huge problem that needs to be dealt with, both by changing US culture and by changing policy.  I mentioned the orientation lectures because those measures obviously were inadequate.  I am not one bit surprised at one-in-five number.  It agrees with the number of girls I knew who experienced this.  UVA was worse by far than UMass, in part because the frats were so much more prominent.  On my freshman hall, at least half the girls had had a bad experience of one sort or the other at a frat, some of them pretty serious.  The scary part is that everyone talked about how much better the frats were than they had been.  I hope that has changed.   And Lisa, I wasn't suggesting any such thing.  Yikes!  I was just expressing my own fears around this issue.  I wasn't suggesting anything should be different because of those fears.  I DO think college policy is a band-aid, even policy at its best, and the true solution involves cultural changes.  Difficult ones.  And I think it is easy to forget that boys can be the victims, too, both of false accusations and of assault.  People are reluctant to talk about female students being assaulted male.  They are doubly so when it comes to male students being assaulted by male students.  Ug, everything I say about this sounds so unsupportive and ambivalent.  I'm VERY happy that people are trying to make policy improvements.  I just think there needs to be so much more, and that the issue is not as simple as we would like it to be.  People are complicated.

 

Nan

 

Oh Nan, I knew exactly where you were coming from.

 

However, I think as a culture, we are far more inclined to be emotionally up-in-arms over someone wrongly accused of a crime than we are to have sympathy or compassion for the victims of a crime. We see stories of young men falsely accused of rape and we think how awful it is for them and how awful it would be for the men in our own lives. The stories loom large in our minds and leave their imprint.

 

Now think about this carefully, what if assault victims' stories were given as much media coverage  as the false accusations? Of course this can only be a hypothetical exercise. Let's go back to my example of the Personal Health class of 250 students. So in your newspaper, you would read 50 accounts ranging from "drunk and pressured" to brutally assaulted. Then you could read about  a third of the women dropping out, maybe two or three of them eventually committing suicide. You could read on and on about depression and cutting, and alcoholism, and healthy relationships that never get off the ground due to the trauma. Dreams that will never happen,dreams that are every bit as valid as those of the people who perpetrated the crime. And somewhere tucked in between # 24 and #25 is the story of the one or two guys who were wrongly accused. It's a different perspective, no?

 

 

[Nan in Mass]

I think we, as a society, need a more peaceful, respectful approach to each other.  All of us.  Only then will this problem really be solved. 

Nan

[swimmermom3]

Well, in my particular case, I was reacting to the two dreadful experiences that I know personally, a falsely accused male and an abused woman (both lives were ruined, at least up until the middle), and my own experience, as a woman and as a mother of boys.  They pretty much balance out, gender-wise.  I'm not exposed to enough media for it to carry anything like the weight that my real life examples carry, and I'm not great at remote statistics in general.

 

I think we, as a society, need a more peaceful, respectful approach to each other.  All of us.  Only then will this problem really be solved.  I whole-heartedly agree that it is a big problem, for men and for women.  I whole-heartedly agree that in the meantime, the band-aid of policy changes in colleges needs to be put in place.  As I said, all I was doing was expressing my own fears for my own particular children, not suggesting that those fears influence policy.

 

Nan

 

Nan, :grouphug: .

 

And could you please clear your inbox?

 

[swimmermom3]

Did they say how they chose the schools? It seems like other schools would have just as many problems.

 

This article explains a bit more of why the schools were on the list.http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/05/01/releases-list-colleges-under-sex-abuse-investigations/FISdXCJzwgK4S4fp0QZkTN/story.html

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Mine is in a dorm that is co-ed by floor.  He says he his room is always full of girls.  He has learned not to go back to the room if he wants to study.  As far as I can tell, his school makes a HUGE effort to get their freshmen interacting with each other, both in class and out of class.  I'll have to ask him what he had for education at orientation.  The older ones covered this at their school, I know.  It was covered at my freshman orientation as well (UVA).  It wasn't mentioned at the UMass Amherst transfer oreintation, but the RAs went over where to go for help, how to get an escort, where not to go, watch your drink, etc., even in the 80's.  I think education needs to start lower, like in middle school, with a huge emphasis on no-means-no, not no-means-coy.  As the mother of three boys, I find this whole issue petrifying.  It feels to me like they are very vulnerable to false accusations.  Not that it doesn't go both ways...

