Previous poll Next poll

Should Kansas University notify the parents of an underaged student who is caught using drugs or violating alcohol policies?

Response Percent Votes
Yes
 
72% 933
No
 
23% 307
Not sure
 
3% 45
Total 1285

Comments

notajayhawk 6 years ago

I guess the tricky part is the definition the University is using for "underage." Those over 18 but under 21 may be underage to drink, but they're legal adults, responsible for themselves and entitled to the privacy protections afforded any other adult.

Should the police notify the parents (or anyone else, for that matter) of every arrest or law-enforcement contact with legal adults below the age of 21?

jumpin_catfish 6 years ago

No tricky part, this is a no brainer people. Of course their parents should be called. Why wasn't this the policy all along?

slowplay 6 years ago

If I'm not mistaken, the student will have to give permission for the University to contact the parents. This is most likely a form that is processed upon enrollment. If a parent is paying the bills, I can not see any student refusing to sign. A similar form is needed for parents to have access to the students financial and medical records, regardless of who is paying the bills.

Chris Ogle 6 years ago

If I am paying the bills, then I should know. If not, I would like to know, but shouldn't have the right to know.

middleoftheroad 6 years ago

Let's think about this shall we? If I'm underage (say 20) and I get caught doing something illegal at work, aren't the police involved? The police wouldn't call my parents, that would be up to me. Why would it be any different on a college campus? If an underage person on a college campus gets caught doing something illegal, it should be handled by the police. From there, the situation would shake out.

jafs 6 years ago

nota,

If the students are legal adults, then the school should call the police and have them prosecuted.

gsxr600 6 years ago

You've got to cut the teet off somewhere. The students are adults. Let them be treated like adults.

Kyle Reed 6 years ago

The bill does come to them Solomon.

kmat 6 years ago

Read the FERPA laws and you'll understand that this is legal and the kids don't have to sign anything saying their parents can be notified.

This policy would affect kids getting busted on campus with alcohol or drugs (would involve campus police). So, it would be kids in the dorms and scholarship halls. Those kids are most likely still living off mom and dad, so yes, the parents should know. I never knew anyone putting themselves through school that would live in the dorms when they could have an apartment for the same price.

esj2003 6 years ago

Don't write novellas. No one reads them. The only way notifying the parents should be considered is if the parents pay that student's tuition. Even then, I'm not sold its ethical.

nekansan 6 years ago

The university should not release the records or any other information on an adult (18 y/o) student without their consent. I think it's fine for the school to have a mechanism for this consent to be on file at the time of enrollment and that any revocation of that consent require parental notification.

Parents can very easily refuse to pay tuition for their kids unless they sign the consent form. Parents should not expect the university to do their job.

MeAndFannieLou 6 years ago

It doesn't matter who is paying another person's bills! If I help my elderly mother-in-law occasionally with her rent or grocery bills, it gives me absolutely no right whatsoever to have any control over her!

If a person is legally an adult that person has certain rights! Now, if we want to talk about raising the legal age of adulthood, that's a different matter. Or, maybe we want some kind of "graduated" adulthood - 18 years old to drive, 21 years old to drink, how old to vote? But if we go down that road, I for one don't think anyone should be eligible for military service until they've reached full legal adulthood, and that would affect whom the military could recruit (or draft, should the need arise).

kmat 6 years ago

This policy isn't about protecting the students from drinking. It's about covering the university's ass because there are too many idiotic kids that binge drink. If the university does nothing, they'll set themselves up for a lawsuit from some parent because they weren't notified that their kid had a problem.

Teaching kids about drinking is the parents responsibility.

Janet Cinelli 6 years ago

I say yes as I was one of those under-agers who got caught, many moons ago. I so very much wish that my father had been involved from the get-go. But, being a very dumb 17 year old, I didn't tell him until much later. While I could totally see how this opinion would be hard to shallow for a current KU student. Believe, they are going to find out anyway, but have them know from day 1.

domino 6 years ago

When my kids went off to college, I hoped I had taught them the things they needed to know. I'm not saying they didn't make some poor choices at times, but they were then adults and needed to know that they were responsible for their actions - that included good & bad choices they made.

As far as the people who say that they should be notified if they are paying for their schooling, here is a unique idea for you. Don't pay for their college and you wont have to worry about it! My kids paid their way thru school and are paying off their student loans. I think it helps them appreciate their education more. I helped my kids when they needed it - with rent, groceries and that sort of thing. Parents do not have to pay for their childrens college education and too often the parents that give their kids a blank check are the ones who have the extra bucks for the alcohol and drugs. I'm not saying kids aren't going to find some of it one way or the other, but if they have to make the decision to party this weekend or eat for the next week, after a few times going hungry will probably learn!

