Michigan Hazing Law
THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)

Act 328 of 1931

***** 750.411t.added THIS ADDED SECTION IS EFFECTIVE AUGUST 18, 2004 *****
750.411t.added Hazing prohibited; violation; penalty; exceptions; certain defenses barred; definitions; section title.

Sec. 411t.

(1) Except as provided in subsection (4), a person who attends, is employed by, or is a volunteer of an educational institution shall not engage in or participate in the hazing of an individual.

(2) A person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a crime punishable as follows:

(a) If the violation results in physical injury, the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 93 days or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both.

(b) If the violation results in serious impairment of a body function, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $2,500.00, or both.

(c) If the violation results in death, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 15 years or a fine of not more than $10,000.00, or both.

(3) A criminal penalty provided for under this section may be imposed in addition to any penalty that may be imposed for any other criminal offense arising from the same conduct.

(4) This section does not apply to an individual who is the subject of the hazing, regardless of whether the individual voluntarily allowed himself or herself to be hazed.

(5) This section does not apply to an activity that is normal and customary in an athletic, physical education, military training, or similar program sanctioned by the educational institution.

(6) It is not a defense to a prosecution for a crime under this section that the individual against whom the hazing was directed consented to or acquiesced in the hazing.

(7) As used in this section:

(a) “Educational institution” means a public or private school that is a middle school, junior high school, high school, vocational school, college, or university located in this state.

(b) “Hazing” means an intentional, knowing, or reckless act by a person acting alone or acting with others that is directed against an individual and that the person knew or should have known endangers the physical health or safety of the individual, and that is done for the purpose of pledging, being initiated into, affiliating with, participating in, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization. Subject to subsection (5), hazing includes any of the following that is done for such a purpose:

(i) Physical brutality, such as whipping, beating, striking, branding, electronic shocking, placing of a harmful substance on the body, or similar activity.

(ii) Physical activity, such as sleep deprivation, exposure to the elements, confinement in a small space, or calisthenics, that subjects the other person to an unreasonable risk of harm or that adversely affects the physical health or safety of the individual.

(iii) Activity involving consumption of a food, liquid, alcoholic beverage, liquor, drug, or other substance that subjects the individual to an unreasonable risk of harm or that adversely affects the physical health or safety of the individual.

(iv) Activity that induces, causes, or requires an individual to perform a duty or task that involves the commission of a crime or an act of hazing.

(c) “Organization” means a fraternity, sorority, association, corporation, order, society, corps, cooperative, club, service group, social group, athletic team, or similar group whose members are primarily students at an educational institution.

(d) “Pledge” means an individual who has been accepted by, is considering an offer of membership from, or is in the process of qualifying for membership in any organization.

(e) “Pledging” means any action or activity related to becoming a member of an organization.

(f) “Serious impairment of a body function” means that term as defined in section 479a.

(8) This section shall be known and may be cited as “Garret's law.”

History: Add. 2004, Act 111, Eff. Aug. 18, 2004.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So where does interviewing actives or signatures fall under?

Thanks for posting the new Michigan law. We were late in implementing a hazing law compared to other states.

That said, you posted Michigan law and other laws vary, depending on the state. Additionally, some GLOs have more strict rules than the Michigan penal code.

The problem with interviewing and signatures wasn't just getting the interviews or signatures. It was what people were making the new members DO to get those interviews or signatures (eg. a sexual favor for a fraternity man's signature or a member making themselves scarce on purpose because they weren't really fond of that new member). Also, what they had to do if they didn't get those interviews or signatures (eg. drink a shot for every interview/signature missed). If people (of the 80's mainly) hadn't abused these things, they might not be against the rules of many GLOs today. But they did, so they are.

This is a super explanation as to why some of our "unhealthy traditions" are categorized as hazing. It's not the activity itself--its how the activity gets accomplished and what happens if it does not.

I personally object to interviews because they are usually one way--the new member asks all the questions, but the active fails to really take interest in learning about the new member. I think it should be a two way street.

And there are other ways to get to know other groups besides collecting signatures--have a social, invite them to dinner if you have a house, spend time playing pool etc.

I strongly disagree with you on both points. When I pledged, interviewing the actives was one of my favorite initiatives. The interview could have easily been completed in about ten minutes but in most cases would run about 45 min to an hour. While I was pledging and while I was active our interviews were never one way. The actives always asked the pledge the same questions that they were asked. They were a great way to really get to know the guys that were pledging, vice/versa.

And for signatures, it was a lot easier for the shy new member to use the signature collection as the ice-breaker or introduction.

Heather, I'm sorry you joined some half-ass sorority that couldn't do anything right, but just because your org f*cked up all these programs doesnt mean the rest of us have. Some chapters have been doing these things for years with out any incident of hazing what so ever.

You're making the assumption that my beliefs stem only from my personal associating experience. THEY DO NOT. I have observed COUNTLESS chapters and student activities groups, some in my sorority and many not, including fraternities and non GLOs. I have talked with people on campuses across the US. And through volunteering and my master's studies I have read about and studied student development, campus culture, hazing and Greek life extensively. Combined, they have helped to give me an educated and reality based perspective on this topic.

Unfortunately, as I have said before, I have seen too many instances where if you give an inch, people will take a mile.

