zero tolerance policy for teen drinking (some cc)

[Only me]

The private christian high school where my oldest dd attends has a zero tolerance policy for alcohol. When I first heard about this at the parent's night I thought it was a good idea but now I am having second thoughts.

 

Apparently the weekend before last there was a party with alcohol. Six of the kids from the high school attended. I'm not sure of the details but apparently a parent told the school officials about it. I'm not sure if her kid attended the party and therefore knew what other kids were there or if her kid heard about the party, told her parents and then the parents told the school.

 

The six kids that were involved were expelled from school for the rest of the year. This is a small, close-knit school and a lot of the kids (including my dd were devastated-lots of tears). Even though my dd wasn't close friends with these kids she felt really bad. Five out of the six kids had been "trouble makers" but nothing this serious. One of the girls never even received a detention before.

 

Most of all my dd is worried about these kids. She is confused because as christians aren't we supposed to help people to become closer to God and not push them away? My dd attended one year at the public school. It was sad that as the year progressed many of her friends started going to parties, drinking etc. My dd feels that if these 6 kids from her current school were having problems at this school it will even be worse for them at the public school. She agrees that drinking is wrong and that they should be punished but that kicking them out isn't the answer.

 

She is also scared because the rumor is that there wasn't any proof. It's not like they came to school or to a high school function drunk. Even though it was a parent that turned the kids in I believe that they received their information for other students. I don't think the parent actually saw them drinking or drunk. So dd is scared that someone could be mad at her and start a rumor about her drinking and she could be kicked out of school even if it is't true. Apparently some of the school officials say that even if there is a rumor of a student drinking they will be kicked out. My dd has never attended a party in her life and at this point it is the furthest thing from her mind but it's a shame that she has to be worried about this.

 

I'm really conflicted about the whole thing. I think it is important for teens to know that it isn't good to drink. It is against the law and of course is dangerous. I also think the school has to let the kids know that they are serious about the situation so that other students don't do the same thing. On the other hand, I agree with my dd that it sounds like these kids are the ones who would probably benefit the most from attending a christian school. Of course at any school there will be problems but at least a higher percentage of the kids don't drink. I'm also a little concerned with the fact that the school can control so much of what the kids do on and off campus. It worries me that someone could start a rumor and that kid could be kicked out.

[Parrothead]

To me it seems a bit over the top. I can see a zero tolerance for school functions, but what about other situations - not necessarily a party. What about the kid who goes to the church that actually offers communion wine? What about the kid who has 1st generation immigrants for parents that think it is okay to drink wine with dinner?

 

For a Christian school, it would seem more appropriate to "train up a child as he should go," and offer training classes for all students. What about, "judge not, least you be judged?" The school officials shouldn't be condemning these kids. They should be helping them over come peer pressure.

[abbeyej]

I think if you have concerns, you should call up the school and ask to speak to the headmaster. Ask for clarification.

 

You keep saying things like, "the rumor is that there wasn't any proof" and "I believe that they received their information from..." and "apparently some of the school officials say..."

 

It sounds to me like *all* *you* have to go on are rumors and suspicions. It's perfectly valid to call up the headmaster and say, "Hey, I'm hearing a lot of rumors, and I'd like some straight answers on school policy and how these things are handled". Obviously he *shouldn't* discuss with you the specifics of any particular child's case besides your own, but he should have no problem letting you know very clearly what the policies are, what proof is required, and what would happen *if* an unsubstantiated rumor were ever started about a child (for instance, your own). What would happen if your daughter attended a party in good faith, only to discover there was alcohol there after the fact? Ask the questions you need answered.

 

But for heaven's sake, don't perpetuate this culture of rumor and suspicion. Ask for clarification from someone in authority. If you don't like his answers, you can protest. But don't base all your opinions on what you *think* *might* be going on based on what you *heard* from *somebody*.

[Haiku]

I think that your daughter should take her concerns to the school administration.

 

Tara

[dcjlkplus3]

I think if you have concerns, you should call up the school and ask to speak to the headmaster. Ask for clarification.

 

You keep saying things like, "the rumor is that there wasn't any proof" and "I believe that they received their information from..." and "apparently some of the school officials say..."