 

Nan

 

I was doing training for admissions information volunteers a few years back and there was a presentation that went into depth about the different modes of reports of sexual assault that could be made, the percentages of reports, how they are training students to be peer counselors, the response teams, etc. The presenter was the then head of the sexual assault training and response department, who happened to be a colleague of mine from several years earlier.

 

One figure that struck me was that something like 60% of the reported incidents have alcohol as a factor on one or both sides. I find this so disheartening, because it seems that when you talk about how drinking (and drugs) contributes to situations in which assaults occur (or to situations where one or both party are not clear about consent) the response quickly turns into an accusation that you are blaming the victim or suggesting that the victim "had it coming". 

 

I've never understood this point of view. In the military and living overseas, there were all kinds of extra bits of awareness we put into place. There were times I walked around the car and looked under it before putting the kids in and driving away. I didn't let the kids wear Tshirts with English slogans when we lived in town overseas. I took different jackets on one trip when our hostess pointed out that the kids' fleeces were in the colors of the right wing nationalist party of the country we were headed to. If there were demonstrations scheduled for one gate, we went out through a different one. And on and on. Not because an anti-American assault would have been my fault if I hadn't taken these precautions, but the safety of my family is one of my primary responsibilities. Trying to stay out of risky situations is a big part of that.

 

I can't help but feel that we are being unrealistic when we curb the discussions that overuse and abuse of alcohol (and drugs) or hanging out with people who are abusing alcohol and drugs puts one at a greater risk.  A greater risk of being assaulted and a greater risk of thinking that an activity is mutually consented to, when it may not be.

[swimmermom3]

One figure that struck me was that something like 60% of the reported incidents have alcohol as a factor on one or both sides. I find this so disheartening, because it seems that when you talk about how drinking (and drugs) contributes to situations in which assaults occur (or to situations where one or both party are not clear about consent) the response quickly turns into an accusation that you are blaming the victim or suggesting that the victim "had it coming". 

 

I can't help but feel that we are being unrealistic when we curb the discussions that overuse and abuse of alcohol (and drugs) or hanging out with people who are abusing alcohol and drugs puts one at a greater risk.  A greater risk of being assaulted and a greater risk of thinking that an activity is mutually consented to, when it may not be.

 

It is disheartening.  I think part of the slippery slope is that the drinking conversation has to be two-sided. Yes, we can tell our daughters the usual about not drinking, not going to parties, staying with a group or a friend, etc., but then we should be talking to our sons that they had better not be drinking and not going to parties. Doesn't the alcohol cloud their judgment and make them less likely to correctly interpret the level of desire on the part of their partner?

 

I know what you are saying and I see the rationale, but my stomach tightens up with regards to certain aspects. The majority of genuine rap victims already blame themselves regardless of the circumstances. When we place a lot of focus on what the victim should or should not have been doing to protect themselves, we shift the focus away from the other party involved. I think it was on the slut-shaming thread where someone posted the usual anti-rape prevention posters done with a twist that was geared to what the would-be rapist should do.  It was eye-opening.

 

I don't think we should curb the conversations about the abuse and overuse of alcohol and its part in many rapes, but I can't see them realistically going anywhere, but saying that the victim had it coming. That's the implication and that's the way it has always been. The guy had no more control or responsibility than a dog next to a fire hydrant. Sadly, that comment also says a lot about what we think of our young men.

