Sigma Chi branding

[ZZ-kai-]

I know our risk management guidelines, and I am pretty sure that if a Beta gets killed in the streets of Jamaica while coming home from a rave, the parents of him cannot sue the General Fraternity, just because he is a Beta.

Thats the point I am making.

[msn4med1975]

Originally posted by ktsnake
Not insulting it. Just observing how for NIC groups, this act probably does fall under the definition of hazing. From the NPHC groups' hazing policies that I've seen, this would probably fall under their definition as well. It doesn't have to be sponsored by the organization to be hazing. You're getting your letters burned into your flesh. I don't think most juries would have a problem finding the connection there.

Branding isn't FORCED upon members either implicitly or explicitly. While someone mentioned a chapter that did their branding shortly after they crossed, MOST of the NPHC members I know with them got them months if not years later and had to request that someone do them. There wasn't a lineup and folks just HAD to do them. With the exception of the Alpha brand (and this just may have been in TN) they got ONE LETTER branded into their arm and if that's what they want to do so be it. It wasn't something they couldn't hide much in the same way you hide a tattoo. As most people that don't get brands don't get infections (anymore thanthose that get tattoos and get infections), a jury would be hard pressed to hold a chapter or organization responsible for something that in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM is connected to the pledging process for MOST chapters. They aren't viewed as associate members till they get branded, they are members flat out and if they choose to adorn their bodies after they are done more power to them. Again, not being truly familiar with the culture of branding in NPHC groups please just comment on NIC groups and what it would mean for them.

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by ktsnake
If a bunch of pledge brothers and myself decide to go off and get branded after we are initiated -- and even if we do it on our own accord, and then something bad happens.. say a serious infection -- the group as a whole can be held liable.

Under what legal theory?

[Kevin]

Originally posted by valkyrie
Under what legal theory?

Legal theory? Are you suggesting that it's too much of a stretch to say that if a group of members of XYZ go and do something and one gets hurt, XYZ might not be held accountable? We see this all the freakin' time in alcohol related injuries. I don't see how this would be much different.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by msn4med1975
Branding isn't FORCED upon members either implicitly or explicitly. While someone mentioned a chapter that did their branding shortly after they crossed, MOST of the NPHC members I know with them got them months if not years later and had to request that someone do them. There wasn't a lineup and folks just HAD to do them. With the exception of the Alpha brand (and this just may have been in TN) they got ONE LETTER branded into their arm and if that's what they want to do so be it. It wasn't something they couldn't hide much in the same way you hide a tattoo. As most people that don't get brands don't get infections (anymore thanthose that get tattoos and get infections), a jury would be hard pressed to hold a chapter or organization responsible for something that in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM is connected to the pledging process for MOST chapters. They aren't viewed as associate members till they get branded, they are members flat out and if they choose to adorn their bodies after they are done more power to them. Again, not being truly familiar with the culture of branding in NPHC groups please just comment on NIC groups and what it would mean for them.

That you know people and that is beside the point is one thing. This Sigma Chi branding appears to have been part of their organization's program. In some cases, I suppose it's just like a tatoo and the organization has no real involvement. In other cases (we don't know a whole lot about it at this point) the organization IS involved. In those cases, whether we're talking initiate or non-initiate, if a group of brothers or pre-initiates decides to have this done, and something goes wrong, it's a lot like what would happen if a group of brothers had a party at someone's house and one of them died of alcohol poisoning.

While we don't know everything that happened here, I don't believe my reasoning is much of a stretch at all.

And as I said before, I sure as hell wouldn't want to call my executive director and let him know our pledges were out branding eachother.

[msn4med1975]

Actually your commenting on NPHC hazing/branding views WAS the point. Comment on what is relevant for you since you just brought it back there. For Sigma Chi and this particular chapter it MAY have been a requirement. It also may have been some random folks that wanted to do something. If it violates NIC rules or Sigma Chi's rules that's one thing. But as you do not know the culture of branding within the NPHC please don't lump it in with what these individuals do.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by msn4med1975
Actually your commenting on NPHC hazing/branding views WAS the point. Comment on what is relevant for you since you just brought it back there. For Sigma Chi and this particular chapter it MAY have been a requirement. It also may have been some random folks that wanted to do something. If it violates NIC rules or Sigma Chi's rules that's one thing. But as you do not know the culture of branding within the NPHC please don't lump it in with what these individuals do.

Well, I've only read the hazing policy for Kappa Alpha Psi. Maybe it's different for yours. However, their hazing policy was exactly the same as mine.

Therefore, the shoe seems to fit.

ETA: I really didn't comment on your "culture". But hazing was long part of the culture for NIC organizations. Because it became outmoded (and just not really compatible with the continuing survival of our organizations) it went away. Organizational cultures aren't always harmonious with our rules

[msn4med1975]

The culture I was referring to had nothing to do with being a minority. Culture has MANY different components. Greek life is a culture in and of itself so is the reasoning behind and perpetuation of branding in the NPHC. If you are not part of the NPHC or at least friends with SEVERAL people that are you would be hard pressed to understand why anyone would continue something that is not sanctioned by our national governing bodies. Our pledges do not brand one another and as I stated, no one is forced to get one but if you are worried about your fraternity you are more than welcome to do so.

[ZZ-kai-]

I would love to see where in your risk management policy that it states a grown adult Sigma Nu member/associate cannot make a decision on their own, to pierce/tattoo/brand themselves, and if they do, the Sigma Nu Fraternity is not held liable.

I think we're all missing the point here. There was a pissed off dad, who didn't like his adult sons decision to brand himself (or be branded for that matter). There is no indication that this was hazing or forced on his son, he was just pissed off and wanted Dallas to know about it.

[shadokat]

I think what ktsnake is referring to here is what we like to call the "duck" rule. If it looks like a duck, and wallks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck, whether it really is or isn't. Just because 10 guys from a single fraternity go out and get branded, because they WANT to, and one of them gets seriously injured for whatever reason, that people won't look at it as a fraternity event, because 10 guys from the same fraternity were all there. No, it wasn't an event, but it will be PERCEIVED as one.

[ZZ-kai-]

I understand that concept and do not argue that, however, unless something was scheduled on the fraternity calendar, or was a topic of discussion as an organized function recorded in the minutes, or organized as a fraternity event by the President or other Exec. Board members, a case like that would not hold up in court.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by ZZ-kai-
I understand that concept and do not argue that, however, unless something was scheduled on the fraternity calendar, or was a topic of discussion as an organized function recorded in the minutes, or organized as a fraternity event by the President or other Exec. Board members, a case like that would not hold up in court.

Yeah, all the fraternities that have been sued because a member drank himself to death after a birthday party or some other unofficial function had to be on their master calendar as well, right? It doesn't have to be a part of official business to be an event. It just has to have the presence of a few of the members (not even really that) and the influence of the organization.

[SiKeS]

Can someone please explain to me what "intake" is?

A couple of you keep talking about it and I've never heard of that term..

Thanks.

[Senusret I]

Originally posted by SiKeS
Can someone please explain to me what "intake" is?

A couple of you keep talking about it and I've never heard of that term..

Thanks.

Membership Intake Program = New Member Education or Pledging

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by ktsnake
Legal theory? Are you suggesting that it's too much of a stretch to say that if a group of members of XYZ go and do something and one gets hurt, XYZ might not be held accountable? We see this all the freakin' time in alcohol related injuries. I don't see how this would be much different.

Unfortuantely, I must agree. Legal decisions can be bizarre these days. And this branding involves letters! Why not take a shot at the chapter or national organization?