 

It sounds to me like *all* *you* have to go on are rumors and suspicions. It's perfectly valid to call up the headmaster and say, "Hey, I'm hearing a lot of rumors, and I'd like some straight answers on school policy and how these things are handled". Obviously he *shouldn't* discuss with you the specifics of any particular child's case besides your own, but he should have no problem letting you know very clearly what the policies are, what proof is required, and what would happen *if* an unsubstantiated rumor were ever started about a child (for instance, your own). What would happen if your daughter attended a party in good faith, only to discover there was alcohol there after the fact? Ask the questions you need answered.

 

But for heaven's sake, don't perpetuate this culture of rumor and suspicion. Ask for clarification from someone in authority. If you don't like his answers, you can protest. But don't base all your opinions on what you *think* *might* be going on based on what you *heard* from *somebody*.

:iagree:

[Rhonda in TX]

They knew the rules. They broke the rules. They have to bear the consequences. I believe the school has to stick by the rules as they are written.

 

Now, as far as proof, yes, there should be proof before action is taken. It can't be on the word of someone else. But maybe the kids confessed when confronted. Who knows?

 

Any concerns you have should be taken to the administration. If the rules need to change, that's where it will happen.

[Tracey in TX]

If you don't have a zero tolerance policy, where is the line drawn? Once, twice? Just don't inhale; drive drunk, just make sure nobody dies...?

Doing the "harder right" is so much more difficult than giving a bit of wiggle room. The bar has been set very high. Won't be anymore drinking in that school for the current student body.

Take the concerns to administration. Undoubtedly, nobody would take expulsion lightly. There must have been proof or confession to expel six students.

[elegantlion]

While it may seem harsh I agree with the "they broke the rules" policy. Apparently the policy was well known and now they want some grace?

 

I totally understand about the confusion about proof and would probably call for clarification.

 

A dear friend of mine attended many christian and public schools. She said the party life at the Christian schools was nearly as bad as at the public, so I can see that if this school had a zero tolerance policy why they would want it enforced.

 

God does show mercy and grace, but he doesn't always ask that we go without consequences. Their grace and mercy may come down the road, but right now I'd say they are dealing with consequences.

[Haiku]

The bar has been set very high. Won't be anymore drinking in that school for the current student body.

 

 

I disagree. I think there will be more drinking, just with more attempts to hide it. To me, crushingly punitive consequences are not "setting the bar high." They are simply punishment for people who don't meet the high expectations. If kids behave simply out of fear of punishment, the point is missed, imho. Far better, to me, would be to have a policy of mandatory counseling/education sessions with a teacher, and/or mandatory school service, or having the kids involved create an anti-drinking program and teach it to kids at an elementary school, than simply telling kids, "We wash our hands of you."

 

I have high expectations of my kids (of all kids, really), and I don't hold with coddling children. But the kids who were expelled learned little, I expect, than that they will be severely punished by adults for behavioral transgressions. You can certainly hold kids accountable for their behavior without kicking them out.

 

To me, it seems like a Christian school kicking kids out doesn't send a message consistent with what I believe to be true of Christian teachings.

 

Tara

[lynn]

I can give a long list of issues that go on in Christian schools. This situation sounds like what happened in 1983 at the Christian school I attended. Not only did the kids have stand in front of the highschool student body and apologize several who admitted to drinking were expelled. Sadly it's not shocking. There were a lot of things that went on in my Christian school that shocked many and led many astray over the years.

[PiCO]

I have a zero tolerance policy for zero tolerance policies.

 

This is a private school, can't they just use common sense instead of saying "zero tolerance"? Someone mentioned an immigrant family that has wine with dinner. Communion. Went to a party where they didn't know alchohol was being served, someone saw them and said they were drinking.

 

In my area, zero tolerance for weapons led to a child being kicked out of school for bringing her mother's lunch to school. The lunch contained an apple and a paring knife. The girl immediately reported the mistake to the school administrators, and she was expelled from the school. Have we no common sense?

[Ellie]

As Christians, we are supposed to hold one another accountable, too. Those children knew the rules and chose to disobey them. They have no one to blame except themselves.