I know a young lady who graduated from KU who had VERY little help from her parents - they just didn't have the money to do much for her. She worked her butt off - applied for and got grants & scholarships - in fact, her last semister of school she was working 2 jobs, doing an internship and was offered a job 3 months before graduation, so started working that job part-time until her graduation, then went full time. She finished her degree, has a very good job and NO student loans to pay off. Her parents inherited some money after her graduation and told her they wished they would have been able to have it sooner to be able to help her more with her college. She said she was glad it happened just the way it did. She feels that she appreciates her education so much more knowing how hard she worked for it.

ClaroAtaxia 6 years ago

jumpin_catfish,

What part of it is a no-brainer? Seems to me there are very delicate legal issues surrounding this, and it certainly isn't a 'no-brainer'. I'm glad you aren't the one deliberating such policies, because it seems you don't deliberate at all.

KUGrad08 6 years ago

I think that this is a great idea. A very large majority of students who are between the ages of 18 - 21 are still under the care of their parents in some way. Plus, drinking is a very adult thing so just because you are an "adult" when you turn 18 doesn't mean that you don't need your parents guidence for the adult responsibilities that you have.

I had many friends in college and even still today that if their parents had been notified of their drug or drinking habbits they might have had a better experience at college, would have gotten in to a lot less trouble, or even might have a better life today.

Also, think of the lives that could have been saved just due to a kids parents knowing that they have a drinking or drug problem? And I dont mean just their physical lives but their psychological lives as well. There are many students who graduate as an alcoholic or as a drug addict and it ruins the rest of their lives.

There is nothing wrong with telling a child's parent that they have a drug or alcohol problem. Just because you have turned 18 and have become an "adult" doesn't mean that you no longer have parents.

beatrice 6 years ago

If the Bush administration had asked an 18 year old soldier to conduct a waterboarding interrogation, should the President have gotten permission from the parents first?

We are talking about adults, thus who is paying the bill should not matter. Adult means adult. At what age do we stop contacting mom and/or dad for everything their adult children do? A 19 year old got a traffic ticket, better let the parents know. The following year he gets caught with a joint -- call the folks.

What if someone is married, yet still under 21 -- do we call the in-laws as well? What if the spouse is paying the bills, is the university required to call the wife/husband?

What if the student is adopted?

My answer isn't just no, but hell no! There is a reason college isn't called high school.

Strontius 6 years ago

This is just a knee-jerk reaction and won't fix anything. Anyone who has spent a few days in college knows this will just be a big joke.

Are the parents of 18-20 year olds going to have their parents informed if the parents AREN'T paying the bills?

This is a terrible policy and an infringement on the basic privacy rights of adults. KU has a law school. I give this policy a few weeks before someone files a law suit and ends this policy.

Tom McCune 6 years ago

When I was in school, students would have rioted over this "in loco parentis" stuff. In fact, they did riot to eliminate a bunch of Victorian silliness.

Sigmund 6 years ago

"Should Kansas University notify the parents of an underaged student who is caught using drugs or violating alcohol policies?"

Yes, they should be notified their child is being suspend from school for a semester. KU should also contact SALLIE MAE with the the same information.

Sigmund 6 years ago

As long as KU students are killing themselves with drugs and alcohol, nobody really cares least of all me. Once they start driving and killing others is when I get upset. For those that are still obsessed with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, more Americans are killed each year as a result of drugs and alcohol than combat.

conservative 6 years ago

Are you efffing kidding me? If they're in college they're over 18. That makes them legal adults. Parents should not be notifiied by the school.

selah 6 years ago

The father of the student who died in march has been all over the university daily kansan's message boards asking that these policies be changed. He claimed that had he known his son had been in trouble for alcohol problems, he would have pulled him out of school and gotten him help. Too late now to find out if that would have helped.

As far as being "legal adults", just because one crosses the magic line between 17 and 18 years of age doesn't mean they stop making stupid decisions. I've been a legal adult for several years now, and I still seek my parents' advice from time to time.

beatrice 6 years ago

"For those that are still obsessed with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, more Americans are killed each year as a result of drugs and alcohol than combat."

Per capita? Are you counting both sides? Of course, none of the people who die from drugs and alcohol do so in service of their country. Just a tad bit of a difference, don't ya think?

dweezil222 6 years ago

As far as being “legal adults”, just because one crosses the magic line between 17 and 18 years of age doesn't mean they stop making stupid decisions.

