Kappa Sig dissolves itself at Duke rather than face their nationals sanctions

[The1calledTKE]

http://www.chronicle.duke.edu/vnews/.../3dcfab52e40d9

[dzrose93]

I think the feedback letters are as interesting as the article itself. Sounds like there are some Duke alumni who aren't very pleased with the University right now.

[IvySpice]

You're right about the commentary. That's the real story.

It's extraordinary that these 50-year-old alumni are withholding donations from their alma mater because it is actually attempting to enforce the law. (My favorite is the place where the alum puts the word "underage" in quotation marks, as though the laws of the State of North Carolina are some kind of mere formality!)

I also love the way "Al Adams" mentions tea parties and poetry readings as examples of dry events. Apparently this guy does not have a lot of imagination. I also love the way he equates lack of alcohol with lack of a campus social life. Because, after all, it's a scientific fact that it is impossible to have fun with your friends while sober. I guess after 50 years, this guy still can't work up the nerve to talk to a girl unless he's smashed, and expects that all the guys at Duke are just as limited as he.

Ivy

[Mystic Cat32]

Back in the 80s the Sammies (Sigma Alpha Mu) at our campus decided to go independent because of an incident. You can read about that at http://www.dentonscramble.com/archives/april2001.htm The section under Fry Street Fair talks about the Lodge at UNT.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by IvySpice
(My favorite is the place where the alum puts the word "underage" in quotation marks, as though the laws of the State of North Carolina are some kind of mere formality!)

My favorite is the place where we all pretend that campus drinking laws are enforced with regularity and fairness, if at all . . .

In a de facto sense, the drinking laws on many campuses only exist when it is convenient for them to be enforced (I'm not sure if that makes them a "formality" specifically, but perhaps in some ways). I'm not about to defend the Eta Prime chapter of Kappa Sigma in any real way - I have very little knowledge of this situation, and none is first-hand - but I will posit that perhaps the enforcement of alcohol laws is unfairly focused on certain groups of students than others . . . perhaps by reputation, or stereotype?

Drinking underage is not an irregular occurrance at most college campuses - in fact, I would say that enforcement of drinking laws is far more rare than breaking them. I won't assign a value judgement to this statement, but merely state that this does seem to suggest that if one portion of the university community is being unfairly targeted (again, not even inferring this to be the case) then perhaps that portion of the community would have some sort of basis for being upset.

I have now exceeded my daily limit for the conditional mood, and I'm out.

[XOMichelle]

Woah IvySpice! Did Duke reject you or something??? We've all heard you talk about your prestigious yet unnamed school, but back off. It doesn't impress us when you look down on them.

Now, what I really want to say:

Alcohol is part of young adult life, law or not. It always has been (read: thousands of years) and always will be.

No matter how much fun you have at alcohol free events, many more college kids will have what they think to be more fun at a party where they can have a free, watery, cheap beer. And if they can't get free, watery, cheap beer, they will find alcohol of their own. Now, on to Duke. I know some, and it is redicilous how many people show up for the few parties that are thrown each weekend. It's crowded and dangerous because people go off campus.

So, seeing as how drinking is a reality, and not something we can change easily, all we can do is make sure that people drinking make informed decisions, and help them be safe. Providing a bar on campus where groups can hold parties (and someone else can check ID's), is a good way to keep kids from driving off campus, and keep the University out of court. Having accurate info on hand on how to deal with someone who is drunk, or recognize alchohol poisioning, is helpful to students who might be in a threatening situation but don't want to get in trouble (Freshman get written up if they are caught drunk... Not good if you need a ride to the Hospital).

Now, I know the fickleness of the alcohol policy is an issue at manyy schools. A dorm here will not get in trouble for throwing a party where people etr sick (or even hit by cars outside...eeeekkk), but a fraternity will get put on probation. Not quite fair to Greek orgs at all, but another reality. I don't know what to do about that, but it sounds like this could be part of the situation too.

Anyway, I respect the alums for speaking their mind, and the brothers for standing up for themselves.

-M

[IvySpice]

I don't think I'm looking down at Duke -- I think these alums are. I think the fraternity men at Duke deserve a lot more credit than they're getting here. I don't think they're all helpless alcoholics who are socially paralyzed when sober. I don't think they're too stupid to understand the consequences of breaking rules. Based on those I've met at law school, I think they're extremely bright and capable young men.

As it happens, I don't agree with the drinking age in this country. I think it's absurd, and I think it's incompatible with our other expectations of 18-to-21-year-olds (that they vote, serve in the military, etc.). I also don't agree with the legal liability structure which makes someone other than the drinker financially responsible for a drinker's foolish acts.