 

The Apostle Paul directs Titus to "reject" factious men from the church in Crete. He told the Corinthians to disfellowship members who were s*xually immoral. He corrected Peter in public when Peter was being hypocritical. Christians are not just supposed to be all warm and fuzzy and love on each other. They are supposed to take appropriate action against fellow believers who choose to live contrary to what they know to be truth.

 

Will there be less drinking among the student body? Maybe. Maybe not. But the rules were clearly laid out from the beginning, and the authorities of the school are bound to administer the consequences they had established. A zero-tolerance policy is a zero-tolerance policy.

 

I think you should choose not to participate in the rumor-mongering. If you have doubts about how it was handled, you should go to the principal and ask the question, instead of pondering the rumors.

[bettyandbob]

I personally would stay miles away from any school that has "zero tolerance". It sounds like a good idea, but is applied to badly.

 

If the policy is stated up front, then it should be followed with proof not rumor.

 

As a parent, I think you should go to the headmaster and explain you concerns and your dds concerns. I would specifically state your dds fear that someone could start a rumor about her and she could be expelled. What safeguards and procedures prevent this?

 

If there is no safeguards and rumors are acceptable, the school is ripe for serious bullying by people who know just the right buttons to push and alarms to set off. I could just see a "Queen Bee" (yes, even Christian schools have these) reporting someone and being backed up by a couple of her worker bees.

[Karenciavo]

I personally would stay miles away from any school that has "zero tolerance". It sounds like a good idea, but is applied to badly.

 

If the policy is stated up front, then it should be followed with proof not rumor.

 

As a parent, I think you should go to the headmaster and explain you concerns and your dds concerns. I would specifically state your dds fear that someone could start a rumor about her and she could be expelled. What safeguards and procedures prevent this?

 

If there is no safeguards and rumors are acceptable, the school is ripe for serious bullying by people who know just the right buttons to push and alarms to set off. I could just see a "Queen Bee" (yes, even Christian schools have these) reporting someone and being backed up by a couple of her worker bees.

 

The OP is listening to rumors from her daughter who got them from an undisclosed source (in this post anyway.) The school may very well have based their decision on proof, hopefully they did.

 

To the original poster; I agree with Ellie and Abbey. Also, maybe you and your daughter could reach out to the students and help them. Relational mentoring is superior to anything the school could do for them.

[Harriet Vane]

I think if you have concerns, you should call up the school and ask to speak to the headmaster. Ask for clarification.

 

You keep saying things like, "the rumor is that there wasn't any proof" and "I believe that they received their information from..." and "apparently some of the school officials say..."

 

It sounds to me like *all* *you* have to go on are rumors and suspicions. It's perfectly valid to call up the headmaster and say, "Hey, I'm hearing a lot of rumors, and I'd like some straight answers on school policy and how these things are handled". Obviously he *shouldn't* discuss with you the specifics of any particular child's case besides your own, but he should have no problem letting you know very clearly what the policies are, what proof is required, and what would happen *if* an unsubstantiated rumor were ever started about a child (for instance, your own). What would happen if your daughter attended a party in good faith, only to discover there was alcohol there after the fact? Ask the questions you need answered.

 

But for heaven's sake, don't perpetuate this culture of rumor and suspicion. Ask for clarification from someone in authority. If you don't like his answers, you can protest. But don't base all your opinions on what you *think* *might* be going on based on what you *heard* from *somebody*.

 

:iagree:

 

I will add this. I attended a private Christian school with a zero tolerance policy. Yes, there were some shenanigans. (My particular group of friends did not participate in those shenanigans). On the whole, though, there was a standard both for behavior and for loving relationship as a community, and it worked well. There were students that struggled with different issues that were contrary to the agreement we all signed--any one who reached out in sincerity for help was given that help. Those that did not want help and support in adhering to the conduct they had agreed to were ultimately unhappy in that environment. Their unhappiness was the direct result of their own choices. I found the administration to be very loving, not just to me but to at least a handful of kids I can think of who faced some struggles. It is completely possible to be loving WITHOUT violating the ethical code that was agreed to.