================================

But the line has to be drawn somewhere. When you send 18-20 year olds the message that they're adults, is it any wonder they want to try an "adult" thing? Standardize the age of majority, whether at 18 or 21, and you eliminate that conflict. Having the split age makes absolutely no sense.

Sigmund 6 years ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says…”Per capita? Are you counting both sides?"

Ok more Americans, on both sides, are killed by drugs and alcohol than in combat.

beatrice (Anonymous) says…”Of course, none of the people who die from drugs and alcohol do so in service of their country. Just a tad bit of a difference, don't ya think?"

Agreed. Those Americans who die in combat are heroes. Those who are killed by drug and alcohol abuse are pure wasted human carnage. Huge difference.

Tammie Bryant 6 years ago

The students are not allowed to posses or consume on campus. Doing so puts them in violation. If caught, they are fined and must attend an educational class on drinking. What if the student is caught at Clinton Lake? Does the University notify the parents? Are they only going to notify the parents if they are caught on campus. What if the students is 21 and lives on campus will their parents be notified?

Bottom line, no the parent should not be notified, the guilty are legally adults, no one needs to know. We don't notify the parents if the student gets an STD and some of those can be just as deadly.

left_of_center 6 years ago

Slowplay:

In case you missed it, KU just changed their policy on alcohol yesterday. It is no longer the students option on whether or not their parents will be contacted. From now on, if a student is found in violation of the alcohol/drug policy on campus, their parents WILL be contacted, regardless of the students wishes.

I can only see this as a positive, as parents have a right to know it their children are in violation of these policies. The fact that previoulsy the University would release such information to other schools, and financial instituions, but not the parents of the student was ludicrious.

Sigmund 6 years ago

There is no absolute right to privacy. Those that break the law have no right to keep their convictions private and the court proceedings themselves are public. Breaking KU policy isn't a criminal violation, more like a code infraction, a parking ticket caliber offense. When balancing the public policy considerations I would expect that notification serves the policy of health and welfare of the students while non-notification only serves saving the potential embarrassment of the under aged violator.

It really isn't even a close call.

notajayhawk 6 years ago

jafs (Anonymous) says…

"If the students are legal adults, then the school should call the police and have them prosecuted."

No argument on that from me. But then, should they also call their parents?


MeAndFannieLou (Anonymous) says…

"Or, maybe we want some kind of “graduated” adulthood - 18 years old to drive, 21 years old to drink, how old to vote ... "

Well, since it's already 16 (in most places) to drive, 18 to vote, 21 to drink...


xbusguy (Anonymous) says…

"If I am paying the bills, then I should know."

So, if they're getting student loans or grants, should the federal government be notified (as Sigmund suggested)?


KUGrad08 (Anonymous) says…

"I think that this is a great idea. A very large majority of students who are between the ages of 18 - 21 are still under the care of their parents in some way."

Funny thing, though - if they weren't college students, and living at home entirely in their parents' care, the police wouldn't notify those parents if they got arrested for underage drinking or for drug use.


none2 (Anonymous) says…

"If you pay to send an 18-21 year old in college, are you going to deny yourself a tax break because they are really adults and not dependents?"

Well, actually, you can have a dependent of any age. Your mother could be your dependent for tax purposes.


Sigmund (Anonymous) says…

"There is no absolute right to privacy. Those that break the law have no right to keep their convictions private and the court proceedings themselves are public."

We do not, however, make a specific notification to the parents of offenders. Want to list the violators offenses in the campus newspaper or on a website? Fine. Tell me one other crime, offense, or misdemeanor for which an adult's mommy and daddy are called.

Sigmund 6 years ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "Want to list the violators offenses in the campus newspaper or on a website? Fine. Tell me one other crime, offense, or misdemeanor for which an adult's mommy and daddy are called."

What I want to do is irrelevant. The question is what is KU allowed to do and what they have chosen to do. Don't like the policy, feel free to attend another school where the policy is different. Don't like being treated like a child, dont violate the rules or your family will be notified.

Sure it might be embarrassing, but tell me one other offense that has cost so many lives? If your a drunk and a criminal your family probably already knows or suspects anyway. If not they are bound to find out eventually and the sooner everyone faces the reality the better.

Balancing the public policy considerations notification serves the policy of health and welfare of the students while non-notification only serves the policy of saving the potential embarrassment of the under aged violator. Which do you value more?

1moreopinion 6 years ago

I see some very good pro and con comments about this issue but I think that it would be illegal for parents to be notified. As a parent I would like to be notified if I had a kid at KU or any other university who got caught with drugs or alcohol.

