my school had a walk out

[raylifes]

I agree 100%. I'm 17 and I drink (hell, there are alcohol cans sitting on my desk right now). My school can't do anything about it. They can tell me not to do it, how much it's hurting my body, and how I could kill someone if I drive. But they can't suspend me unless I walk onto their property while I'm intoxicated. They had no right to suspend those kids for drinking. I will say, it was stupid of them to post pics of themselves drinking. But the only people who could really punish them is their parents.

 

 

 

The school had every right... Here's a piece of my earlier post.

 

 

 

Here's a quote from the article at startribune:

 

 

 

The Minnesota State High School League requires student athletes to sign a pledge that they will not drink alcoholic beverages.

 

 

 

And here another important part:

 

 

 

Eden Prairie High School administrators have reprimanded more than 100 students and suspended some from sports and other extracurricular activities after obtaining Facebook photos of students partying, several students said Tuesday.

 

 

 

I don't know about the "other extracurricular activities", but I feel they were right to suspend the athletes who had been drinking, it's their own fault.

[deloriagod]

I agree 100%. I'm 17 and I drink (hell, there are alcohol cans sitting on my desk right now). My school can't do anything about it. They can tell me not to do it, how much it's hurting my body, and how I could kill someone if I drive. But they can't suspend me unless I walk onto their property while I'm intoxicated. They had no right to suspend those kids for drinking. I will say, it was stupid of them to post pics of themselves drinking. But the only people who could really punish them is their parents.

 

 

 

The school had every right... Here's a piece of my earlier post.

 

 

 

Here's a quote from the article at startribune:

 

 

 

The Minnesota State High School League requires student athletes to sign a pledge that they will not drink alcoholic beverages.

 

 

 

And here another important part:

 

 

 

Eden Prairie High School administrators have reprimanded more than 100 students and suspended some from sports and other extracurricular activities after obtaining Facebook photos of students partying, several students said Tuesday.

 

 

 

I don't know about the "other extracurricular activities", but I feel they were right to suspend the athletes who had been drinking, it's their own fault.

 

 

 

Fair enough. The OP made it sound as though the students were suspended from classes and everything. I totally understand the after-school activities suspension as every school I know of has that policy in place. I suppose it's my fault for not reading the actual article.

[venomai]

Basically, he cited statistics saying that the earlier you start, the more likely you are to develop alcohol dependence. You disagree?

 

I agree that an early onset of binge drinking will increase risk of dependence, but as I was referring to responsible use I don't see how this is relavent.

 

 

 

Is this the paper you are referring to? If so -- I'm not sure if that's the greatest source. For one, it does not make a clear distinction between responsible drinking and alcohol abuse, a distinction that is absolutely necessary in any study regarding alcohol dependence. The paper doesn't seem very reliable; it is very one-sided and their claims seem to be moot when we consider other countries and cultures that do not show the same trends of increased risk.

 

 

 

As I said, responsible use at an early age has often shown to result in lower levels of heavy drinking. Take France and Spain, for example, where children are often allowed wine at meals and sometimes even in school cafeterias. Surprisingly, both countries are low in terms of alcohol dependence levels. On the other hand, the US (where many parents adopt a zero-tolerance policy), even with one of the highest drinking ages in the world, tends to have extremely high rates of alcohol dependence. The UK also suffers from many drinking problems. Of course, there are other influences at play, but in general we can see that children drinking does not immediately equal higher risk of dependency -- in many cases it seems to suggest otherwise.

 

 

 

Here are some interesting articles. I will look for better sources on the subject -- most search results so far tend to link to the above paper. :)

 

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/YouthI ... 48192.html

 

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/ZeroTolerance.html

 

http://www.indiana.edu/~engs/articles/cqoped.html

 

 

 

Interrupting, and knowing, is not the same thing. If I had a kid, I would want to know.

 

Most parents are not so ignorant that they need to be told when their children are drunk and/or high -- the smell alone is a dead giveaway, and impairment is usually quite easy to notice. However, I agree; I would want to know what my children are doing to ensure that it is responsible and not detrimental to themselves or others. However, the way to figure this out is not to snoop or prod into their personal life, which is often seen as interruption, but to give them space and openly discuss alcohol/drug use with them.