[Only me]

Just to clarify. I'm not basing all of this just on what my dd said. We had parent-teacher conferences last week and some of this was discussed. Of course the teachers couldn't name any names but when I asked a few of these questions they couldn't answer either. Quite honestly I was just thinking about letting it go and giving the administrators the benefit of the doubt but I really want my questions answered.

 

They did hold an assembly and discussed what happened but weren't very clear with the students about what happened. Apparently many of the students were confused after the assembly and felt that the administrators implied some of the things that the students are concerned about (the rumors) For instance that even if there is a rumor about someone drinking then they will be expelled.

 

I've decided to speak to the school tomorrow. I'm not going in on the defensive rather to just clarify the exact rules etc.

[tibbyl]

Although many will pile on to disagree vehemently with me, I strongly believe that schools are overreaching their authority when they punish students for something that happened in a non-school setting. Their in loco parentis should not extend beyond the school or school-related functions.

[Ria]

Although many will pile on to disagree vehemently with me, I strongly believe that schools are overreaching their authority when they punish students for something that happened in a non-school setting. Their in loco parentis should not extend beyond the school or school-related functions.

 

I agree with you, actually. Let parents be parents, thanks!

 

Ria

[Murphy101]

I have a zero tolerance policy for zero tolerance policies.

 

This is a private school, can't they just use common sense instead of saying "zero tolerance"? Someone mentioned an immigrant family that has wine with dinner. Communion. Went to a party where they didn't know alchohol was being served, someone saw them and said they were drinking.

 

In my area, zero tolerance for weapons led to a child being kicked out of school for bringing her mother's lunch to school. The lunch contained an apple and a paring knife. The girl immediately reported the mistake to the school administrators, and she was expelled from the school. Have we no common sense?

 

Although many will pile on to disagree vehemently with me, I strongly believe that schools are overreaching their authority when they punish students for something that happened in a non-school setting. Their in loco parentis should not extend beyond the school or school-related functions.

 

:iagree: They are paying for an education. Obviously a christian based one in this case. They are not paying to have big brother breathing down their neck every time they walk off campus. Frankly, I'd be glad to take my money elsewhere.:auto:

 

Then again, my kids better never apply there!

We brew our own beer!

oh the horror! Can you imagine it now?

What did you do this weekend?

Oh I went home to visit the folks. We all stayed up late brewing a batch of amber ale while mom supplied fresh hot cookies. My little brother was so excited because now that he's 10 - he got to stay up past bedtime to help!

Picturing professors gasping and fainting left and right.:lol:

 

ETA: just to clarify... lest you think we are all sloshes around here

my dh says he loves his beer too much to get drunk. better to savor that one beer for the entire night. drunks don't fully appreciate fine beer.

he'd be royal ticked if a kid of his got drunk. shows a lack of proper appreciation! LOL

Edited October 29, 2008 by Martha

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

I'm really conflicted about the whole thing. I think it is important for teens to know that it isn't good to drink. It is against the law and of course is dangerous. I also think the school has to let the kids know that they are serious about the situation so that other students don't do the same thing. On the other hand, I agree with my dd that it sounds like these kids are the ones who would probably benefit the most from attending a christian school. Of course at any school there will be problems but at least a higher percentage of the kids don't drink. I'm also a little concerned with the fact that the school can control so much of what the kids do on and off campus. It worries me that someone could start a rumor and that kid could be kicked out.

 

At the high school my son attended, there was a no tolerance policy for lying, cheating, and stealing. No chances, no "strikes." If you did those things, you were gone, and don't let the gate swing back on your butt on the way out.

 

Six days before graduation, a young man was caught NOT where he said he was going to be (lying), on a back road in a car with two young ladies and a whole lot of alcohol. One of the main buildings on campus is named for his father, a major donor. (And when I say major, we're talking multiple millions.) Three generations of this family attended that school. The young man was gone before the sun rose the next morning. He did not graduate. He got a certificate of completion. He agreed to the rules and to accept their consequences, and he broke them anyway.

 

Compassion is wonderful. I think there's definitely a place for mercy. Learning young the lessons of personal responsibility by being allowed to own the full consequences of mistakes is pretty wonderful, too, although certainly not as pleasant.

