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.