 

A quick talk regarding risks that should be observed, or a six months de facto house arrest. Either way, that's the choice of the parent in how they intend to raise their offspring to legal majority. Making that choice for them by withholding information regarding illegal or potentially harmful activities on the basis that you yourself manage responsible drug use... Meh, I don't buy it. I may not agree with how all parents given such information will deal with it, but I think they have a right to that information.

 

Yes, they do have a right to that information. But as I've said, most parents do not need to be told that their children have drunk alcohol or smoked marijuana as it is generally easy to tell and, at the very least, statistics show it to be a very common trend in high school.

 

Nevertheless, when it concerns illegal matters the parents are entitled to know. But in this case, the mother snooping around on other student's private profiles was an invasion of privacy (in the general sense of the term). I personally don't feel that she was right in her decision. She not only risked her daughter's high school reputation for something as minor as alcohol use but also ended up spreading a message that, if anyone was to look at statistics, is a generally obvious one. Students drinking underage -- is this really a surprise to parents?

 

If whatever you're doing gets you in trouble if it's caught on camera, you should really be paying attention to what you're doing, the cameras, or both. Can't do the time, don't do the crime.

 

Yep, I agree.

 

The day parents allow themselves to be scared into refraining from doing what they believe to be morally right because the repercussions might involve people being mean to her at school, that's the day when the inmates truly start running the asylum.

 

So you are saying the mother was justified in invading the privacy of hundreds of students, which lead to many suspensions, and in turn potentially destroyed her daughter's high school life?

 

If it were a matter of a real infraction or harm -- such as murder, fraud, trafficking, substance abuse, rape, etc. -- then the situation would be entirely different. But the case here seems to be a very minor infraction, most likely a group of kids drinking beers before they have reached a certian age, or people inducing an altered state of mind by smoking a plant. Done responsibly, these are things that do not seriously harm the individual or others.

[pfilc23]

Walkout was a waste...instead they should beat the crap out of the idiot that posted the pics. Teach everyone an important lesson: Get me in trouble with your stupidity and get beat down. Kids greatest power against authority is not letting authority know what you're doing. Kids have no rights whatsoever, so you're only hope of having fun is to keep is a secret.

[sonerohi]

dude, there was a school dance on new years and we were actually only in 8th grade but we had champaigne.. we were only allowed half of a glass apeice but still.. me and like 10 others even used a picture of all of us interlocking arms and drinking champaign as a picture on myspace.

[jackalope14]

You go to Eden Prairie? Cool.

 

I heard about this and yea its pretty stupid. Looks like mostly the kids in sports got in trouble, which makes sense since they signed a waiver saying they wouldnt do that.

 

 

 

tbh it had nothing to do with the school, it wasn't their problem, so they shouldn't have got involved.

 

 

 

Thats just plain wrong. The School would be completely irresponsible to be presented with the photos and then do nothing to the athletes who signed an agreement to not even be at a party with drugs or alcohol.

[Bloodredsword]

War_Junky, I suggest you read up what freedom of speech entails.

 

 

 

It does not mean absolute freedom, and I can't be bothered quoting the restrictions and such again.

 

yes i know there are some restrictions, but if i wore a shirt with a cross to school nobody would give it a second look, but if i wore one with a Nazi symbol (and was an actual follower of that, and was not a supremesist but just being proud of my race) i would be surrouned by teachers in like 15 seconds,

 

its a totally biased system

 

 

 

Well think about it, does a swastika represent quite the same thing as a cross? Horrible things were done under that symbol.

 

 

 

 

 

Now, I'm not saying that horrible things happened in relation to a cross, but I personally think a swastika is alot worse. -.-

[crimsonking]

War_Junky, I suggest you read up what freedom of speech entails.

 

 

 

It does not mean absolute freedom, and I can't be bothered quoting the restrictions and such again.