[Catherine]

a zero tolerance policy for "rowdiness in the library". To me, zero tolerance has come to stand for some fantasy of absolute compliance with authority that is neither wise nor realistic. It presupposes that a larger punishment will be more likely to elicit compliance. I think that is simplistic.

 

I think it's entirely appropriate that a school like this might soon find itself unable to find enough perfect students whose parents will pay its tuition.

[Aggie]

Personally, I think it's wonderful that a school is holding its students to the same standards our laws do.

 

Also, it is a *private* school. Parents and students who don't agree with the school's policies are free to go to any other school. :)

 

Aggie

[hornblower]

Is there widespread agreement among protestant Christian denominations that teens cannot drink? Just wondering.

[Aggie]

Is there widespread agreement among protestant Christian denominations that teens cannot drink? Just wondering.

 

It's pretty widespread in our laws. :)

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Although many will pile on to disagree vehemently with me, I strongly believe that schools are overreaching their authority when they punish students for something that happened in a non-school setting. Their in loco parentis should not extend beyond the school or school-related functions.

 

I tend to agree. And in the example I posted, the kid was under the school's direct authority at the time. If he had not been, he would have been his parent's responsibility to deal with unless he tarnished the reputation of the school *directly* by his actions.

[JoyfulMama]

We brew our own beer!

oh the horror! Can you imagine it now?

What did you do this weekend?

Oh I went home to visit the folks. We all stayed up late brewing a batch of amber ale while mom supplied fresh hot cookies. My little brother was so excited because now that he's 10 - he got to stay up past bedtime to help!

Picturing professors gasping and fainting left and right.:lol:

 

ETA: just to clarify... lest you think we are all sloshes around here

my dh says he loves his beer too much to get drunk. better to savor that one beer for the entire night. drunks don't fully appreciate fine beer.

he'd be royal ticked if a kid of his got drunk. shows a lack of proper appreciation! LOL

 

Our husbands would get along famously! :cheers2:

 

I agree that it is best not to continue to discuss an issue based upon rumor. I do, also, agree that you as a parent, and your daughter, have some valid questions about the policy which you would like to have clarified.

 

As far as zero tolerance policies, I believe they have their place. If the policy deals with the breaking of a law (i.e. underage drinking) I feel it should be upheld. But when a rule is made to enforce a standard of conduct or safety, and not related to a law, then I don't feel a zero tolerance policy is necessary.

Should we not be teaching our children to respect the law and those in authority? Would you rather your child is arrested and charged with underage drinking, or be expelled from a school?

The Bible does say that we should be compassionate and treat others with love and kindness. HOWEVER it also states that we are to discipline our children when they are wrong. Therefore, punish them, but do so with love.

Now about the parents should be parents... this is why the schools have over-reached their school events - because many parents in this country don't want to be 'the bad parents' and punish their children for bad behavior!

Story time.... :lurk5:

At my previous church ('nother state) there was a man/father I highly respected, with whom I attended an adult bible study. One morning the conversation turned to 'current events', and he told how his oldest son had just been put on three days detention at school, as he was caught drinking while on a school trip. Father's first response to kid was to tell him not to put whiskey in a water bottle, but use an iced tea bottle, as vodka goes in a a water bottle! Father then doled out his own punishment of grounding/loss of priviledges for one month, and he ws going to sell the son's car (father had paid more than half and was paying insurance/gas). To father, this was a severe enough punishment to have the kid do some serious thinking, and learn an important life lesson. The school administrator contacted the father to request that the father reduce the punishment, and not sell the son's car. In the end, the father did not sell the car, and the son regained the car upon completion of one month. Son was placed on a last chance deal. The leader of the group then stated that she had multiple teen parties at her house where alcohol was present for her son and his friends (then in college). And they balked at me for feeling that this was inappropriate, even though it is illegal. During this time there was a local court case where a mother was being charged for hosting a teen party where alcohol was available, and another woman was being charged for supplying the alcohol. It came out in testimony that there were multiple teens driving (DUI) from that party, and many parents thought their children were sleeping in their beds while they were out partying. Why did this night become so well known? Well, because multiple teens died that night.