The key word here is adult. These students are adults, but I do agree to the point that if a parent is paying, then the parent should be notified. But, I see lawsuits in the future if this plan is adopted and used. The important thing is that I firmly believe that something needs to be done. I am saddened each time I read about a student dying from alcohol or drugs.

Sigmund 6 years ago

1moreopinion (Anonymous) says… "I see some very good pro and con comments about this issue but I think that it would be illegal for parents to be notified.

What law does this violate? Feeling that something violates the law isn't the same thing as actually violating the law. The highly touted Buckley Amendment specifically excludes "records maintained by a law enforcement unit of the educational agency or institution that were created by that law enforcement unit for the purpose of law enforcement. " http://epic.org/privacy/education/ferpa.html

1moreopinion (Anonymous) says… "The key word here is adult. "

Agreed. The records of children are far more restricted than those of adults. Adult criminal records are public while those of juveniles are not. College student adults should expected that their criminal acts will be a part of the public record. Treating adult college students like children, by informing parents of when they violate school policy and/or the law, is not a crime.

notajayhawk 6 years ago

Sigmund (Anonymous) says…

"What I want to do is irrelevant. The question is what is KU allowed to do and what they have chosen to do."

Actually, the question (it's at the top of the page) is what they "should" do. (You aren't our local 'Jeopardy' contestant, I see.) A difficult concept for an attorney, perhaps, but there is often a difference between what an entity is legally allowed to do and what they should do.

I'll concede the first sentence, though.

"notification serves the policy of health and welfare of the students"

Then wouldn't it be in the public interest for the police to call the parents of a nineteen-year-old non-student who violates a liquor or drug law? Why don't we do that, too?

jafs 6 years ago

nota,

I don't think parents should be notified if children are of adult age.

However, I do think they should be notified if children are under-age.

Is that really true that police don't notify parents if under-age children are arrested? That seems wrong to me.

Sigmund 6 years ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "Actually, the question (it's at the top of the page) is what they “should” do. (You aren't our local 'Jeopardy' contestant, I see.) A difficult concept for an attorney, perhaps, but there is often a difference between what an entity is legally allowed to do and what they should do."

Fair point, but many of the posters who think KU "should not" seem to think it was illegal and I was responding to them. The thread progressed from a simple yes/no and we were getting discussion of rationale. But KU is going to do what they choose regardless of we think they should.

I'll take "Potent Potables" for $400, Alex.

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…"Then wouldn't it be in the public interest for the police to call the parents of a nineteen-year-old non-student who violates a liquor or drug law? Why don't we do that, too?"

We have a public trial and it is put on the public record. Society treats differently situated adults, well differently. As long as all adult KU students are treated the same I really don't think there is a issue. KU should set policies and should do what they feel is in their students best interest.

"What are Jello Shots, Alex?"

jafs 6 years ago

And, for the person who didn't care until these students drive drunk and injure/kill other people, that is happening right now.

notajayhawk 6 years ago

jafs (Anonymous) says…

"Is that really true that police don't notify parents if under-age children are arrested? That seems wrong to me."

Again, that's dependent on the definition of 'underage.' If a minor (someone under 18) gets arrested, I assume the parents are notified. But you can be an adult (e.g. 19 or 20) and get arrested for 'underage' drinking, and nobody will be notified.

notajayhawk 6 years ago

Sigmund (Anonymous) says…

"Fair point, but many of the posters who think KU “should not” seem to think it was illegal and I was responding to them. The thread progressed from a simple yes/no and we were getting discussion of rationale."

Fair enough, although I might have said "deteriorated" instead of "progressed" (as all too often seems to be the case).

"But KU is going to do what they choose regardless of we think they should."

Hence my willingness to stipulate to your other sentence. ;)

"We have a public trial and it is put on the public record."

I realize that. We do not, however, make a specific notification to an adult's parents (or spouse, or neighbors, etc.). Actually, if we're assuming they don't already know, it's likely those parents aren't local and wouldn't have seen the police blotter in the newspaper.

And the fact that the information is public record does not automatically grant the right for such specific notification. E.g., 42CFR, which deals with the confidentiality of substance abuse treatment records, specifically states that even if a party could or would have obtained the information elsewhere, even if there is an assumption that the party already has the information, it still can not be disclosed. (And no, I'm not saying 42CFR applies to this situation - although if students are being assessed and referred to substance abuse education/treatment as part of this process, it would open up an interesting avenue for challenging the policy.)

Tell me - if an adult male is arrested for patronizing a prostitute, should/could/do the police notify his wife?