 

yes i know there are some restrictions, but if i wore a shirt with a cross to school nobody would give it a second look, but if i wore one with a Nazi symbol (and was an actual follower of that, and was not a supremesist but just being proud of my race) i would be surrouned by teachers in like 15 seconds,

 

its a totally biased system

 

 

 

Well think about it, does a swastika represent quite the same thing as a cross? Horrible things were done under that symbol.

 

 

 

 

 

Now, I'm not saying that horrible things happened in relation to a cross, but I personally think a swastika is alot worse. -.-

 

 

 

Yeah, actually it does, it was used in countless religions and cultures before Hitler started using it himself, and I believe its still used in some religions today, just because it was used by the Nazis doesn't mean its evil.

[Giordano]

War_Junky, I suggest you read up what freedom of speech entails.

 

 

 

It does not mean absolute freedom, and I can't be bothered quoting the restrictions and such again.

 

yes i know there are some restrictions, but if i wore a shirt with a cross to school nobody would give it a second look, but if i wore one with a Nazi symbol (and was an actual follower of that, and was not a supremesist but just being proud of my race) i would be surrouned by teachers in like 15 seconds,

 

its a totally biased system

 

 

 

Well think about it, does a swastika represent quite the same thing as a cross? Horrible things were done under that symbol.

 

 

 

 

 

Now, I'm not saying that horrible things happened in relation to a cross, but I personally think a swastika is alot worse. -.-

 

 

 

Yeah, actually it does, it was used in countless religions and cultures before Hitler started using it himself, and I believe its still used in some religions today, just because it was used by the Nazis doesn't mean its evil.

 

With orgins from Buddism. Funny part too is, the Nazi swastika is actually a flipped version of the real one, and the school bastards couldn't probably tell the difference. #-o

[Defender2516]

"some mom found her underage daughter drunk one day, and decided to check her FaceBook profile, where she saw over 200 pics of kids drinking alcholic beverages. She put them on a disk and sent it to our dean. "

 

 

 

My question is this. Where was the kids who where drunk? The school or on their own personal properties?

 

 

 

I am not saying that they should be drinking, but saying they cannot earn a education from something they did OUTSIDE school is pure BS.

[Adam007]

 

I think the suspensions were justified, assuming you live in a country where most high school students are too young to drink. It may not be his business what the kids drink, but it is his business who goes to his school.

 

But it happened outside of school and has no bearing on what goes on in school. That should be outside of the school's jurisdiction.

i don't agree. First off, what if a kid decides to go to school drunk? and maybe hits another kid on the way, or just acts like a jack [wagon] there. Unlikely but possible.

 

 

 

Also, if someone got a hold of alcohols at such a young age, what else can he get a hold of?

 

 

 

Thirdly, if a person can so easily break one law, how many more laws can he break without his own concern?

 

If the kid is in school and is drunk, yes, that's a problem. But in this case, the kid wasn't in school. As for what else a kid can get at that age, what's it matter? Sure it's illegal, but that's not the school's responsibility. If it doesn't happen at the school, the administration shouldn't play a part. I know you're against underage people breaking rules, but why should schools play a role in this? It's just not their responsibility to enforce these things.

[King_Royale]

If the kid/s in school are drunk AT school they can be suspended

 

 

 

But suspending them while NOT being at school for drinking & getting drunk

 

 

 

Rofl.

[BlueTear]

I agree that an early onset of binge drinking will increase risk of dependence, but as I was referring to responsible use I don't see how this is relavent.

Until you've shown that binge drinking is not an inherent part of the drinking culture in the US, it has a significantly higher relevance than responsible drinking culture in Spain.

 

Is this the paper you are referring to? If so -- I'm not sure if that's the greatest source. For one, it does not make a clear distinction between responsible drinking and alcohol abuse, a distinction that is absolutely necessary in any study regarding alcohol dependence.

Since it actually does list the criteria it uses for alcohol dependance rather clearly, I'll assume you're refering to the manner in which drinking started, to which I'll answer; Does it really matter, on the basis of the drinking culture in question? You can theoretically argue that early drinking does not neccesarily mean a higher dependence, and cite other countries with a different drinking culture. But for all practical intents and purposes, that culture does not exist in the US, the UK or Scandinavia, and thus talking about it is a theoretical excercise with scant connection to reality.