 

Last fall, a young woman that my daughter knows professionally and socially was killed by her former husband. The media was full of comments about how she should have know better to pick a guy like that. The comments were about 3 to 1 with regards to her actions and the fact that the guy shot her in the head at close range in front of her 5 yo daughter and their 2 year old daughter, leaving the oldest one alone with her mother while she was dying. The moral judgements on the young woman were far stronger than on the guy, for the most part.

 

 

[creekland]

It is disheartening.  I think part of the slippery slope is that the drinking conversation has to be two-sided. Yes, we can tell our daughters the usual about not drinking, not going to parties, staying with a group or a friend, etc., but then we should be talking to our sons that they had better not be drinking and not going to parties. Doesn't the alcohol cloud their judgment and make them less likely to correctly interpret the level of desire on the part of their partner?

 

 

My three guys know ALL the dangers involved with drinking and hanging out among those who do.  So far, two of mine have chosen different crowds once in college.  The third tells me he plans to do the same.

 

We're not teetotalers, but they know the difference between parties and all that come with them and a glass of wine with dinner or an occasional Mojito on vacation.

 

At middle son's college he told me they had stats that 67% admitted to having at least one drink during the previous semester in an anonymous survey.  He pointed out that this would mean roughly 33% chose not to.  It's not like "everyone" drinks - at least - at his school. 

 

But the dangers involved with drugs and alcohol are definitely there.

 

[swimmermom3]

My three guys know ALL the dangers involved with drinking and hanging out among those who do.  So far, two of mine have chosen different crowds once in college.  The third tells me he plans to do the same.

 

We're not teetotalers, but they know the difference between parties and all that come with them and a glass of wine with dinner or an occasional Mojito on vacation.

 

At middle son's college he told me they had stats that 67% admitted to having at least one drink during the previous semester in an anonymous survey.  He pointed out that this would mean roughly 33% chose not to.  It's not like "everyone" drinks - at least - at his school. 

 

But the dangers involved with drugs and alcohol are definitely there.

 

 

In this article on the Catholic colleges and dealing with sexual assault, one of the schools talked about their freshman orientation. Students tend to overestimate how many people are partying and hooking up and that misconception leads to extra pressure. Part of the orientation was to assure students that not everyone was doing it - just like your son pointed out.

[creekland]

 We get our local news from Rochester, Creekland. I heard a story about a girl, I think she was just a freshman, who died in her dorm from heroin at U of Rochester. It sounds like that county, and others in the area, are seeing a huge increase in heroin use. Her family said they had absolutely no idea.

 

This happened while we were visiting.  My guy knew about it before it became public due to being in a club with a friend of the girl.  It certainly wasn't a good situation.

 

My cousin is a police officer in a small town in midstate NY.  He told us central NY has had a rash of ODs on heroin recently, including several who have died.

 

And in our local news (PA) this past week they said they've had 14 heroin deaths so far this year in one county (fairly rural county).  They also did a week long report talking about how heroin has made a huge comeback and what it is doing to so many people from all walks of life.

 

Recently there was a major drug bust of suppliers in PA (very nationally esteemed) colleges - the dealers were college students.

 

It was eye opening - and something we also discussed with our boys.

 

It's better to discuss EVERYTHING with our young adults IMO.  I doubt those dealing will give them the whole story.

 

[Nan in Mass]

Nan, :grouphug: .

 

And could you please clear your inbox?

 

 

Lots of hugs back, Lisa.  And wishing you lots of cheery May flowers and sunshine, inadequate recompense for any upsets I caused you, but about all I can manage from a the shores of an entirely different ocean.  I know I need to deal with my inbox.  I'll get to it eventually.  It's from a past life and full of emotional time bombs, so I have to pick a strong moment lol.

Nan

[creekland]

Lots of hugs back, Lisa.  And wishing you lots of cheery May flowers and sunshine, inadequate recompense for any upsets I caused you, but about all I can manage from a the shores of an entirely different ocean.  I know I need to deal with my inbox.  I'll get to it eventually.  It's from a past life and full of emotional time bombs, so I have to pick a strong moment lol.

