Give me a break. If only there were some sort of device that teenagers could use to communicate with eachother. If this existed, then they could call or text for the person to come out when their ride shows up.
Maybe some day.
The publicity exists because the girls parents sued. I agree that shouldn’t have happened.
Agreed.
Yes, she did.
Ah. So you are OK with kids going to parties with alcohol. It’s just that some reasons are OK and some are not?
Is it just designated drivers who can go to parties, in your view? Because I predict if this was the policy you’d see all fifteen of the non drinking kids at that party claim to be designated drivers.
No. I never suggested that.
Has there ever been an incident where kids got in trouble for hanging around adults who were drinking? If so, provide a cite and we can discuss it. I’d probably join you in your outrage if that was the case.
However, that’s not what happened here. This was a bunch of kids having a party with alcohol. That’s not in dispute, is it?
I think the cops can tell the difference between a neighborhood cookout where the adults are having a few beers and there are HS kids present and a bunch of kids having a house party while their parents are away. We can and do treat these things differently.
She did not do any of those three things. Even someone as willfully stupid and blind as you should be able to see that.
Even the police agreed she was off the hook.
She was at a party kids were having with alcohol. Even the police agreed with this, as does she and her parents.
Do you disagree with this basic statement of fact?
She didn’t do any of the three things you just said she did. When moving goalposts, it’s traditional to wait until the thread makes it to a new page so hopefully nobody will notice.
I didn’t say she did all three. Read the posts. Little Nemo listed three things kids shouldn’t do:
"No, kids shouldn’t have parties with alcohol. "
"And kids shouldn’t drink alcohol. "
“And nobody should be driving when they’ve been drinking alcohol.”
Then he said she didn’t do any of those things. But she did the first. She was at a party with alcohol when the cops showed up.
Again, do you dispute this?
No but I fail to see where she did wrong. Even the police said she was there to help a friend.
Where I coach, an athlete is subject to discipline/suspension/dropped from team for confirmed use of drugs or alcohol.
Do you believe you should receive a speeding ticket because other drivers are speeding?
It’s really simple. The policy as it exists now in North Andover is that kids can’t be at parties with alcohol.
What exactly are you guys proposing should be the policy? I might even agree with you if you could spell it out.
How about “the school district should have a general policy of requiring students to avoid parties with alcohol present, while also exercising discretion in meting out punishment.” What if (to use a hypothetical) she’d actually been attending a party that didn’t have alcohol and 5 jocks showed up with cases of beer? Would that justify a suspension?
Of course I do. Being at a party (much less for 10 minutes) is not “having a party”, anymore than taking a taxi is “having a car”.
Do you think the kid who went to somebody’s house, saw it was a party with alcohol, and then immediately left should have been arrested and got in trouble?
I mean, they were at at party with alcohol. They left, but they were at it.
OK. Now we’re getting somewhere. You want to change the policy so kids can be at a party with alcohol as long as they aren’t using drugs or alcohol themselves.
That’s reasonable. But I understand why they have it the way they do today. Keeping kids out of the party entirely is probably a better idea IMO.
In either case, the rule as it stands today is that you can’t be at the party, even if you haven’t been drinking. If you disagree with this, that’s fine. But don’t claim she did nothing wrong.
It’s funny that you mention speeding. Did you know MA has rules that kids aren’t allowed to be in cars together when they have a permit? One kid can drive but not when he has other kids under 18 with him. This is a reasonable rule, just like not allowing them into parties because kids don’t have good judgement, especially in groups.
Kids go to parties with alcohol all the time and are not arrested. Many such parties are hosted at my house by my wife and me. Friends come, beer and wine is served, and teenagers mill around looking bored and full of angst. What you are suggesting is that kids should not be allowed at a party where alcohol is served an no adults are present. However, you get a few 21 year-olds to attend and I’m not sure you’re happy with that situation either. Laws have to be written that clearly proscribed what behavior is a crime. So, I’ll throw it out there again, what is the crime this young women committed? Being present while others are drinking clearly isn’t a crime. Is it being present while underage people are drinking? Do we really want to live in a world where it is a crime to be in the proximity of other people who are violating the law? I can see it now, “I’m sorry sir, I’m going to have to take you in. That man you’re standing next to didn’t file tax returns last year.”
This punishment seems appropriate to me. It’s just five games.
Yes.
How long should we allow kids to be at parties with alcohol? What is the time limit? More than ten minutes, but how long?
But that’s NOT the rule.
The policy is that "students should be aware that if they are part of a group that is engaged in activities contrary to school rules, they may come under suspicion and be subject to investigation if that is deemed appropriate by the administration. It is wise, therefore, either to prevent the wrongdoing, or failing that, to remove one’s self from the group as soon as possible without putting one’s self at risk.
It doesn’t say you can’t be at a party with alcohol. It says that if you’re at a party with alcohol, you might be investigated and that it’s wise to just leave.
The rule is perfectly fine as it is – it conveys the message that hanging out with troublemakers can get you in trouble – as long as it’s enforced with some level of sanity or common sense.
Did this actually happen?
Unless the cops come and actually find someone in the party, I don’t know how they would prove that this happened.
I think having a rule that you get in trouble even if you didn’t bring the alcohol or know there was alcohol makes sense. That way there are no excuses. If a kid is at a party and someone comes in with alcohol they need to either not let it in or leave themselves. If they are still there and the cops come they might get in trouble.
I want to parties when I was a kid. You knew the deal. It might get busted up and you might get into some trouble. It’s not the end of the world.
I’d hate to see what you consider proper punishment for actually doing something wrong.
How about using a little common sense? School administrators are supposed to be able to think.
And if the police on the scene say she did no wrong, that should be a clue.
She did’t commit a crime. She wasn’t charged with a crime and I’ve never said she was a criminal.
Debaser, it was post 6 in the thread.
Now, if somebody immediately left as soon as they saw there was alcohol, do you think they should be punished because they were at the party?
If not, isn’t it true that for you, “some reasons are ok and some are not” ?
The way the policy is enforced is that you can’t be at a party with kids where alcohol is present. Everyone knows this. The cops and the school are consistent with this in North Andover. No one is complaining about the fifteen kids that were at the party and weren’t drinking. They all knew the score.
The “putting one’s self at risk” and the “appropriate” response by the school was to give all the kids a five game suspension for being at the party. Again, not the end of the world.