But if the law is wrong, there are two ways to handle it. One is to vote and lobby the N.C. legislature until the law is changed. The other is to openly defy the law and swallow the punishment you have coming to you. The choice these alumni are making -- whining that the university ought to turn a blind eye to illegal activity which is going to get the UNIVERSITY sued (not just the fraternity) -- is not an alternative that I respect.

>Providing a bar on campus where groups can hold parties (and someone else can check ID's), is a good way to keep kids from driving off campus

I agree. And if Kappa Sigma had been checking ID's, there wouldn't have been a problem. The reason it was supposed to go dry was that a PLEDGE was hospitalized for alcohol poisoning. (I haven't heard of many over-21 pledges at Duke.) The alumni claim that the university just wants to get rid of fraternities. That may be true (I have no idea), but there's no evidence of it here. The Kappa Sigmas broke the law and then repeatedly defied the terms of their probation. If the Pitchforks a cappella group did the same, they'd be up a creek, too.

Ivy

[PsychTau]

Regarding "in loco parentis". . .If our parents/family members (and society in general) did NOT hold our Universities responsible for our actions and instead held US responsible if we did something stupid (i.e. NOT sueing the University), then perhaps the University won't be so quick to "crack down" on drinking.

I know that Greeks have all of these rules and policies to protect us from liabilty. The University does the same, to an extent: they have rules on campus (and enforce them somewhat) so that they won't be held liable if someone breaks those rules. I see it as protection from a lawsuit. However, if society wasn't so quick to file a lawsuit whenever they are displeased about something.

XOMichelle, you may have something with the "bar on campus" idea. A few years ago, there was an incident at a college I was at where XYZ fraternity and ABC sorority had a mixer off campus, in another county, at a bar. On the way home, one of the drivers (who had been drinking) had an accident and killed an XYZ brother and an ABC sister. From what I know about the situation, the two groups attempted to reduce liability by having the mixer at a third party vendor who could check ID's. However, they are in trouble because they "apparently": 1. Did not provide sober drivers or third party transportation; 2. Had an "official" function where the primary occupation is to drink alcohol (I'm assuming this is against their rules--it is against AST rules); and 3. Allowed their underage members and pledged members to drink (i.e. did not tell the bartenders that they were underage, etc.) The bar where they had the mixer is in trouble because 1. They did not check ID's well enough (although the driver supposedly had a fake ID); and 2. Allowed the underage drinkers to drink. The parents of the deceased have sued the fraternity, sorority, the bar, and the university (although the university was dropped from the lawsuit, from what I heard). I think it goes to trial in January 2003.

Now, hindsight always being 20/20, it's possible that if this mixer had been on campus, 2 lives would not have been lost. The "bar on campus" would have been responsible to check ID's and "take up keys"/provide escorts and transportation. But it would have made the university liable if anything would have happened to anyone, which I don't think the university would go for.

I'm rambling, so I'll stop. I guess my point is that if we would take responsibility for our actions (as well as our family members holding us responsible, too), then maybe some of these restrictions could be more realistic.

:: off soapbox ::

[AXOLiz]

This sounds very similar to what happened at my school when I was there (and the year before). According to people I was friends with (and FuzzieAlum can probably comment on this...), there was a bar on campus where everyone used to go and have fun. Yeah, there was underage drinking, but it happens. The school didn't like that, so it bought the bar and closed it.

I started college the next year, and there were a lot of fun parties on campus. They were pretty much all fraternity parties, and while I'm sure there were many exceptions, from what I remember they usually had security present, someone was always checking a guest list or IDs, etc. They may have broken rules involving drinking, but that also happens.

So at one point in the year, a freshman was at a fraternity party and got drunk. From what I've heard, they don't know if he was even drinking there, but he was drunk while he was there. The next morning - after having slept for 10 hours - he slipped in the bathroom, hit his head on the sink and died. While it was a tragic incident, the fraternity got blamed and sanctioned, many of the fraternities were forced to go dry, and the school created new rules that basically made it impossible to throw a party. It became the excuse the school needed to crack down further on any drinking on campus.

So what has it done to the campus? People still drink. They find a way to do it, even if they're underage. They do it holed up in a dorm room somewhere. If nothing else, greeks on my campus always watch out for anyone at one of their parties, even if it's because they know what will happen to the org. if something bad happens. Those I know who've had too much to drink at a fraternity have been taken care of. People have even been escorted to the hospital if it was necessary. I haven't heard otherwise, although I'm sure bad things do happen.

Now, without a place to go to party relatively safely, students drink in their rooms or off campus. And guess what? People still die, only they die because they passed out in their room and there was no one who'd take care of them. At least before, the drinking was somewhat controlled. But then, the school used the one excuse it had to crack down, and the students were less happy and still found a way to get themselves hurt.