My local was a pretty exceptional group of women and we did most things very well. What I regret was that the women who led my group (as did all the sororities on my campus), fell victim to trying to keep up with the boys by creating an associating program that mirrored the fraternities' in many aspects and that they took the easy way out. In my case, I truly believe they did not know any better--they simply thought this was what it meant to "be Greek". But times have changed since then--and we need a new definition of what it means to be Greek.

I truly believe we will not survive if we do not become more relevant to students' development while in college (because colleges and universities won't want us); if we do not walk the walk, and talk the talk so to speak. We say we value brother/sisterhood but we treat our new members as less than ourselves. Hazing, or even making people jump through hoops to join our groups, is not living with integrity, intellect, and high moral character.

Keep doing your interviews, collecting signatures and playing your games because they are not the problem--its a lot bigger than that. And some of us have been fighting it for a LONG time.

The fact that interviews and signatures are now considered "hazing" is a great indication of how terrible greek life has become in this country. Both of those methods are great ways to get to know the pledge, and for them to get to know you. Interviews were helpful, in that you find out a lot about the person, and also hear about stories that will probably be referenced a good bit over your collegiate career. Yeah, and sometimes it is hard to get them all done, but thats part of the point. Pledging isn't supposed to be easy, and they have to prove to me, as I did to brothers before me, that I deserve to be in the fraternity. God forbid you challenge the pledges. On a side note, playing pool or having a social with the pledges is not a good substitute. Such activities, if replacing traditional pledge duties, put pledges at the same level as a brother, which is not at all the case.

OK, this is REALLY OFFENSIVE.

Doing interviews for both of my GLOs is not something I considered "playing games." It's a time to get to know your future brothers or sisters one on one, outside of a structured group event. Not everyone is gregarious. I would have never gotten to know some people if it wouldn't have been for interviewing because they were shy in groups. And not everyone has oodles of time to hang out at the house just waiting for sisters/pledges to pass through to get to know them "normally." Some people are very busy. And even before we instituted sisters interviewing pledges, it's not like the sister sat there and just spat out answers and didn't ask the pledge anything.

Getting signatures is not "playing games." It helps you to meet members of other GLOs and non-Greeks who are friends of your brothers or sisters. Again, not everyone will meet people at a big social - the shyer people will feel left out.

I'm not saying people should interview everyone in a chapter of 200 - that would be craziness and you'd have no time for anything else - but there should be a way to get to know at least some people one on one instead of just in an amorphous mass. In this day and age when we schedule "play dates" for three year olds, I find it amusing when people say well golly whiz, if you have a superduper new member program you'll get to know everyone individually without scheduling interviews at all.

At NO TIME did I EVER have to "perform" to obtain any interviews or signatures. The fact that some people used them that way makes me ill. But to punish all groups everywhere - and make no mistake, it IS punishment - by eliminating them is kind of like saying that just because the Penn State chapter of ABC hazed, we should shut all the ABC chapters down to make sure it doesn't happen again. (I feel Otter's speech coming on.)

Those were some of the best parts of my pledge time, and anyone who tries to tell me otherwise is full of shit.

It's statements like the above quote that turn alums off and make them wash their hands of their GLOs - when they're told that things that they did gladly and greatly enjoyed doing are hazing and the reason Greek life is going to hell. As someone so eloquently said in another thread, you are what you post. :rolleyes:

33--you have greatly miunderstood my perspective. I do not think interviews in and of themselves are bad--as long as they are a two way street. In fact, I have allowed these activities in the past as long as it is both people getting to know one another.

I do think that making people jump through hoops and playing other "power games" just because "that's the way we've always done things" should have no place in our programs.

If I REALLY OFFENDED you (easily offended?) then I apologize. I am proud of what I posted and I think it speaks a lot about my personal values and integrity. It's MUCH better than calling someone lame and ripping on their post--don't you think?

Like I said, we did institute sisters interviewing pledges - but even without that, unless the people involved are idiots, most people are naturally going to ask related questions of someone who is asking questions of them. The point is that with as busy as people are, you need a structure to make sure it gets done.

I agree that power games are bs. Like I said, those were never involved in either of my pledge programs.

And yes I am easily offended, when someone dismisses something important to me in the same breath with "games." I'm sure you'd be happy if someone said "now go do your little sorority thing" when you were on your way to a convention or workshop.

The answer to your last question is: no. :p

What do you mean by two way street. I know we're looking at this from different perspectives (fraternity v. sorority) but I am interested in a clarification. I don't consider much about the pledge-member relationship to be a two way street.

I think she means that the actives also interview the pledges and that there is no do my laundry before I give my interview, etc. etc.

This thread is making me thirsty for a http://www.thebevnet.com/images/revi...apple-kris.jpg

I think she meant that the pledges would ask questions and the actives would just answer the questions asked and not engage in asking their own questions.

My interview book is one of my most cherished mementos from my pledge period. We weren't demanded to do it and there wasn't a punishment if we did, and we weren't required to get every single sister. We were very much an anti-hazing chapter, but had to even keep that activity on the DL

Unfortunately, some people are idiots. And that's why some campuses and organizations have the rules that they have.

In the grand scheme of things though--as I said, interviews aren't the problem.

Shiner--you and I have a VERY different perspective on new member education. That's why I call it new member and you call it pledging. I want women in my group who, among other things, believe in themselves and treat others with respect. I look for women who is ready to be an asset and add to my organization--not someone I have to spend a great deal of time building into the kind of member I want.

I am not saying that you don't want those kinds of things too--just that we have very different perspectives on how to get there.