Marshall Tri-Sigma Lawsuit

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by DZsis&mom

Why is it embarrassing for a parent to step in and assist their child in a situation that seemed to be spiraling out of control?

Mom didn't 'step in and assist' her daughter - she took over. She went to her daughter's sorority's HQ when it wasn't her place to do so. Her daughter will never learn to manage adult issues if she's never given the opportunity.

I work daily with college students, and I'm all too often stunned and appalled by their behavior and that of their parents. I've seen parents set their kids' college schedules; I've seen/fielded emails/phone calls from parents asking why their kid didn't get a better grade, or asking to be excused from class meetings; I've witnessed parents going through graduation fairs or job fairs to get information or fill out paperwork/applications for their kid; and yes, I've even seen parents accompany their recent graduates to on-campus job interviews. I can only imagine what happens once Little Darling is hired.

The amount of heli-parenting is out of control. Too many parents feel like they're helping their kids by 'stepping in to assist' when in reality, they're simply delaying the growth that needs to happen. This is creating a generation of kids who can't do things on their own, yet feel entitled to everything they want.

I guess what's sad to me is that Generation Y seems content to have their adulthood delayed by their own parents, and don't seem to be embarrassed when their parents interfere to the degree they do. (Yes, I'm generalizing. I'm aware there are self-sufficient GenY-ers out there. And they're a breath of fresh air.)

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

MThe amount of heli-parenting is out of control. Too many parents feel like they're helping their kids by 'stepping in to assist' when in reality, they're simply delaying the growth that needs to happen. This is creating a generation of kids who can't do things on their own, yet feel entitled to everything they want.

As an attorney who practices family law, I've noticed this a lot in divorce cases. The parent's (or parents') over-involvement in intimate marital issues can often contribute to the breakdown of a relationship. I had a custody case recently where I represented a father. I never heard from him but his mother called 2-3 times a week. We finally took the case to mediation and settled it. The next day, his mother called and fired me! I guess they're still going at it, though mother has a pretty binding mediation agreement which was probably what would have happened had we spent the thousands of dollars and heartache it takes to go to trial over custody.

The difference between shielding your child from everything which could possibly cause them harm or discomfort and letting them learn to fight their own battles is not a subtle one.

If you as a parent have no problem "protecting" your child from her sorority, which she could quit and leave at any point, what's to say that 10 years from now, when they're married, you're not going to be that mom who prods her child to produce grandchildren she doesn't want? Who needles at the husband for not making enough money or being successful enough? Where are you going to draw that line? If someone is saying it's fine 'n dandy to repair to sorority HQ to breathe down the necks of national officers about their daughter's potential issues, perhaps that person hasn't really thought much about where that line might be.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Kevin

As an attorney who practices family law, I've noticed this a lot in divorce cases. The parent's (or parents') over-involvement in intimate marital issues can often contribute to the breakdown of a relationship. I had a custody case recently where I represented a father. I never heard from him but his mother called 2-3 times a week. We finally took the case to mediation and settled it. The next day, his mother called and fired me! I guess they're still going at it, though mother has a pretty binding mediation agreement which was probably what would have happened had we spent the thousands of dollars and heartache it takes to go to trial over custody.

Whoa, wait, let me get this straight. You had a custody case where two parents were fighting over custody of a child, let's call him Buddy. The woman who called you is Buddy's GRANDMOTHER?!?!

That's unreal. She probably called the wife to make sure her son was getting enough BJs every week.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Whoa, wait, let me get this straight. You had a custody case where two parents were fighting over custody of a child, let's call him Buddy. The woman who called you is Buddy's GRANDMOTHER?!?!

It's definitely not unusual for grandparents to be involved in their kids' custody cases. Keep in mind, if lawyers and judges are involved in your divorce, it's probably a pretty high conflict divorce. Over-involved grandparents are a major cause of high conflict divorce. Also, those over-involved grandparents are often the folks paying the attorney fees as older folks tend to be in better financial positions than their children.

It's not even unusual for grandparents to try and obtain custody for themselves over a grandchild, using their own still-attached children as pawns in a game over control.

Heli-parenting is a huge problem in our culture. The fact that I see more colleges, businesses, etc., looking to accommodate this behavior rather than correcting it is pretty troubling.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

I guess what's sad to me is that Generation Y seems content to have their adulthood delayed by their own parents, and don't seem to be embarrassed when their parents interfere to the degree they do. (Yes, I'm generalizing. I'm aware there are self-sufficient GenY-ers out there. And they're a breath of fresh air.)

This is the part that absolutely slays me and is like a foreign language. Over in the Planned Parenthood thread I said that I had insurance that would have covered BC but never used it because I didn't want my parents to find out. I'm sure there's some Gen-Y girl reading that and saying "why would she do that?"

I was an only child and quite overprotected (for the time) and it took a LONG while till I got to the point where I could rebel. I don't think it's healthy when children can't do at least a little of that.

[ASUADPi]

I don't know who is telling the truth but the timeline makes me question her.

According to the article she witnessed events 4/9/10, complained and the "hazing" began. She initiated 8/16/10.

Question 1 for her: Why did you continue to be part of an organization that "hazed" you for 4 more months and then decide to initiate?

To me this makes no sense. I get she is young but really unless she is so desperate for the need to belong, why would you WILLINGLY initiate into an organization that you claim is hazing you? I don't get it.

Question 2: Why did you move into the house with the women you claim were hazing you?

She then went to honor councils on 10/17/10 and 11/17/10.

She called nationals on 11/15/10 to complain about the "abuse". (So now I question her motives. Did she call nationals because she had only been initiated 3 months prior, had already been brought to honor council once and was about to go a second time).

She was then brought to honor council for the 3rd time 3/15/10 and was told on 3/18/10 that she was about to be brought the 4th time (which could mean loss of membership).

So in 9 months of being an initiated member she was brought to honor council 4 times.

She then moved out of the house 4/3/11.

But then waited to file a LAWSUIT until October 2011.

For me it's like wait a minute.
1. why did you join if you were being hazed?
2. why did you move into the house?
3. did you speak to the advisors or did you go straight to nationals?
4. why did you wait OVER a year to file a lawsuit (which to me most lawsuits are about people wanting money).

The kicker, the trial won't be for another year and half.

Something about what she is claiming seems very fishy to me. Like I just cannot imagine the advisors to the chapter or nationals sitting back and doing nothing, which it seems like that is the basis of her argument. Considering NPC has a no hazing policy and all the sororities have no hazing policies, schools have no hazing policies, I just don't buy it.

Especially if what the article claimed was true, that the chapter had been given 8 sanctions for hazing. If this were true, then they would have been on the Tri-Sigma radar of "we need to closely watch this chapter".

Something about it doesn't make me believe her.

I do think that she did tell and that she did suffer backlash for telling. But I don't think she is telling the whole story, the fact that she was brought up to 4 honor councils in 9 months doesn't say much for her.

Just my opinion.

[Low C Sharp]

Question 2: Why did you move into the house with the women you claim were hazing you?

I don't know how the market works around Marshall, but April would have been way too late to get other housing for the next fall where I went to school. Practicalities might have taken over.

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

I don't know how the market works around Marshall, but April would have been way too late to get other housing for the next fall where I went to school. Practicalities might have taken over.

Plus the chapter may have had a mandatory live-in policy.