This is in no way meant to encourage drinking, let alone underage or at fraternity parties, but it's pretty much a fact of life that college students drink, and sometimes they drink too much. At least if you can somewhat ensure they're doing it semi-responsibly by letting them do it in the open instead of behind closed doors, I think there's a better chance that if something bad happens, it can be taken care of before it gets worse.

[madmax]

Originally posted by IvySpice
You're right about the commentary. That's the real story.

It's extraordinary that these 50-year-old alumni are withholding donations from their alma mater because it is actually attempting to enforce the law. (My favorite is the place where the alum puts the word "underage" in quotation marks, as though the laws of the State of North Carolina are some kind of mere formality!)

I also love the way "Al Adams" mentions tea parties and poetry readings as examples of dry events. Apparently this guy does not have a lot of imagination. I also love the way he equates lack of alcohol with lack of a campus social life. Because, after all, it's a scientific fact that it is impossible to have fun with your friends while sober. I guess after 50 years, this guy still can't work up the nerve to talk to a girl unless he's smashed, and expects that all the guys at Duke are just as limited as he.

Ivy

The school isn't trying to enfore laws. They are trying to legislate morality. It's not against the law for someone over the age of 21 to purchase or consume alcohol, UNLESS you are Greek. What law is someone breaking if they are over 21 and they have a keg at a private off campus residence?

If a university alcohol policy is fair and good for the students then how come those policies don't apply to ALL student organizations?

How come many universities make themselves exempt from their own alcohol policies? Greeks can't serve alcohol at private off campus homes but the university will serve alcohol on campus at fundraising affairs. It a little hypocritical for universities to have those gay alcohol awareness programs and they lecture the new freshman on the evils of alcohol when the university serves alcohol at all alumni functions.

[madmax]

Originally posted by IvySpice
You're right about the commentary. That's the real story.

It's extraordinary that these 50-year-old alumni are withholding donations from their alma mater because it is actually attempting to enforce the law. (My favorite is the place where the alum puts the word "underage" in quotation marks, as though the laws of the State of North Carolina are some kind of mere formality!)

I also love the way "Al Adams" mentions tea parties and poetry readings as examples of dry events. Apparently this guy does not have a lot of imagination. I also love the way he equates lack of alcohol with lack of a campus social life. Because, after all, it's a scientific fact that it is impossible to have fun with your friends while sober. I guess after 50 years, this guy still can't work up the nerve to talk to a girl unless he's smashed, and expects that all the guys at Duke are just as limited as he.

Ivy

The school isn't trying to enfore laws. They are trying to legislate morality. It's not against the law for someone over the age of 21 to purchase or consume alcohol, UNLESS you are Greek. What law is someone breaking if they are over 21 and they have a keg at a private off campus residence?

If a university alcohol policy is fair and good for the students then how come those policies don't apply to ALL student organizations?

How come many universities make themselves exempt from their own alcohol policies? Greeks can't serve alcohol at private off campus homes but the university will serve alcohol on campus at fundraising affairs. It a little hypocritical for universities to have those gay alcohol awareness programs and they lecture the new freshman on the evils of alcohol when the university serves alcohol at all alumni functions.

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by madmax


The school isn't trying to enfore laws. They are trying to legislate morality.

That's true. That has traditionally been one of the "jobs" that we expect our colleges to do.

This quote, from the United States "Ordinance of 1787" which chartered my Alma Mater, Ohio University, and also formed the Northwest Territory is inscribed on the campus gate:

"Religion, Morality and Knowledge, being necessary to good government, and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."

As a parent, I believe that imparting basic morality for my children is my job, however, I also expect(ed) the schools my daughter attended and my son attends not to allow imorality to run rampant. I expect them to provide a certain degree of safety and law enforcement.

"In loco parentis," which is mentioned above, and which I've talked about several times in other threads has ebbed and flowed in the years since I started college in the mid 60's.

Because of the litigious nature of our society (also mentioned above), it seems to be making a comeback.

Students won't like that, but as long as the "sue everyone" mentality is in effect -- and, frankly, as long as people keep breaking the rules (and laws), and doing dumb things, that ain't likely to change.

And, the last time I checked, underaged drinking is still against the law...whether we/I agree with it or not.

[MysticCat]

With all of the ragging on Duke (by its alumni and others) it seems worth noting that the article says the conditions of probation were being laid down by Kappa Sig's international headquarters. Kappa Sigs Risk Management Manual contains this "Alcohol and Drug Education Policy":

1. The possession, use, consumption or serving of alcoholic beverages and/or other drugs by the Fraternity shall be in accordance with all applicable local, provincial, state, and federal laws. The chapter shall also abide by rules of its host university or college.