It only takes one time when dealing with something so dangerous. Which is why it is illegal. If we (parents and schools) don't take that seriously, why should our children?

 

Wow.. this got really long... I'll shut up now! :seeya:

[elegantlion]

I tend to agree. And in the example I posted, the kid was under the school's direct authority at the time. If he had not been, he would have been his parent's responsibility to deal with unless he tarnished the reputation of the school *directly* by his actions.

 

After some thought I would say I agree with this as well. I can understand a zero tolerance policy pertaining to school activities. Once a child is not at school that falls under parental control, not school admin. I just asked my dh about this and he agreed.

 

I'm not sure I could send my child to a school with such a policy.

[Harriet Vane]

Personally, I think it's wonderful that a school is holding its students to the same standards our laws do.

 

Also, it is a *private* school. Parents and students who don't agree with the school's policies are free to go to any other school. :)

 

Aggie

 

This is the difference between a public and a private school.

[Haiku]

I don't agree with "zero tolerance" policies in general because they have led to things like kindergarteners getting suspended for passing around m&ms and telling kids they were drugs, or kids getting suspended/expelled for bringing utensils to school to eat their lunches. These are things I have heard about in the news.

 

My personal "zero tolerance" horror story is that, when I was a foster care social worker, I had an 8 year old who was suspended from the school he had just started attending (after moving to a new foster home) because he brought a broken pair of scissors to school. This violated the school's "zero tolerance" policy on weapons, and the school administration's stance was that broken scissors aren't functional and therefore serve no purpose other than a weapon. The real story was that the boy's teacher had told the kids to bring in scissors, and the boy, being too embarrassed to ask his brand new foster mom for scissors, found the broken pair somewhere and took them to school. I went to bat for this boy but it made no difference. There was "zero tolerance" and the rule had to be applied rigidly.

 

I think that if kids sign a contract stating that they understand they will be expelled if they drink, well, they should be expelled if they drink. However, I disagree with the school having this policy in the first place, and I think now might be a good time for the school to re-examine it.

 

Tara

[1bassoon]

 

A dear friend of mine attended many christian and public schools. She said the party life at the Christian schools was nearly as bad as at the public, so I can see that if this school had a zero tolerance policy why they would want it enforced.

 

 

Dh taught at a Christian school for the first time ever - and boy, was he SHOCKED at the behaviors/partying that went on. Way worse than public schools.

[Harriet Vane]

Dh taught at a Christian school for the first time ever - and boy, was he SHOCKED at the behaviors/partying that went on. Way worse than public schools.

 

This is a difficult line for me to swallow as it generalizes all Christian schools and all public schools. Why paint them ALL with such a broad brush? Your dh has worked at ONE and thinks they are all like this?

 

When people rant about public schools or rant about private schools or praise either one, my first question is always, "WHICH ONE?" Because honestly, there is as huge a variance in schools as there are in people.

[hornblower]

It's pretty widespread in our laws. :)

 

Well, in Canada the legal alcohol purchase age is 19, at which age some kids are still in high school & clearly, still "teens".

Also, in several provinces it is explicitly permitted for parents to serve alcohol to their under 19 yo children. In the other provinces, I understand that absent signs of abuse/neglect, the authorities would not interfere.

 

I come from Europe where watered down wine is often offered to kids. There's a distinction made between wine & beer and hard liquor....

 

Anyway, apart from the laws, I'm curious about religious attitudes to alcohol consumption.

[StaceyinLA]

I think that it's one thing to have a zero tolerance policy at school events and on school property, but yet another to reach out the big arm of the school to private gatherings. (kinda sounds like big brother to me, and I'm all against more government).

 

And as far as underage drinking, yes, I agree it's illegal, but I do NOT agree with the legal age of 21, and I believe if I am having a celebration and want to serve my teen a glass of wine or champagne, or beer and pretzels, I will do so (and not feel guilty).

 

I'm of the, "I can't believe a guy can go to war at 18 and put his life on the line for his country but can't stop for a cold beer on the way home," camp. In all ways you are considered an adult at 18, except drinking. I think the 21 law is absurd.