Nan

 

Just wanted to offer :grouphug: .

 

[FaithManor]

Lots of hugs back, Lisa. And wishing you lots of cheery May flowers and sunshine, inadequate recompense for any upsets I caused you, but about all I can manage from a the shores of an entirely different ocean. I know I need to deal with my inbox. I'll get to it eventually. It's from a past life and full of emotional time bombs, so I have to pick a strong moment lol.

Nan

Many, may hugs Nan!

[Sebastian (a lady)]

It is disheartening.  I think part of the slippery slope is that the drinking conversation has to be two-sided. Yes, we can tell our daughters the usual about not drinking, not going to parties, staying with a group or a friend, etc., but then we should be talking to our sons that they had better not be drinking and not going to parties. Doesn't the alcohol cloud their judgment and make them less likely to correctly interpret the level of desire on the part of their partner?

 

I know what you are saying and I see the rationale, but my stomach tightens up with regards to certain aspects. The majority of genuine rap victims already blame themselves regardless of the circumstances. When we place a lot of focus on what the victim should or should not have been doing to protect themselves, we shift the focus away from the other party involved. I think it was on the slut-shaming thread where someone posted the usual anti-rape prevention posters done with a twist that was geared to what the would-be rapist should do.  It was eye-opening.

 

I don't think we should curb the conversations about the abuse and overuse of alcohol and its part in many rapes, but I can't see them realistically going anywhere, but saying that the victim had it coming. That's the implication and that's the way it has always been. The guy had no more control or responsibility than a dog next to a fire hydrant. Sadly, that comment also says a lot about what we think of our young men.

 

Last fall, a young woman that my daughter knows professionally and socially was killed by her former husband. The media was full of comments about how she should have know better to pick a guy like that. The comments were about 3 to 1 with regards to her actions and the fact that the guy shot her in the head at close range in front of her 5 yo daughter and their 2 year old daughter, leaving the oldest one alone with her mother while she was dying. The moral judgements on the young woman were far stronger than on the guy, for the most part.

 

I do understand what you're saying about the discussions veering towards blaming the victim. That isn't my purpose at all. The discussions that need to be had after the fact are going to be quite different. Though even then, there will be potential actions like underage drinking or drug use that will have to be addressed.

 

I'm thinking mainly about the conversations that need to be had with both men and women about not drinking to excess, not partying with huge groups of strangers, not going to places where the point of the activity seems to be to see how out of control the group can get. 

 

This is not meant to excuse an attacker in any way.  And yes, I do already and intend to continue having discussions with my sons about how to stay out of situations where there is excessive drinking (or underage drinking at all), or where there is a party til you drop atmosphere. There are too many dumb things that happen after, "Hold my beer, watch this . . ."

 

I think men do have a lot more potential for control than we give them credit for, and certainly more than what is glamorized by the Jersey Shore, MTV Spring Break type media. I don't think that all of the safety (or honor) responsibility rests with women. I simply think that we put a lot of effort into telling men then are creeps who are responsible, no matter how much they or the other party was drinking. And not enough effort into pointing our that drinking oneself into a stupor is not a way to still be alert and aware of ones surroundings.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I heard about this a couple years ago. Interesting idea.

 

21 Birthday Training

 

I don't know if it would work on a modern American campus, but I've always thought that part of the issue is that alcohol is so off limits for so long for American adolescents that they don't learn how to drink socially and responsibly. This ranges from the high drinking age to the general lack of alcohol in campus for those of age to a lack of real consequences for those who drink and drive. (This last point in comparison to places in Europe where one drunk driving conviction may mean losing a driver's license permanently.)  If you could drink a beer with dinner in the campus dining hall, I'm not sure there were be as much attraction for the big keg parties.