 

 

 

The people who do not drink until they are 21 who live in the US, are less likely to suffer from alcohol dependance. The fact that the same doesn't hold true in Spain is nice, but of little consequence to a discussion regarding youth drinking in the US. You can't disregard the findings of a study examining youth drinking the USA because a similar study performed in Spain would give a different result, when the topic at hand is youth drinking in the USA.

Most parents are not so ignorant that they need to be told when their children are drunk and/or high -- the smell alone is a dead giveaway, and impairment is usually quite easy to notice. However, I agree; I would want to know what my children are doing to ensure that it is responsible and not detrimental to themselves or others. However, the way to figure this out is not to snoop or prod into their personal life, which is often seen as interruption, but to give them space and openly discuss alcohol/drug use with them.

In my personal opinion, trust is a two way street. You show up at home drunk - which I'm going to define as irresponsible use - you've at least temporarily forfeit any given right to a personal life. I'm not saying you should demand the password to your childs facebook the moment your child gets one, but as the adult in the little arragnment, if you suspect there's something there you or another parent needs to know based on the state your child came home in, I say go for it.

So you are saying the mother was justified in invading the privacy of hundreds of students, which lead to many suspensions, and in turn potentially destroyed her daughter's high school life?

1) Yes. Good parents are not ignorant. I'm not saying they should run a miniaturized version of Stasi at home, but if your child violates your trust in a way that makes you want more information, then sitting on your hands in aquiring that information is not acceptable. Again, what you choose to do with that information is one thing - and personally, I lean more towards talking it over extensively than house arrests - but a parent can't look the other way out of convenience.

 

2) "leads to many suspensions" falls under the category of "Can't do the time, don't do the crime". Quite frankly, if you do something that will get you in trouble if caught - no matter how you're caught - you can't blame someone else. The mother did not put them in spotlight, they walked there on their own. Quite frankly, the whole "it's not my fault, I'm not being punished for something *I* did" evident in at least one of the articles in the OP scares me more than underage drinking ever will.

 

3) Freakishly enough, I don't rate high-school reputation above irresponsible use of what is for that age an illegal substance, and the idea of protection my daughters high school reputation by witholding relevant information from other parents strikes me as downright irresponsible.

 

If it were a matter of a real infraction or harm -- such as murder, fraud, trafficking, substance abuse, rape, etc. -- then the situation would be entirely different.

But then you're back to making choices for them. In your opinion, it's a minor thing. Depending on the age and the amount consumed, I agree with you, it is minor - it still warrants a series of talks at home, but not a house arrest - but I can't honestly say I am qualified to make that same choice for other parents, nor do I think you're qualified to make that choice for me if it involvs my child.

But the case here seems to be a very minor infraction, most likely a group of kids drinking beers before they have reached a certian age, or people inducing an altered state of mind by smoking a plant. Done responsibly, these are things that do not seriously harm the individual or others.

And luckily, the track record for youth drinking in the USA is all about drinking responsibly...

 

 

 

 

 

I'd also like to direct a bit of a boot to everyone who keeps saying "the school can't do that, they weren't drinking on school property". Had you actually bothered with, I don't know, READING THE THREAD rather than glancing at it sideways expecting to absorb all the relevant data through your exceptional telepathic skills, you'd have noticed the bit about signing an agreement when participating in school sport. Had you actually read any of the articles though, as opposed to concluding that "links are for nubs, real posters are all-knowing" you'd have noticed that such an agreement was indeed an important part in deciding on suspensions. In fact, one student intended to argue that the pictures were taken before he signed such an agreement, and would thus be inadmissable.

[soldin911]

i think the walk out was stupid

 

 

 

OFF TOPIC:

 

last week about 20 people in my school were suspended or expeled for having illigal drugs after their lockers were searched. They were caled down to the main office, searched, and some walked out of school in handcuffs.