[Murphy101]

Is there widespread agreement among protestant Christian denominations that teens cannot drink? Just wondering.

 

no, it's not.

 

It's pretty widespread in our laws. :)

 

no, it's not. some states are 18, some are 21

 

Aside from that, I question the school policy.

Is it "no drinking" or is it no illegal underage age drinking?

One is just saying they will uphold the legal age of drinking laws.

The other is expanding the law to include a large population of students that actually can drink alcohol legally.

 

I completely agree a private school can have whatever rules it wants.

That's why I'd take my money elsewhere.

If the rule is being applied stupidly (no proof, rumor, etc..) then that should be brought to the adminstration. It should take a LOT more than a phone called claim to get someone expelled, imo.

[Ellie]

I dont have an issues with the policy, but I do think that there needs to be an alternative punishment other than expulsion after just one act.

 

But that's usually what "zero tolerance" means. No mercy.

 

And remember: the students knew the policy. Whether we think zero tolerance is good or bad, whether we agree with the punishment or not, the students knew, and did it anyway.

 

IMHO, parents who have trouble with zero tolerance policies should have talked to the school authorities before enrolling their dd and agreeing to abide by that policy. It's too late now.

[Melinda in VT]

I think that it's one thing to have a zero tolerance policy at school events and on school property, but yet another to reach out the big arm of the school to private gatherings. (kinda sounds like big brother to me, and I'm all against more government)..

 

:iagree: I learned after the fact that by consuming a glass of wine with Thanksgiving dinner (at my house) in my 19yo nephew's presence, I technically caused him to violate his university's honor code.:tongue_smilie:

 

Now, to be fair, I don't think anyone else realized this either and I haven't heard any hint that there was a problem.

[Jugglin'5]

Is there widespread agreement among protestant Christian denominations that teens cannot drink? Just wondering.

 

Only in America. The suffragettes were usually "temperance" activists, and then there is MADD. I put temperance in quotes because teetotalism does not equal temperance. We're conservative Protestants and our kids drink wine or beer with us at dinner occasionally, and wine in communion, but I think we are definitely in the minority. Guinness is the kids' favorite, in small amounts of course. I think the American approach to alcohol actually encourages binge-drinking in teens and young adults. I think they need to learn to drink responsibly alongside their parents.

 

But I agree that the rules are the rules, even if I think they may be misguided.

[Only me]

IMHO, parents who have trouble with zero tolerance policies should have talked to the school authorities before enrolling their dd and agreeing to abide by that policy. It's too late now.

 

I hope you're not referring to me. I have no problem with my dd abiding by the policy. I'll admit that so far I have been very lucky with dd. She has no desire to drink or attend parties where it is even a possibility that alcohol will be served. Quite honestly my dd does very little socializing outside of school activities so it isn't a problem. We were very aware of the policy when we enrolled dd and agreed with it. I still agree that the students knew about it ahead of time and shouldn't be surprised by their punishment.

 

I'm more concerned with the grey areas. I'm waiting for a call back from administration to clarify a few of the questions I have.

 

For instance if dd arrived at someone's home and didn't know there would be drinking. (She has been instructed to call me right away and I will pick her up). The problem is that even if she didn't even take one sip she would still have been seen at the party and therefore could be "guilty by association". My dd has a pretty good social radar but I know that I was put into that situation a time or two as a teenager. For instance one time I was out with a friend. That friend wanted to stop by another friend's house on the way home. When we got there we realized that people were drinking and decided to leave. I'm wondering what would happen to my dd in that situation. If someone found out about the drinking and saw my dd there (even if she wasn't drinking) would she be expelled?

 

I also want to make the administration aware of the rumors (which I'm sure they are already) but to ease my worries and my daughter's I want to make sure that they are just rumors and exactly what their policy is.

 

In my original post I was mainly seeing what other people thought of zero tolerance. Originally I thought it was a great idea. The kids know the rules and they should abide by them. What I didn't originally think about though was that sometimes those rules might not seem as cut and dry as they seem. Of course if a student came to a school function drunk or with alchol they should be expelled. If there was a party, police had to come break it up and students were arrested then those kids who were drinking should be expelled. If a school official actually saw a student drinking on or off campus they should be expelled. Other than that I'm not sure how things should be handled.