[What is a "hangover," Alex?]

notajayhawk 6 years ago

Or perhaps I should have said:

"Who is Lorena Bobbitt, Alex?"

jafs 6 years ago

nota,

That makes sense about 19-20 year old drinking - there's no good reason to "notify" parents.

However, in the case of adult males visiting prostitutes, one could make the argument that the wife has a right to know, if only to protect herself from STD's, particularly AIDS.

9070811 6 years ago

Parents pay tuition and rent as a gift. Just because they do this does not mean they should be notified because of their adult child getting into legal trouble. Sooner or later parents may find out. If they don't, well then they should be proud that their adult child was able to a handle the situation without their intervention. A lot of parents take money/assistance away when their child screws up. It's usually the best solution to shape a student back up. But by no means does the University of Kansas have the rights to call a parent to disclose sensitive information. The university is to call the police, not the parent / guardian. It is the adult son/daughter who is supposed to call the parent. That is his/her responsibility. Plus, who is else is going to have bail money and access to a lawyer?

Plus, what if the student pays their own tuition...what are they going to do about those students when they get in trouble.... Seems unfair to me. I can't get in trouble with my parents/guardians but you can!!!

9070811 6 years ago

WHAT IF THE STUDENT HAS NO PARENTS

beatrice 6 years ago

non2: "If I was a parent and one of my children died from such things and the school knew and said/did nothing, I'd sue them till it hurt so that another parent didn't face the same thing."

On what grounds? Imagine for a second that the 18 year old legal adult didn't go to college, but instead went to work at Wal-Mart. If everything is the same, are you going to sue Wal-Mart? Would it matter if the parents are paying their son's or daughter's rent?

I can appreciate your wanting the university to watch out for the well being of your offspring, but it isn't their JOB to do so. They are there to provide the opportunity for an education, not caretake.

Should the university let parents know if a student is seen riding a motorcycle without a helmet? There could be an accident and the student could die. Is the university liable? I don't think so.

In other words, at what point do you deal with the individual as the adult they actually are rather than continue to treat them as something less than a legal adult?

In what other area is adulthood dependent on who is footing the bill?

notajayhawk 6 years ago

jafs (Anonymous) says…

"However, in the case of adult males visiting prostitutes, one could make the argument that the wife has a right to know, if only to protect herself from STD's, particularly AIDS."

I think that's the argument of Sigmund (and others), that notifying the parents of the KU students has a 'public interest' benefit. But in the case I postulated, the spouse would have to be notified anyway by the Health Department if the husband contracted an STD - what if he didn't?

Sigmund 6 years ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…"Tell me - if an adult male is arrested for patronizing a prostitute, should/could/do the police notify his wife?"

Perhaps if there were several recent cases where adult married males contracted AIDS from prostitutes and such cases were on the rise then society would want to make notifications to spouses of those convicted of patronizing prostitutes citing public health and safety as the rationale.The context of this policy decision are the deaths this semester, as well as the deaths and injury in recent semesters, to "adult aged" college students who were breaking the law and/or campus policy and whose parents were footing the bill at KU.

Adult college students whose parents are not footing the bill for tuition, room and board and who are opposed to this policy (or if they were caught would be embarrassed that their parents might find out they are drinking underage) can simply choose not to attend KU. The less dependent a student is on their parents the less impact this policy will have, and vice versa. Finally, this policy will have no impact on those that simply follow the law.

beatrice 6 years ago

Sig, I'm actually surprised to see you in favor of such an obvious "nanny-state" policy.

At 18 you are an adult and responsible for your own actions -- unless you go to college. What a horrible lesson to be teaching young adults.

Again I ask, in what other part of society would any business or organization be required to contact the parents of a legal adult when this adult does something illegal? Why must the university treat adults like children when no other part of society does?

youarewhatyoueat 6 years ago

Nearly all the Freshmen/Sophomore aged students I've ever had to deal with in all my time in Lawrence behave as glorified 16 year olds, despite supposedly being an "adult."

Yes, notify the parents. I wish I could notify them every time I have to deal with them at work and they throw tantrums if they can't get what they want, WHEN they want it or otherwise behave at the (public) dinner table in a manner not unlike a 5 year old. It's no wonder, to me, why the legal age has not been lowered!

And yes, I know they ALL aren't like that, but sadly I have only come across a blessed few that aren't.

youarewhatyoueat 6 years ago

Nearly all the Freshmen/Sophomore aged students I've ever had to deal with in all my time in Lawrence behave as glorified 16 year olds, despite supposedly being an "adult."