 

 

[Nan in Mass]

Sebastian - This reminds me of something called The Convincer that showed up on campus when I was at school.  It was a thing that looked rather like a rowing machine with a seatbelt.  It moved forward at a certain speed (not very fast) and then slammed you to a stop so you could feel what it would feel like to run into something like a tree in a car.  I remember watching the football team try it.  One of them got into it, saying something macho about seatbelts being stupid and never buckling up, was slammed sans belt, and then staggered away dazed, muttering something about having no idea.  Even watching was pretty effective.

 

Nan

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Sebastian - This reminds me of something called The Convincer that showed up on campus when I was at school.  It was a thing that looked rather like a rowing machine with a seatbelt.  It moved forward at a certain speed (not very fast) and then slammed you to a stop so you could feel what it would feel like to run into something like a tree in a car.  I remember watching the football team try it.  One of them got into it, saying something macho about seatbelts being stupid and never buckling up, was slammed sans belt, and then staggered away dazed, muttering something about having no idea.  Even watching was pretty effective.

 

Nan

 

Nan,

I love those sleds. They are in fact convincing.

 

When we lived in Japan, the police department had one with an airbag that would deploy using pressurized air. That was pretty cool too.

 

I've noticed that the on base liquor stores here in California sell small one use breathalyzers at the counter. I've also seen them in the on base department store. I've been tempted to buy a handful and test them out at home. Not letting my young teens drink, but to let them see how the levels change as dh and I do.

[Laura in CA]

(This last point in comparison to places in Europe where one drunk driving conviction may mean losing a driver's license permanently.)

When I lived in Germany, I saw a number of people drink a lot at parties (department Christmas party, Feuerzangenbowle, birthday party at a cabin in the woods, etc.), and they returned home by various means -- took a taxi, got a ride, took the bus, spent the night there (in a sleeping bag), etc. -- but not a single one drove himself home. It was explained to me that the minimum penalty was losing your license for six months, and no one wanted to risk that.

[Caroline]

The service fraternity on my campus did something like this. It was back in the eighties, though. I don't know how it would work today.

 

 

I heard about this a couple years ago. Interesting idea.

 

21 Birthday Training

 

I don't know if it would work on a modern American campus, but I've always thought that part of the issue is that alcohol is so off limits for so long for American adolescents that they don't learn how to drink socially and responsibly. This ranges from the high drinking age to the general lack of alcohol in campus for those of age to a lack of real consequences for those who drink and drive. (This last point in comparison to places in Europe where one drunk driving conviction may mean losing a driver's license permanently.) If you could drink a beer with dinner in the campus dining hall, I'm not sure there were be as much attraction for the big keg parties.

[creekland]

The service fraternity on my campus did something like this. It was back in the eighties, though. I don't know how it would work today.

 

 

 

I think waiting until kids are 21 to show them these things IRL is a bit late...

[swimmermom3]

I would agree that finding a way to decrease the excessive drinking on college campuses would probably result in fewer sexual assaults. It would also probably take more than a slick PSA to accomplish that. Many of the high schools go to great lengths to produce the "Every 15 Minutes" type drinking and driving simulations. They deeply touch kids - in the moment.

 

I wonder how many kids are prepared for the social interaction of college? Worldviews collide. In an age of technical communication, how skilled are young people at interpreting body language and facial expressions? Alcohol facilitates finding superficial common ground.

 

Decreasing alcohol consumption is certainly helpful; it's a bigger, better band-aid. But will it be enough to keep colleges off lists like this? So, if we magically decrease consumption on campus, and a corresponding drop in sexual assaults occurs, will the schools report their rape numbers? Will they make sure their assault response programs are genuine and effective? Will we see a greater than 3% conviction rate if you remove the ambiguity caused by alcohol?

 

Wharton School of Business recently conducted a little experiment where they sent out a bunch of emails to various college professors that required a response, a meeting, I think. The emails were signed with a male and female names and a wide variety of ethnic sounding names. Overall, the names that appeared to belong to white males received far more responses from the professors than those with female or ethnic-sounding male names. Perhaps I am over-extrapolating, but the results make me think that perhaps colleges and universities are still in many ways a man's world and that the lack of response to sexual assault on campus reflects that.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I think waiting until kids are 21 to show them these things IRL is a bit late...

