Hazing dilemma...

[Kevin]

With my own organization, there have recently been several major chapters closed down due to hazing violations, posting stupidity on Myspace, etc. The most recent (of which I'm aware) being our chapter at Washington State University (a 97 year old chapter which was probably one of the top fraternity chapters of any group anywhere in the northwest) and MTSU which would have given anyone a run for their money.

It seems many of our (I)HQs are faced with a dilemma -- shut down many of your top chapters to try to stamp out hazing OR pretend it doesn't happen, make a show of being concerned here and there, but otherwise just avoid the problem and hope nothing horrible happens.

Both approaches clearly have their advantages and disadvantages. If you ignore the problem, you're essentially betting that a chapter which in many cases will have a rich 100+ year old history without incident which tends to show that whatever they do, though it may violate risk reduction policies promulgated by the national body, is very unlikely to cause an actual injury. Advantages include financial growth/security, protecting alumni investments made in the chapter home, preserving the condition of the property, preserving the reputation on campus. They have to weigh those factors with the possibility that something might go wrong which would be catastrophic for the entire national organization (though the chances are not really great that'll happen).

Assuming that half the chapters of your organization hazed, would you a) shut those chapters down hoping to recolonize, or b) leave those chapters alone and only deal with outstanding cases, or c) do nothing.

[adpiucf]

I think you wouldn't just start shutting them down... I would look first at the chapter operations and education opportunities. Hold workshops on membership, review pledging processes, attempt to define hazing a little better and policies to deal with hazing on a national level. The key is getting buy-in on these practices on the local level.

Traveling Chapter Consultants are a great way for chapters to report back to their nationals and to work with nationals to correct practices that may not be in accord with national policy.

I also think it is very important to look at the campus culture and get the IFC and Panhellenic groups to work together on co-educational workshops and policies to make it a Greek-wide effort.

Lastly, communication is so important -- between members, officers, advisers and nationals. The chapter should be able to handle problem areas and members without nationals intervening. Strong leaders and strong values are important-- so cutting down on hazing really comes down to recruiting and retaining strong members with a positive self-image and a true interest in following the ideals of the organization-- ideals that have more to do with fraternity, leadership, scholarship and service... and nothing at all to do with reciting the pledgebook while half-naked and shivering in a cold, dark, and dank basement while being presided over by a manical pledgemaster drunk on power. We've all seen that Law & Order episode...

Chapters should be given the tools and opportunities to fight back and overcome a hazing culture, and to recognize the dangers of such a culture before being shown the door. Hazing is wrong, but just shutting a chapter down without giving the men and women a chance to redeem themselves is also wrong.

[Tom Earp]

Originally Posted by adpiucf

I think you wouldn't just start shutting them down... I would look first at the chapter operations and education opportunities. Hold workshops on membership, review pledging processes, attempt to define hazing a little better and policies to deal with hazing on a national level. The key is getting buy-in on these practices on the local level.

Traveling Chapter Consultants are a great way for chapters to report back to their nationals and to work with nationals to correct practices that may not be in accord with national policy.

I also think it is very important to look at the campus culture and get the IFC and Panhellenic groups to work together on co-educational workshops and policies to make it a Greek-wide effort.

Lastly, communication is so important -- between members, officers, advisers and nationals. The chapter should be able to handle problem areas and members without nationals intervening. Strong leaders and strong values are important-- so cutting down on hazing really comes down to recruiting and retaining strong members with a positive self-image and a true interest in following the ideals of the organization-- ideals that have more to do with fraternity, leadership, scholarship and service... and nothing at all to do with reciting the pledgebook while half-naked and shivering in a cold, dark, and dank basement while being presided over by a manical pledgemaster drunk on power. We've all seen that Law & Order episode...

Chapters should be given the tools and opportunities to fight back and overcome a hazing culture, and to recognize the dangers of such a culture before being shown the door. Hazing is wrong, but just shutting a chapter down without giving the men and women a chance to redeem themselves is also wrong.