Yes, notify the parents. I wish I could notify them every time I have to deal with them at work and they throw tantrums if they can't get what they want, WHEN they want it or otherwise behave at the (public) dinner table in a manner not unlike a 5 year old. I often wonder how their parents would react if they saw this side of their precious angels. It's no wonder, to me, why the legal age has not been lowered!

And yes, I know they ALL aren't like that, but sadly I have only come across a blessed few that aren't.

notajayhawk 6 years ago

Sigmund (Anonymous) says…

"Finally, this policy will have no impact on those that simply follow the law."

Again, no argument from me. But then, if they all followed the law, there would be no need for the policy.

I still don't think you've addressed whether the fact that just because something is public record (such as an arrest), some entity (KU, the police, whoever) could/should/do make specific notifications to family members of the violator. You do seem to be saying 'yes, if there's a public interest benefit' involved, but no otherwise. But are the laws and our rights that fluid, that situational?

I thought there was a reason why that blindfold was on the lady holding the scales?

Sigmund 6 years ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "I still don't think you've addressed whether the fact that just because something is public record (such as an arrest), some entity (KU, the police, whoever) could/should/do make specific notifications to family members of the violator."

OK I'll address it squarely. Nothing forbids KU's notification policy and they could implement. As those who are offended by it can avoid it by not attending KU or not violating KU policy, and as immature students are killing themselves and others while underaged drinking, KU should do something. As the critics of the new policy have offered no suggested changes to the current failed policy, KU should implement their new policy.

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "You do seem to be saying 'yes, if there's a public interest benefit' involved, but no otherwise. But are the laws and our rights that fluid, that situational?"

Yes, all laws are situational and fact driven and are enacted to further public policy objectives. But this is a policy of KU and not the law. This is a bona fide effort to address the obvious problem of underaged drinkers acting immaturely and killing and injuring themselves and others. As the critics of the new policy have offered no suggested changes to the current failed policy, KU should implement their new policy.

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "I thought there was a reason why that blindfold was on the lady holding the scales?"

Well it is not to ignore obvious violations of the law nor to avoid seeing the obvious carnage on campus. Nor does it indicate your mom and dad should be blindfolded. Anyone who is this scared of what mommy or daddy finds out needs to grow up a bunch!

beatrice (Anonymous) says… "Sig, I'm actually surprised to see you in favor of such an obvious “nanny-state” policy."

This policy imposes no additional restriction on behaviour so no increase in the nanny state. If your point is no one likes a tattle-tale, your point is well taken. Tough beans, KU is going to rat you out to mommy and daddy! Oh, The Horror! No matter what your age if you are so afraid of what your parents think just how adult are you really?

Sigmund 6 years ago

What "should" KU do? If I were making the policy I would suspend those in violation of the policy for the semester and I would notify only those financing the students education. KU won't do that because that might cost too much in tuition dollars and hurt the revenues of Downtown Lawrence Bars and Liquor Stores Inc. We need every dime in sales tax revenues to fund empty electric biofuel wind solar powered buses to save the planet bursting into flames if Al Gore as much as farts. Better a few students kill themselves and others than they stop borrowing thousands of dollars to go to KU and party! To pretend we are concerned we will tell their parents who will also pretend they care.

Tammie Bryant 6 years ago

Is KU breaking the law by not reporting the possession or drinking to the police?

notajayhawk 6 years ago

Sigmund (Anonymous) says…

"OK I'll address it squarely."

Thanks. I already got that you're in favor of the KU policy. I was asking a broader question. You're saying in general that it's okay for some authority (be it a college administration, a police department, whoever) to make a special effort to notify the family member(s) of an adult violator? Or only when there's a public interest benefit? That, say, a non-student picked up for public intoxication in a Lawrence city park should have his parents in Minnesota called?

"Yes, all laws are situational and fact driven and are enacted to further public policy objectives."

So would you say that warrantless wiretapping of suspected terrorists, or even torture, would be allowable depending on the situation? Just curious.

"Well it is not to ignore obvious violations of the law nor to avoid seeing the obvious carnage on campus. Nor does it indicate your mom and dad should be blindfolded. Anyone who is this scared of what mommy or daddy finds out needs to grow up a bunch!"

Well, you'd know more about this than I do, I presume, but I was under the impression that the blindfold symbolized that everyone was equal under the law - that people were not going to be treated differently based on whether they belonged to this group or that group.

So if the protection of young students acting foolishly and the public welfare is the concern, why only notify the parents when the violation occurs on campus?