 

I don't disagree. On the other hand, I'd never want to be in the position of providing alcohol to someone under 21.

 

 

[musicianmom]

There should be an equivalent of a "learner's permit" for alcohol, I guess.

[swimmermom3]

I don't disagree. On the other hand, I'd never want to be in the position of providing alcohol to someone under 21.

 

So, I am curious. You said that you had considered having your kids measure the effect on you and your dh.

 

If your kids were older, would you consider allowing them to drink at home and measuring the results?

 

We have allowed our kids to have a small amount of wine with dinner for several years. We talk about why we chose the wine and we may even have them try a bit of two different wines to go with the meal. For us, it is a complement to the meal. The kids aren't allowed to have beer or hard alcohol separately except for a glass of champagne at New Year's if they are home.

 

One of the reasons I have considered allowing the older two to drink beyond one glass at home and then checking blood alcohol levels is that they are both so slight that it would be easy to overestimate their capacity. My older son would be the one the guys would encourage to keep drinking. His younger brother is far less likely to be influenced by peer pressure.

 

[Teachin'Mine]

This article points out the flip-side of early drinking.  It's sobering.

 

http://www.helpguide.org/harvard/alcohol_teens.htm

 

 

[flyingiguana]

Alcohol may be a contributing factor, in that it clouds judgement.  But I still wonder why a guy with clouded judgement thinks it's a good idea to sexually assault a woman.

 

He's just drunk -- he's not possessed by evil spirits.That people can drink and decide to have a designated driver or take the bus home suggests that alcohol doesn't cloud judgement at all.  It's just an excuse so some guys can say they had no control over themselves and thereby get away with assault.

 

Which suggests to me that men are constantly having to repress the urge to assault women?

 

If that's the case, then the alcohol is only releasing something that's already there.  Meaning that the problem isn't the alcohol.  If some men weren't taught from an early age that they can and SHOULD assault women, then alcohol would not be a problem.

 

If more assaults happen when both parties are drunk, it may not be the alcohol that's the factor, but the cultural expectations that go along with being drunk.  "I was drunk, so I can't be blamed for this or that crime...." 

 

There are plenty of other good reasons to reduce college binge drinking, but I think blaming sexual assaults on drinking is a red herring.  There are underlying causes that need to be addressed.  Just focusing on the alcohol connection doesn't get to the root of the problem.

[flyingiguana]

This article points out the flip-side of early drinking.  It's sobering.

 

http://www.helpguide.org/harvard/alcohol_teens.htm

 

I don't know that that really says anything -- yes, there are correlations between kids in the US who drink early and then get into other kinds of trouble.  But that doesn't mean the drinking caused the trouble, only that drinking is part of that constellation of things that are labelled "trouble".

 

Early binge drinking is probably bad.  Binge drinking for anyone is bad.  It would be interesting to see if there are any studies on effects of moderate alcohol consumption on teens and kids, but I don't think that's a study that could be done in the US.  Any kid who drinks is likely to have other issues.

 

Underage drinking isn't actually illegal in many states, if the parents give consent (although it usually has to occur "in the home" or other private property, *with* the parent's presence, and never extends to providing alcohol to other people's kids).

[Teachin'Mine]

I don't know that that really says anything -- yes, there are correlations between kids in the US who drink early and then get into other kinds of trouble.  But that doesn't mean the drinking caused the trouble, only that drinking is part of that constellation of things that are labelled "trouble".

 

Early binge drinking is probably bad.  Binge drinking for anyone is bad.  It would be interesting to see if there are any studies on effects of moderate alcohol consumption on teens and kids, but I don't think that's a study that could be done in the US.  Any kid who drinks is likely to have other issues.