EXCELLENT post!

If an International has a policy set, it should be followed to the letter.

If it is not and wants to stay in the old day scenerio then the law must be set down as per the IHQ.

Visitations and explanations should be explained in no uncertain words.

If they continue, then there is one recourse!

They either will follow the tenents or if something happens with harm, either the IHQ should take action or the school will!

If they are kicked off of campus, it may be harder for them to even come back!

If they do not for some years, it will be even harder and how may can lose out?

[macallan25]

Leave the chapters alone and deal with outstanding/more serious happenings. To me, this is what it seems like goes on at most big schools/chapters in the South. Maybe i'm forgetting if it has happened, but it just doesn't seem like big powerful chapters are going to get shut down over anything that is not pretty damn serious.


......and Tom.....I don't know of a single chapter that follows every single guideline and regulation set forth by their Nationals. That is a little bit of a stretch to say that they should all be followed to the letter of the law.

[tallgreekalum]

This gets into the whole "letter of the law" vs letter of the real law. Most of us would not agree with state law/university definitions of hazing. Often, requiring a pledge pin could be illegal. Sending pledges to a "greek 101" type anti-hazing meeting many schools require could be illegal

I think that our position, pragmatically, is to employ a "stupidity meter", so to speak. Public pledge humiliation, for instance, is probably treated more seriously that private activities. Is that right? I'm reminded of the line from Animal House, "they can't do that to our pledges, .........."

I think the key is to get members to think about each activity they involve pledges in and what it is supposed to achieve, and try to design activites that accomplish the same goals in as low-risk a way as possible. But often "pride goeth before the fall" If everything else is going well, chapters are often reluctant to address pledge program issues.

[ladygreek]

Heck, we don't have a problem suspending an old chapter. We have suspended Alpha Chapter on more than one occasion.

[tallgreekalum]

[QUOTE=macallan25;1454471]Leave the chapters alone and deal with outstanding/more serious happenings. To me, this is what it seems like goes on at most big schools/chapters in the South. Maybe i'm forgetting if it has happened, but it just doesn't seem like big powerful chapters are going to get shut down over anything that is not pretty damn serious.

The question becomes what is "serious". (Inter)nationals ARE cutting loose chapters over rules violations. Phi Delt has closed down a fair number of chapters and several others have gone local over the dry house issue. Kappa Sig shut down Ole Miss and others over dry house. If they'll do it over dry house, they'll certainly do it over hazing. Your own (you are an SAE?) Duke Chapter is now an AD Chapter because of nationals threat to shut down what was a big, old chapter at the top of it's game. Sigma Nu at Vandy over hazing. The list goes on. That's ok, AD will pick up the pieces Our realistic policies are attracting more ex-national chapter locals into the fold.

[macallan25]

[QUOTE=tallgreekalum;1454547]

Originally Posted by macallan25

Leave the chapters alone and deal with outstanding/more serious happenings. To me, this is what it seems like goes on at most big schools/chapters in the South. Maybe i'm forgetting if it has happened, but it just doesn't seem like big powerful chapters are going to get shut down over anything that is not pretty damn serious.

The question becomes what is "serious". (Inter)nationals ARE cutting loose chapters over rules violations. Phi Delt has closed down a fair number of chapters and several others have gone local over the dry house issue. Kappa Sig shut down Ole Miss and others over dry house. If they'll do it over dry house, they'll certainly do it over hazing. Your own (you are an SAE?) Duke Chapter is now an AD Chapter because of nationals threat to shut down what was a big, old chapter at the top of it's game. Sigma Nu at Vandy over hazing. The list goes on. That's ok, AD will pick up the pieces Our realistic policies are attracting more ex-national chapter locals into the fold.

Yeah, I realize they ARE shutting down chapters.....but keep in mind the type of chapters I was talking about. When they start shutting down chapters like SAE at Alabama or Phi Delt at Ole Miss.......then get back to me. There are plenty of chapters that I think most would agree are....above the law....so to speak.