2. No chapter of Kappa Sigma Fraternity may purchase alcoholic beverages with chapter funds, nor may any member, in the name of or on behalf of the chapter, coordinate the collection or provide any funds for such a purchase. This includes, but is not limited to, the purchase of kegs, party balls and other bulk quantities of alcoholic beverages.

3. The direct or indirect sale of alcoholic beverages by any chapter of Kappa Sigma Fraternity is strictly forbidden. No chapter of Kappa Sigma shall participate in any activity or action which creates the impression that the chapter is selling alcohol. Such examples would include, but are not limited to, charging admission to parties, passing the hat, selling empty cups, selling drink tickets, or providing vending machines which dispense alcoholic beverages.

4. The use or possession of any unlawful drug in any form is not permitted at any Kappa Sigma function or at any Kappa Sigma chapter house.

5. Parties and social activities should be open to members and invited guests only. Open parties, meaning those with unrestricted access by non-members of the Fraternity, without specific invitation, are prohibited by Kappa Sigma Fraternity.

6. All undergraduate rush functions and rush activities associated with, or sponsored by, any chapter of Kappa Sigma Fraternity will be dry; that is without the presence of alcoholic beverages.

7. Alcoholic beverages are prohibited at any pledge program or initiation ceremony of the chapter.

8. No member of this Fraternity shall purchase for, serve to or otherwise facilitate the consumption of any alcoholic beverage for any person under legal drinking age.

9. Chapters are strongly encouraged to conduct the Alcohol and Drug Education Program, “My Brother’s Keeper”, for the Brothers and pledges.

Kappa Sigma Fraternity views violation of this policy as an extremely grave matter and shall respond to any such violation with expulsion, depledging, suspension or fines, depending upon the circumstances. The day-to-day responsibility of the enforcement of this policy rests with the members and chapters. Kappa Sigma calls on each individual member to abide by and to enforce this policy for the good of the Order.

From the article, it would appear that the Duke chapter may have violated at least a few of these rules -- failing to abide by North Carolina law and university regulation and serving alcohol to pledges -- and that they were called on it and required, by their international office as well as by the university, to be dry. When their international office learned they were not operating as a dry chapter, then it took action just as this policy says it would.

This is not about legislating morality -- it is about requiring compliance with the law, as well as protection from potential liability that could wreck a fraternity. Looks to me like Kappa Sigma was acting in accordance with its policies. Also looks to me like the Duke Kappa Sig's have no one to blame but themselves.

[IvySpice]

>The school isn't trying to enfore laws. They are trying to >legislate morality. It's not against the law for someone over the >age of 21 to purchase or consume alcohol, UNLESS you are >Greek. What law is someone breaking if they are over 21 and >they have a keg at a private off campus residence?

They are breaking North Carolina law if they:

Provide alcohol to an individual under 21

or

Provide alcohol to anyone of any age who is "noticeably intoxicated"

Plus, they are legally responsible and liable for the safety of any guest of any age to whom they provide alcohol (like the wasted guy who fell out of a window in the KS dorm section during the probation period). The host of the party has the legal burden to determine who is over 21 and to prevent underage individuals from drinking. What's more, there's absolute liability -- a good-faith belief that someone was over 21 doesn't excuse the host from liability.

The majority of fraternity members at colleges with traditional student populations, like Duke, are under 21. The overwhelming majority of pledges at these colleges are under 21. If I am mistaken in my assumption that the Kappa Sigma pledge who was hospitalized was under 21, and in my further assumption that that pledge wasn't the only underage student who ever had a beer at a Kappa Sigma event, then I hope a Duke student will correct me. If I'm not mistaken, then the individuals involved broke the law, and their fraternity membership has nothing to do with it.

The law is excessive. The law does not make allowances for responsible alcohol use that it ought to make. But we need to take that up with the North Carolina legislature.

Ivy

[docetboy]

As a Kappa Sigma pledge at the Gamma-Nu Chapter, I am extremely dissapointed to see the loss of Eta-Prime. However, in light of all hazing incidents that have put GLO's in an extremely bad light over the past 30 years, and the Kappa Sigma Risk Management Policy that every member is forced to read and sign, I must agree with the National Organization. The changes that were instituted were not that bad, compared to what could of happened. The charter could of been taken away completely, or even the chapter could of been forced to stop rush, both drastic actions. Not being able to party because of a hospitalized pledge does not seem all that important, in the larger light.

This said, I wish best of luck to the men at Duke and I hope that all difficulties can be worked out and hope that Duke can see a strong Kappa Sigma in the years to come.