And incidentally, after looking again at the new policy as described in the LJW ("parents and legal guardians will be notified when: ... a student is referred for a second-level alcohol assessment"), I'm starting to think the policy DOES violate 42CFR.

Sigmund 6 years ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "So would you say that warrantless wiretapping of suspected terrorists, or even torture, would be allowable depending on the situation? Just curious."

Give me a break we are talking about telling mommy and daddy not hooking batteries to genitals. There is no equivalency and comparison is absurd.

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "Well, you'd know more about this than I do, I presume, but I was under the impression that the blindfold symbolized that everyone was equal under the law - that people were not going to be treated differently based on whether they belonged to this group or that group."

All similarly situated person are being treated equally under this policy. This doesn't mean college students caught violating KU policy are to be treated like terror suspects nor vice versa. Blind justice suggest only determination of innocence or guilt should be made without bias or prejudice, not that we should ignore facts or be blind to reality. Once that occurs (you violated) the blindfold can come off.

Why should anyone give any weight to your opinion of the legality of the KU policy (now that you are "starting to think") as opposed to those at KU who are charged with studying the policy, the law, and the facts when your arguments are little more than over the top hyperbolic absurd comparisons of the angst filled teenager caught coming home after curfew.

jafs 6 years ago

If they are legal adults, they should be treated as legal adults.

If they are minors, they should be treated as such.

If the school wants to do something about this, they can notify police and let the system work, or they could suspend/expel students for this behavior.

Alternatively, they could make substance abuse counseling mandatory for students caught using alcohol/drugs, and suspend/expel students who don't attend.

nota,

I'm not sure that's true about health departments notifying spouses - it's been a while, but back when I was tested for AIDS (just a precautionary measure), it was anonymous.

I would argue that the police should in fact notify the spouse - it can take up to six months for AIDS to show up in blood work, and there's no guarantee the husband would even get tested, as well.

notajayhawk 6 years ago

Sigmund (Anonymous) says…

"Give me a break we are talking about telling mommy and daddy not hooking batteries to genitals. There is no equivalency and comparison is absurd."

In terms of severity, obviously. Which is why I asked the question, in response to your contention that "ALL laws are situational" [emphasis mine]. So apparently all of them are not, in your opinion. I recognize that the two are at opposite ends of a spectrum. But at what point along that continuum is the line drawn? And is that line fixed? And who decides - you?

"All similarly situated person are being treated equally under this policy. This doesn't mean college students caught violating KU policy are to be treated like terror suspects nor vice versa."

No, they're not. And thanks for trying to use the terrorist example as a diversion, but that wasn't the comparison I used in my post. I asked why it's okay to notify the parents of a student who violates the alcohol and drug policy ON campus if they don't do so when the violation occurs OFF campus. If, as you say, the policy is justified for the sake of the student's safety and the public welfare, exactly what difference does it make on which side of the street the transgression took place?

"Why should anyone give any weight to your opinion of the legality of the KU policy (now that you are “starting to think”) as opposed to those at KU who are charged with studying the policy, the law, and the facts when your arguments are little more than over the top hyperbolic absurd comparisons of the angst filled teenager caught coming home after curfew."

Well, I've been increasingly less than impressed with your own opinion on the legality of issues; speaking of absurdities, I find it interesting that an attorney espouses the view that the legal code is situational - well, some of the legal code - well, sometimes... But the fact that assuming the administrators who came up with this policy performed exhaustive legal research into the nuances of the applicable statutes (especially since those statutes are so situational and all) is a leap of faith.

And I daresay I'm more acquainted than you with 42CFR and other statutes and regulations which govern the confidentiality of substance abuse-related information, being as how I have to be familiar with their provisions, understand them, and comply with them on a daily basis. Actually, there is no question that the policy violates those provisions, the only question is whether KU is bound by them. He might lose, but a good attorney would be able to make a case.

notajayhawk 6 years ago

jafs (Anonymous) says…

"I'm not sure that's true about health departments notifying spouses - it's been a while, but back when I was tested for AIDS (just a precautionary measure), it was anonymous."

They don't notify anyone that you were tested. And I'm not sure about over here, but in Missouri, when you test positive for an STD, they have you name your recent partner(s) who may have been affected.; they then give you a little card you're supposed to give them, but I'm pretty sure they contact them directly if they don't show up and present the card within a certain time period.

"I would argue that the police should in fact notify the spouse - it can take up to six months for AIDS to show up in blood work, and there's no guarantee the husband would even get tested, as well."

