Legacy Policy

[Sen's Revenge]

There was an NPC org (which one I honestly can't remember) who spoke on their page about Alumnae Initiation. They listed a few reasons why a woman would go that route, and one of the reasons was something like "situations where preserving the family legacy was more significant than the local, undergraduate experience." I remember walking away from it thinking that a woman could still be an XYZ later if she (and her relative) wanted, if the local chapter released her or if there was no chapter on campus.

I thought that was nicely put. Now stick a pin in that for a second.

You all may remember last year the drama and lawsuit surrounding the two legacies to AKA at Howard University. To summarize and paraphrase: AKA has a legacy policy but local university policy trumps the org's rules. So even though under normal circumstances, these woman may have been chosen as legacy initiates, because there was a "line cap" at the school, the legacy applicants had to be whittled down and the senior legacies were the first to go.

Now, had they not sued, their legacy status could certainly had been invoked if they pursued membership in a graduate chapter later on. I believe that one of the conversations which arose from the whole debacle was whether or not "legacy" should mean a guarantee at the collegiate level or not.

That said, my fraternity does not have a legacy policy, although some of the guidelines I've seen seem to suggest "bonus points" should be given to legacies. Although other organization's policies are their own business, I do believe that "fit" in a local chapter is as important as continuing a family tradition. If the relative truly thinks their legacy is (or will be) a worthy candidate as an alumnus/alumna, and they will not try to create a quasi-collegiate experience for themselves, then I think legacy can be preserved through alum initiation, if the org sees fit to use it in that way.