[venomai]

Until you've shown that binge drinking is not an inherent part of the drinking culture in the US, it has a significantly higher relevance than responsible drinking culture in Spain.

 

I would argue that the reason the US and UK cultures are different is, for one reason, because of the laws and strict rules surrounding the use of alcohol, especially for youth.

 

 

 

I said that responsible drinking at a young age has often shown to be benefitial. You are saying that binge drinking at a young age can be detrimental. I agree with you, but your points do not relate to my statement of responsible drinking, regardless of what the culture is in the US.

 

 

 

On the subject of responsible drinking, most studies I've seen tend to show that, at least in the UK and Australia, where drinking causes many issues, students who drink tend to do it responsibly -- regardless of inherent cultural attitudes. A while back warri0r45 made a post about the stats behind responsible drinkers in the UK and Australia. Here's a snippet from his post:

 

[hide=click to reveal snippet]

SENSIBLE DRINKING

 

 

 

While current advice on sensible drinking, within the UK, advocates consideration of daily consumption levels and the number of alcohol-free days (Department of Health, 1995), many of the reviewed studies have used weekly benchmarks of 14 units for women and 21 units for men to monitor safe or sensible drinking behaviour. In the GHS survey (Bridgwood et al., 2000), 36% of men and 13% of women within the 16ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâ24-year age group exceeded these weekly consumption guidelines.

 

 

 

The study of West et al. (1990) provides similar data for male students (see Table 2), but the later studies of Webb et al. (1996, 1998), Norman et al. (1998), Hannay (1998), Pickard et al. (2000), Underwood and Fox (2000) and Newbury-Birch et al. (2000) all reported higher percentages of 54, 50.8, 63, 48, 41, 51 and 45%, respectively (mean ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâñ SD: 52 ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâñ 8%). This most recent evidence would suggest that male students are more likely than males in the general population to exceed 21 units of alcohol per week, and more importantly, that approximately one in two male students is doing so.

 

 

 

For females, File et al. (1994) reported that between 12 and 22% of non-Asian females exceeded 14 units per week in the first three undergraduate years. This figure rose to 26% in year 5. Ashton and Kamali (1995) reported a figure of 18.3% while Norman et al. (1998) recorded 16.9%. Again the later studies (Webb et al., 1996, 1998; Hannay, 1998; Newbury-Birch et al., 2000; Pickard et al., 2000; Underwood and Fox, 2000) present higher values; 43, 58, 38, 41, 38 and 39%, respectively; mean ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâñ SD: 43 ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâñ 7%.

 

 

 

Comparison with GHS data would suggest that female students are at least three times more likely to exceed weekly guidelines than their counterparts in the general population.

 

 

 

Significantly, the difference between the genders clearly evident in the GHS data is less obvious in the UK undergraduate population. GHS figures suggest a male:female ratio of 2.8:1 for those exceeding weekly guidelines. Studies cited above might suggest a male:female ratio of 52:43, i.e. 1.2:1.

 

 

 

According to several investigators, the main reason given by students for drinking was pleasure (Ashton and Kamali, 1995; Webb et al., 1996, 1998; Newbury-Birch et al., 2000) or ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹Ãâenjoying the tasteÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ and ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹Ãâbeing sociableÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ (West et al., 1990). Less than 10% felt that examinations were the motivation (Ashton and Kamali, 1995). Other factors which might influence drinking behaviour, e.g. student demographics, require further investigation.

 

Source: http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/co ... -ETAL-2000[/hide]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since it actually does list the criteria it uses for alcohol dependance rather clearly

 

Yes, it does list that quite clearly. What I suggested is that the paper does not make a clear enough distinction between responsible use and irresponsible abuse.

 

 

 

I'll assume you're refering to the manner in which drinking started, to which I'll answer; Does it really matter, on the basis of the drinking culture in question? You can theoretically argue that early drinking does not neccesarily mean a higher dependence, and cite other countries with a different drinking culture. But for all practical intents and purposes, that culture does not exist in the US, the UK or Scandinavia, and thus talking about it is a theoretical excercise with scant connection to reality.