 

Underage drinking isn't actually illegal in many states, if the parents give consent (although it usually has to occur "in the home" or other private property, *with* the parent's presence, and never extends to providing alcohol to other people's kids).

 

I wrote my post and linked the study in response to several parents talking about the advantages, or possible advantages, of introducing teens to drinking before the age of 21 to help prevent a temptation to overdue it when they turn 21.   Drinking at an early age alters the brain.  How much is safe?  How much is too much?   

[regentrude]

I wrote my post and linked the study in response to several parents talking about the advantages, or possible advantages, of introducing teens to drinking before the age of 21 to help prevent a temptation to overdue it when they turn 21.   Drinking at an early age alters the brain.  How much is safe?  How much is too much?   

 

You could look for studies from countries where there is not drinking age.

In Germany, you have to be 16 to purchase wine/beer and 18 for hard liquor, but there is no age limit for consuming alcohol.

I have not seen any studies that indicate worse outcomes than the restrictive drinking limits in the US. yes, there is alcoholism and yes, some people binge drink - but I have not seen anything comparable to the alcohol steeped weekends on US college campuses. Prohibiting something makes it more attractive to teens, and getting booze when you're not allowed to is considered a sport. It won't be nearly as attractive if it's not against the rules.

[FaithManor]

You could look for studies from countries where there is not drinking age.

In Germany, you have to be 16 to purchase wine/beer and 18 for hard liquor, but there is no age limit for consuming alcohol.

I have not seen any studies that indicate worse outcomes than the restrictive drinking limits in the US. yes, there is alcoholism and yes, some people binge drink - but I have not seen anything comparable to the alcohol steeped weekends on US college campuses. Prohibiting something makes it more attractive to teens, and getting booze when you're not allowed to is considered a sport. It won't be nearly as attractive if it's not against the rules.

Regentrude, I have also wondered about stigma. I think it's entirely possible that in Germany and other western European nations, being drunk is culturally looked down upon and that probably helps. Since America is about as far from a homogenous culture as one can get, there isn't really much of a cultural prohibition and in some families, many local ones here come to mind, unfortunately, going out binge drinking at 21 (our state's legal age) is considered a "rite of passage" which is very, very bad because it elevates the act of drinking alcohol and getting intoxicated to some sort of heroic level...well, similar to the way the parents around here act about sports. You'd think when their 5 year olds try out for pee wee football, that the next great NFL player just walked onto the field, and the outlook on being 21 and getting to drink is similar. The perspective is quite damaging.

 

Dh and I are not tee-totalers. We imbibe responsibly which for our personal boundaries, means not every day and many times not even once in a week. An occasional glass of wine with a meal, an occasional glass of champagne to mark an auspicious event, and occasional Mike's Hard Lemonade with our barbecue. In order to take the mystery out of it, we've allowed our teen boys to taste once in a while or even have an ounce or two, and every time then talked about the responsibilities of using alcohol wisely. We hope that this will help them make wise choices when they come of age. Their never imbibing grandparents have talked openly with them about why they have never had alcohol - in both cases it is because they had experienced the negatives of relatives who drank excessively and just didn't want to risk that they might be prone to the same - and so hopefully, the honest communication will produce responsible adults who are ready to face the pressures that some work and college environments can bring.

 

I know that some of the Eastern European nations that were once part of the Soviet regime have high alcoholism rates, and some such as Russia and Ukraine have very high Fetal Alcohol Syndrome rates, so I wonder what cultural differences play into the greater picture.

[Teachin'Mine]

Here's a bit about Germany:

 

http://www.dw.de/the-highs-and-lows-of-germanys-drinking-culture/a-2226609

 

 

The title of the article is "The Highs and Lows of Germany's Drinking Culture".

[flyingiguana]

I wrote my post and linked the study in response to several parents talking about the advantages, or possible advantages, of introducing teens to drinking before the age of 21 to help prevent a temptation to overdue it when they turn 21.   Drinking at an early age alters the brain.  How much is safe?  How much is too much?