The problem is, it's not definite that even if the husband did contract an STD he would necessarily infect the wife. In my business we have a duty to warn that allows us to breach a patient's confidentiality. If an HIV+ patient tells me he's planning to have unprotected sex with person 'X,' I still can not breach his confidentiality and warn 'X,' since that is not considered imminent danger.

dedicatedtomyjob 6 years ago

esj2003 (Anonymous) says…

Don't write novellas. No one reads them. The only way notifying the parents should be considered is if the parents pay that student's tuition. Even then, I'm not sold its ethical.

just because you dont like to read other peoples opinions dosent mean that you have the right to tell them that they have to limit how long they take to say/ type them. if you dont want to read a "novel" or "essay" then skip it and get over yourself.

jafs 6 years ago

nota,

Really?

That seems completely absurd to me - the risk of an unknowing person catching a fatal disease should outweigh privacy concerns.

Of course, if everyone insisted on practicing safe sex, it wouldn't be an issue, I guess.

However, when one is married and expects one's spouse to be faithful, one has a reasonable expectation that one doesn't need to use condoms, I would think.

When the husband has sex with a prostitute, that expectation is diminished, and the wife has a right to know.

Just my two cents.

Sigmund 6 years ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… "And I daresay I'm more acquainted than you with 42CFR and other statutes and regulations which govern the confidentiality of substance abuse-related information, being as how I have to be familiar with their provisions, understand them, and comply with them on a daily basis"

Possibly, so I called a friend who also works in the area. It was their opinion that conviction for Minor In Possession (or similar violation of KU policy) is not "substance abuse related information" that would be subject to confidentiality requirements. Records of violations of the law aren't related to treatment or medical records and have little to know protection. Get convicted of DUI it is public infor, go to treatment and it is confidential (although the fact you were ordered to go is public).

Sigmund 6 years ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says… “And I daresay I'm more acquainted than you with 42CFR and other statutes and regulations which govern the confidentiality of substance abuse-related information, being as how I have to be familiar with their provisions, understand them, and comply with them on a daily basis”

Possibly, so I called a friend who also works in the area. It was their opinion that conviction for Minor In Possession (or similar violation of KU policy) is not “substance abuse related information” that would be subjected to confidentiality requirements. Violations of the law aren't related to treatment nor medical records and any records of conviction have little to no protection. Get convicted of DUI and it is public information, however go to treatment and those records are confidential (although the fact you were ordered by a judge to go is public).

notajayhawk 6 years ago

Sigmund (Anonymous) says…

"It was their opinion that conviction for Minor In Possession (or similar violation of KU policy) is not “substance abuse related information” that would be subjected to confidentiality requirements. Violations of the law aren't related to treatment nor medical records and any records of conviction have little to no protection."

Which is why I was referring to the provision in this policy that involves referring the student to a 'second-level' alcohol assessment, not to the violation itself. By 'second-level' one would assume it is an assessment beyond the one all students are required to complete as a matter of course.

Your friend is correct that the violation itself is not covered by the provisions of 42CFR. If it was, we wouldn't be able to publish arrest or convictions for DUI's. But assessment and referral for treatment IS covered by 42CFR. If the parental notification mentions that their child is being referred for further assessment, that would likely be violating 42CFR. If it doesn't specifically mention the referral, a lot would depend on whether there is a reasonable expectation that the parent knew that was included in the policy.

As I said, it's not a slam dunk anyway. It would be a stretch (although, as I said, a case could be made) to say KU is required to follow the provisions. It would depend on a number of factors. They'd have to be the ones providing the assessment (e.g. at the counseling center). The department performing the assessment would have to be an entity that holds itself out to the public as a provider of such services (the counseling center's website makes no mention of such services, but having a brochure in the lobby that includes substance abuse counseling as part of their services would do). And federal money they receive would have to be related in some way to those services (e.g. if they receive a grant for drug and alcohol prevention programs, which they likely do).

The fact that a DUI offender is ordered to treatment is exempted for several reasons. The court is not the provider of the services. And, despite the fact that it's often thrown around that someone was ordered to treatment, that's not technically true. Courts can't order someone to be treated per se. The can order an evaluation and for the offender to comply with the recommendations from that evaluation. Yes, I'm aware that court orders and probation/parole requirements often include a provision to 'complete a treatment program' or some such, but in reality they usually can't do that. I'm more familiar with Missouri's statutes on that subject, since that's where I work, but again, they are only authorized by statute to order an evaluation. And the difference with KU ordering one is that 'second-level' proviso, which implies that the person has a problem with substance abuse.

Sigmund 6 years ago

Oh, ok. So after thinking about it you think KU notification of parents of infractions of school policy does not violate student rights. You, I, KU, and my friend all agree.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.