 

My argument is theoretical. :)

 

However, the paper's claims say nothing about the cultural differences:

 

Starting to drink at an early age is also associated with alcohol dependence and related problems during adult life.

 

This claim is culture-indepdent and should be applicable to any culture. Yet the moment we attempt to apply it to other cultures, such as France and Spain, we see that it does not hold true. Either the paper should make a clear reference to cultural differences, or the paper should make claims that can be applied universally. To pass their current claims off as universal fact would be misleading and, in my opinion, unprofessional.

 

 

 

The people who do not drink until theay are 21 who live in the US, are less likely to suffer from alcohol dependance.

 

Yes, this is quite a clear statement and I fully agree.

 

If we can prevent teens from drinking until they are 21, then there would be a significant decrease in drinking, and therefore a significant decrease in alcohol dependence. The same can be applied to any bad habit, whether it be caffeine abuse, heroin abuse, sexual addiction, etc.

 

 

 

However, in the case of alcohol, this is something that has often proved very difficult -- and putting strict rules and laws around it only seems to make the substance more desired.

 

 

 

About 75% of students have drunk alcohol by the time they finish high school, around age 18.[1] That percentage continues to climb until the age of 21. Those who are left are not those who are "waiting" for it to be legal -- like the paper would have you believe -- they are more likely to be those who choose not to indulge in such activities. If a student wishes to drink, the laws or rules will not stop them from doing so.

 

Saying that those who drink before age 21 are more likely to become dependent is, in my opinion, comparable to saying that those who drink are more likely to become dependent.

 

 

 

2) "leads to many suspensions" falls under the category of "Can't do the time, don't do the crime". Quite frankly, if you do something that will get you in trouble if caught - no matter how you're caught - you can't blame someone else. The mother did not put them in spotlight, they walked there on their own. Quite frankly, the whole "it's not my fault, I'm not being punished for something *I* did" evident in at least one of the articles in the OP scares me more than underage drinking ever will.

 

I agree with you -- I never said otherwise.

 

 

 

The rest of your post is just a matter of differing opinions.

[Kaiser1993]

I bet half those kids just wanted to get out of school :roll:

looking at your sig, I have realized i look too much like Light Yagami.

 

I think the suspensions were justified, assuming you live in a country where most high school students are too young to drink. It may not be his business what the kids drink, but it is his business who goes to his school.

 

But it happened outside of school and has no bearing on what goes on in school. That should be outside of the school's jurisdiction.

i don't agree. First off, what if a kid decides to go to school drunk? and maybe hits another kid on the way, or just acts like a jack [wagon] there. Unlikely but possible.

 

 

 

Also, if someone got a hold of alcohols at such a young age, what else can he get a hold of?

 

 

 

Thirdly, if a person can so easily break one law, how many more laws can he break without his own concern?

 

 

 

Well lets see, I know tons of people who drink underaged, do drugs & other things.

 

 

 

Back OT: The supensions imo weren't justictifed. If it wasn't on school grounds then they shouldn't give a damn.

[warren211]

I wish "Concerned Parents", like the one who sent in the disk with the photos would just relax. They are such suck-ups to authority. Wow, teens are drinking, give me a break. Look at MySpace, and Facebook, and how many people on that site are underage drinkers. Those concerned parents just had to go on that kid's Facebook and look at her friend's profiles, and just had to tell the school.

 

 

 

Now that mother has ruined a ton of futures, all because she couldn't give it a rest.

 

 

 

Also, since when can the school suspend people for drinking off-school? I mean, they made an agreement they wouldn't for sports, but suspended from school? =/

 

 

 

(Reason #1 why you don't tell your parents your passwords :-$ )

 

 

 

The mother was reporting an illegal activity. Last time I checked there's nothing wrong with that. The philosophy "everyone does it so I might as well do it too" doesn't work here for a concerned parent. Why should the KIDS drink, they ruin THEIR own lives, then blame their PARENT when they get in trouble? Again, last time I checked there ARE (believe it or not) consequences for breaking a law! Who knew?!