Well, it seems like it would be hard to any of the five to get a hometown rec. anyway.

I think that the parents are to blame more than the school although the school didn't handle things well either.

You can turn out to be a decent person even if your high school administrators are idiots as long as your parents showed you right from wrong.

On the other hand, it's hard not to turn out to be a jerk if your parents reared you to believe that the only values are your individual rights and "success," which is another idea from the report.

It's a perfect storm of suburban affluenza, indifference, and irresponsibility.

Wikipedia has a Glenbrook North entry:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenbro...th_High_School.
At least in that case the suspensions stuck, it seems. (I can't decide which is sadder. The fact that an apparently decent high school will always be remembered for the hazing incident or the person who wrote up the debate section of the entry, not that three national championships in a single year isn't an accomplishment.)

According to this, at least one of the hazers at a midwestern university got cut from rush immediately once it was found out that she took part in the hazing.

Several others did join sororities at another midwestern school, but that's all GeekyPenguin would say on that. ;)

I suspect that would be the case here as well.

Some chapters just won't put it together, especially if they're outside the region.

While I agree that the principal was at fault here (note I said principal not school because it sounds like some teachers tried to punish these students and the adminstration and parents did not support them) at what point do parents have to be responsible for their childs behavior?

Frankly my parents knew my friends, what I did, and where I was pretty much until I went to college. They were open about the fact that drinking underage was not acceptable in their house and there would be consequences about it. I knew my parents meant it and I respected them enough to follow their rules. Once I went to college my parents started to trust my judgement, but until then they said I was a kid and as a kid I was going to do dumb things and it was their job to keep me from dumb things that would harm me or others. So sorry if this sounds mean to some, but I do blame the parents in this sutitution quite a lot.

They should have known what their daughters were doing. It is their job as parents to know what their children are doing. I could not believe in the dallas article a parent said that if the school had told them their daughter was disrespectful they would have done something. Hate to tell that parent, but if they had raised their children right the reports of disrespect and the reports of drinking would not have occured.

The parents in this situation knew what they were doing and by appealing punishments and the such the were partly to blame for the behavior, but the school administration (not teachers) are to blame for not controlling it.

Parents and kids will do these things if the school does not put a stop to it. The administration was letting these girls do what they want and were not supporting staff in disciplining the behavior.

Most parents can be worse than the kids (this is where the child learns it). Trust me I had to deal with two parents in high school who were constantly spreading lies about me (bc their daughters did not make the squad).

About the girls in a sorority - sad thing is there will probably a group on campus they could fit in with. This is not an isolate event. Plenty of HS girls would run with this power if they were given it.

Wasn't the principal the parent of one of the five girls? She compounded her errors by being a bad principal on top of her sucky parenting.

Texas has a store called Condoms To Go?

That's freakin' awesome.

okay so what did they do?

I just re-read the article, I found no wrong doing other than the article "they were bad" and all of you saying "they were bad and the parents/school are/is retarded" I hope they sue the school for defamation.

i saw this movie a couple of weeks ago...

I teach in a school district next to this one. The problems seemed to be that 5 of the girls had a "We can do anything we want" attitude. The problems reportedly included cutting classes, walking out of classes at whim, failing to turn in assigned work, talking disrespectfully to teachers, etc. The principal was the mother of one of the girls and it appears that she stopped or changed disciplinary actions taken against the girls.

Another major issue was when the girls went to a store in the area called "Condoms to Go" (There are several locations in the Dallas area.) The girls went in their cheerleading outfits and posed in sexually suggestive ways. The cheerleading sponser tried to suspend them for this (wearing the school cheerleading uniform while doing this) and the principal refused to allow the suspensions. Most schools tell all their athletes and cheerleaders this: When you are in a school uniform, you are representing us. Do not act up. Sort of like the GLOs telling our members the same when they have on letters or are at functions.

I know all about terrorism!

Oh okay. Well, yeah, then detetion for everyone, that was like the only punishment there was suspension = kids at home/on their own with way too much freetime and parents didn't like that....detention. Should be brought back.

I still don't think that makes them that bad, not bad enough to be called terrorists anyway, Tom, for gods' sakes.

And also, maybe I am just having a slow time with this, but why is this in the news??

Goes like this: 5 girls are holy terrors, a coach tries to punish them and ends up quitting after the principal (also one of the girl's mothers) doesn't back her up. The coach quits (because she can't do her job if the girls aren't made to behave) and goes to the media. Someone studies the issue and turns up all of the misbehaviors of the girls AND the principal. Principal resigns and settles a lawsuit.

It's news just about as much as the high school hazing is. As in "LOOK AT KIDS THESE DAYS"

FYI - Tom did not call them 'terrorists'. That was how it was worded on the AOL story. I agree that they shouldn't be called terrorists. I'm thinking spoiled, self-indulgent brats with parents who need to grow a pair.

Detentions, suspensions for the squad: All of these were tried but the parents, including the principal/mother on one, balked at any punishment for the little angels.

Well, I'm sorry Tom, I thought that was you since you made the thread.:o

Still though........cutting class does not make you a terrorist, cutting some one's head off because they are different religion than you makes you a terrorist.

wow