Add to all this the fact that the people working at the national HQ may not be in any way shape or form, the people needed to remedy a particular situation. Our national councillors don't live or work at our HQ, and that's who would have taken care of something like this.

Mom didn't 'step in and assist' her daughter - she took over. She went to her daughter's sorority's HQ when it wasn't her place to do so. Her daughter will never learn to manage adult issues if she's never given the opportunity.

I work daily with college students, and I'm all too often stunned and appalled by their behavior and that of their parents. I've seen parents set their kids' college schedules; I've seen/fielded emails/phone calls from parents asking why their kid didn't get a better grade, or asking to be excused from class meetings; I've witnessed parents going through graduation fairs or job fairs to get information or fill out paperwork/applications for their kid; and yes, I've even seen parents accompany their recent graduates to on-campus job interviews. I can only imagine what happens once Little Darling is hired.

The amount of heli-parenting is out of control. Too many parents feel like they're helping their kids by 'stepping in to assist' when in reality, they're simply delaying the growth that needs to happen. This is creating a generation of kids who can't do things on their own, yet feel entitled to everything they want.

I guess what's sad to me is that Generation Y seems content to have their adulthood delayed by their own parents, and don't seem to be embarrassed when their parents interfere to the degree they do. (Yes, I'm generalizing. I'm aware there are self-sufficient GenY-ers out there. And they're a breath of fresh air.)

As an attorney who practices family law, I've noticed this a lot in divorce cases. The parent's (or parents') over-involvement in intimate marital issues can often contribute to the breakdown of a relationship. I had a custody case recently where I represented a father. I never heard from him but his mother called 2-3 times a week. We finally took the case to mediation and settled it. The next day, his mother called and fired me! I guess they're still going at it, though mother has a pretty binding mediation agreement which was probably what would have happened had we spent the thousands of dollars and heartache it takes to go to trial over custody.

The difference between shielding your child from everything which could possibly cause them harm or discomfort and letting them learn to fight their own battles is not a subtle one.

If you as a parent have no problem "protecting" your child from her sorority, which she could quit and leave at any point, what's to say that 10 years from now, when they're married, you're not going to be that mom who prods her child to produce grandchildren she doesn't want? Who needles at the husband for not making enough money or being successful enough? Where are you going to draw that line? If someone is saying it's fine 'n dandy to repair to sorority HQ to breathe down the necks of national officers about their daughter's potential issues, perhaps that person hasn't really thought much about where that line might be.

Our director of chapter services would have been the person to go to in this situation. That she had correct. What I do not understand is why she did not go first to her chapter adviser (when she claimed she was not being heard out by the process of Honor Council), then to her regional consultant/regional support team, bypassing that potentially if the allegations were serious to the Assistant Director of Chapter Services and later the Director of Chapter Services (which her MOM did eventually get to, but bypassed many layers of support to do so).

I just don't get it. If the allegations were serious, she should have gone directly to her adviser when they began. I also see no notice of her going to the Greek life staff if she really was being abused/hazed. Finally, why have mommy go to the appropriate person months after the fact? There is something missing here, for sure. From reading it, the allegations she was charged with in Honor Council were all legitimate, although they are broad ranging in nature and I don't know if they were founded. I also know that a woman is always allowed to speak for herself during HC proceedings. If that did not occur than she should have gone to the adviser immediately, IMO. Well actually she should have filed for an appeal, which I'm almost 100% positive the adviser attends. I know they attend for level 3 and 4 meetings as well, for sure.


This whole situation puzzles me. I have no idea of the legal case she has. If she really was harassed I don't understand why she stayed. If she wasn't, it doesn't sound like her case would hold up. I can't tell too much detail from the articles and I don't want to prejudge either this woman or any of the other sisters that are involved, but this is just unfortunate all around. Like others have said, it sounds like a bad fit from the get go and just a lot of unpleasantness ever since. I'll reserve other comments until after the trial, if it gets that far. But again, I really hope this is resolved quickly.

Keep in mind that I pledged when it was still called pledging, and we didn't initiate for a whole semester...

One of the articles indicated that she pledged at the end of March and was initiated at the end of April - a month! IMO, one of the biggest repercussions of shortened new member periods is that some info doesn't get the time it deserves. I certainly know nothing about Sigma's new member education, so perhaps my assumption is incorrect, but I wonder if the proper channels of protocol were glossed over. ?? Also, if Marshall students are anything like those I'm around, it often seems like the answer is always to go to the top (President, in academic issues; HQ in Greek affairs) when things aren't going the way students expect. Maybe inadequate info and this mindset are what prompted her to choose the route she did.

I don't know how the market works around Marshall, but April would have been way too late to get other housing for the next fall where I went to school. Practicalities might have taken over.

IMHO
 

I really doubt that there will be a trial. This will be settled out of court.

Agree -
If mom was going to visit HQ...it should have been done only as support. & encouraging daughter to speak on her own behalf.

How did what I say imply your wife didn't have the ability to teach?

Hopefully it will end soon for all parties involved.

Plus the chapter may have had a mandatory live-in policy.

The implication that until you're a parent, you can't possibly empathize or understand something is ridiculous.

Not to mention, we can all see bad parenting a mile away.

Whoa, wait, let me get this straight. You had a custody case where two parents were fighting over custody of a child, let's call him Buddy. The woman who called you is Buddy's GRANDMOTHER?!?!

That's unreal. She probably called the wife to make sure her son was getting enough BJs every week.

This is the part that absolutely slays me and is like a foreign language. Over in the Planned Parenthood thread I said that I had insurance that would have covered BC but never used it because I didn't want my parents to find out. I'm sure there's some Gen-Y girl reading that and saying "why would she do that?"

I was an only child and quite overprotected (for the time) and it took a LONG while till I got to the point where I could rebel. I don't think it's healthy when children can't do at least a little of that.

Our NM materials are all online so it's possible that she did not read them as thoroughly as possible, but the information is certainly there.

It's definitely not unusual for grandparents to be involved in their kids' custody cases. Keep in mind, if lawyers and judges are involved in your divorce, it's probably a pretty high conflict divorce. Over-involved grandparents are a major cause of high conflict divorce. Also, those over-involved grandparents are often the folks paying the attorney fees as older folks tend to be in better financial positions than their children.

It's not even unusual for grandparents to try and obtain custody for themselves over a grandchild, using their own still-attached children as pawns in a game over control.

Heli-parenting is a huge problem in our culture. The fact that I see more colleges, businesses, etc., looking to accommodate this behavior rather than correcting it is pretty troubling.