But that link doesn't cite any evidence. There's only this: "Drinking may have lasting health effects. Some researchers believe that heavy drinking at this age, when the brain is still developing, may cause lasting impairments in brain functions such as memory, coordination, and motor skills—at least among susceptible individuals."

 

But the pertinent studies aren't cited (and the way it's worded, it kind of looks like there aren't any pertinent studies. "Some researchers believe" isn't strong evidence. Doesn't even sound like they looked at anything)

 

And then the article goes on to talk about the dangers of binge drinking and alcohol poisoning, which I think is fairly strongly supported. But nowhere do I see evidence that early drinking actually *causes* either binge drinking or alterations of the brain. The former is only a correlation (and as I pointed out in my previous post, it's a correlation that could be due to any number of other things). The latter has no supporting evidence in this particular link.

 

If there is supporting evidence for alteration of the brains of teens (or younger) who drink, that would be interesting to see.

 

However, I strongly suspect that any evidence isn't going to be very convincing -- because I doubt there are many before and after snapshots of teen brains. Most of the evidence is going to be of teens who have already been drinking. But were the brain differences between drinkers and non drinkers the cause or the effect of drinking?

 

However, if there is better evidence out there, please post what you find. I find this all an interesting question. I'm not trying to argue for or against teen drinking. It's just that I'm not convinced by the one link that was posted. And I feel it's worth pointing out the flaws in the logic.

[flyingiguana]

It doesn't disprove the hypothesis that the kids who are prone to binge drinking are prone to it *because* their brains aren't normal.

 

Even if there were changes over the study period in the drinking group but not the non-drinking, that still doesn't prove anything.

 

Teens would have to be randomly assigned to be drinkers or not. No one's going to condone that study. Just as they're not going to condone studies giving various concentrations of alcohol to pregnant women to see at which point fetal alcohol syndrome kicks in.

 

But I'm criticizing these studies from the view of a scientist. All I'm saying is that there isn't the best evidence for keeping kids from light drinking. The issue is that keeping them from drinking is probably the safer course of action, given that we don't really know what the effects are. But the only thing we can really say for sure is that we don't know. The best we could probably do at this point is to compare rates of brain dysfunctions in countries with less restrictive teen drinking policies with those in countries that are more restrictive. But even then, the results may be skewed by a lot of binge drinkers, when what we really want to know is what the effect of moderate drinking is.

 

Because these are mostly studies of binge drinkers. Alcohol is an obvious poison and the body can't detoxify it if there's too much dumped in the system at once. That's probably fairly well documented. What these studies don't get at (and what would be of most interest to most of us) is the effect of light to moderate alcohol consumption on teen brains. My best guess would be not much. There's no reason to suspect the enzymes that break down alcohol are less available in teen bodies. From an evolutionary viewpoint, there wouldn't be any reason for teens NOT to be eating/drinking alcohol (ie, in rotten fruit) particularly if all cavemen over the age of 21 were ingesting it. So there'd be pretty high selective pressure for teens to also have the alcohol detoxifying enzymes -- and no reason for those enzymes to suddenly appear right at the magic age of 21.

 

Are their brains more vulnerable? Hard to say. It could be they're less vulnerable, as they may have better repair mechanisms, being younger.

 

I think what these studies mostly tell us is that habits are being formed in teens. Most people over the age of 25 don't suddenly become binge drinkers. And it may be easiest to keep people from going down that path than to bring them back from it once they've started. So public health measures might most profitably be put into trying to keep teens from turning into irresponsible drinkers before they've established their drinking habits.

 

But just because it may make the most sense, from a public health standpoint, to keep teens from drinking so that they'll form the habit of drinking less (although it may not....) that doesn't prove anything about what the actual effect of the alcohol is.

 

These are all correlations (even the study that found changes in drinkers vs non drinkers). The problem is the lack of randomly assigned treatments, so we can't ever be sure if the drinking caused the brain changes or the other way around.