[Ellie]

I'm not completely in favor of zero tolerance policies, because as you can see, there are gray areas. I just think that the folks who are bent out of shape over the discipline meted out (not necessarily you) have no reason to be bent out of shape.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I think that it is worth your family clarifying what the school's zero tolerance policy entails. Leave the other students situation alone and ask about situations that your daughter may be in. Is it that she may not drink or that she may not be at occasions were alcohol is served. Or that she may not be with others who are drinking?

 

It may be that the school's policy really is very stark. I turned down a job with a school in large part because of their drinking policy. I had no problem with their saying I couldn't serve students alcohol. I was more uncomfortable with the idea that they wanted me to not drink in front of students, even at a mixed age function where alcohol was considered appropriate. But I was also expected to not drink at all. Since my understanding of the Biblical restrictional on alcohol are centered on restricting drunkeness, not drinking, I found that this was a red flag that my values and the schools values weren't going to line up well.

 

If I were a parent in a situation like this, I would ask more questions about the actual policy. I might try to get the school to change the policy if I had a disagreement with it. But I might find myself either putting up with the disagreement or looking for a new school.

 

One other factor in this is that different Christian schools see their missions differently. Are they a school for Christians or a school that follows Christian values but allows non-Christians to attend? Do they expect students to adhere to Christian values at all times or that they will be able to repent and reap consequences?

I remember that this came up with a school started by our old church when one of the students got pregnant. It is almost impossible to come up with an answer that satisfies all the families. It does sound like your school has a situation on its hands that is worth a larger discussion. Not of the specifics of each students' activities but of their larger vision of how the school handles students behaving badly.

[tibbyl]

The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required all states to raise their minimum purchase and public possession of alcohol age to 21. States that did not comply faced a reduction in highway funds under the Federal Highway Aid Act. The national law specifically prohibits purchase and public possession of alcoholic beverages. It does not prohibit persons under 21 from drinking.

 

However, state laws vary. While this act did not explicitly ban the consumption of alcohol by those under 21, some states did enact a total ban. However, most states still permit underage drinking in certain circumstances. In some states, there are no restrictions on private consumption. In other states, consumption is only allowed in specific locations, in the presence of consenting and supervising family members, and/or during religious occasions.

[Paz]

We have been involved with private schools in the past and basically when you or your child sign the agreement with the school you are signing away some of your rights and giving them the ability to discipline as they see fit according the the rules they have indicated. They have the responsibility to protect the student body and instill their rules and morals. This can get to the point where some of your child's freedoms are taken away. In the case of drinking, it they are at a party, if there is a picture of them at a party, or if someone says they were at a party they can be punished. They can interview students and based on what one student or a group of students says they can punish, expell, etc. Whether I agree with it or not, that is the way it is.

[Spy Car]

Part of Justice is punishment be commensurate with the "crime".

 

Expelling teen-agers from school for drinking seems out of proportion to the wrong-doing.

 

Bill

[kalanamak]

In other states, consumption is only allowed in specific locations, in the presence of consenting and supervising family members, and/or during religious occasions.

 

Yes, as in my state. Here is a compendium:

http://www.alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov/stateprofiles/

[OhM]

I'm more concerned with the grey areas. I'm waiting for a call back from administration to clarify a few of the questions I have.

 

For instance if dd arrived at someone's home and didn't know there would be drinking. (She has been instructed to call me right away and I will pick her up). The problem is that even if she didn't even take one sip she would still have been seen at the party and therefore could be "guilty by association".

 

This would be my concern with the policy. I hope they're not encouraging deception by not allowing the students to do the right thing when they find themselves in a situation they never intended!

 

I had to decide against a very good local Christian university for some graduate work that I otherwise would have been elated to attend because I couldn't in good conscience sign their honor code. At the same time, I appreciate the code that they're asking their students to uphold, and have a great deal of respect for the students who choose to live by that standard (and yes, I know several who do). For that code to actually mean something, I would expect the university to uphold it by issuing the stated consequences when it has been broken.