Dattebayo wrote:Some schools have rigorous charters for their social fraternities that do not allow for official frat sponsored parties involving alcohol, but they do it anyway because social frats have little value other than for drinking (or if your major is business, lol), IMO... This is mostly for on-campus frats, but there are other rules for those associated with the school but not on campus as well. I can only imagine that they were trying to keep their charter from being revoked by dropping the guy off at the hospital instead of hanging around. Proof that alcohol in extreme excess makes people really damn stupid...
This couldn't be further from the truth. EVERY national fraternity (social or professional) prohibits drinking for under age people, and all of them abide by what's called FIPG risk management.. Google it if you care. There's lots of guidelines like you can only have a 6-pack per night, drinking needs to be monitored by a sober individual, so on and so forth. Having a common source of alcohol, be it multiple cases in a place where anyone can get to it, kegs, handles of booze, etc, are ALL prohibited.
Of course, having those regulations in place really means nothing, because at the end of the day regardless of if their house has greek letters on it or not, it was still a house full of unsupervised kids with access to alcohol..... When I was in school, there were far more SEVERE cases of people going to the hospital due to alcohol from people who lived in off campus apartments, or even people that lived in the dorms.
You're kind of right (by accident) by saying that on-campus fraternities kind of play by different rules than off-campus fraternities, but that's simply because they own their own property and the school does not have legal authority to appear unannounced on property that isn't theirs.
Not to be anecdotal, but my fraternity was and typically has been mostly engineers. My Jr. year the valedictorian of the whole school was in my fraternity, and our average GPA was right around 3.0 my entire career, and again most of us were engineers or scientists.
CLEARLY these kids were not looking out for the good of the fraternity by ditching one of their brothers. Realistically, if the kid had died they would have been in a FAR WORSE situation, both personally and in the fraternity, by ditching him rather than staying with him. Having a Minor Consumption charge is a heck of a lot better than being legally tied to someone who died.
Here's what I get upset about... These guys that ditched their friend at the hospital are sh1tty friends.. These folks just so happened to be in a fraternity. In my opinion, the two shouldn't be linked because they really aren't connected. Even if you wanted to claim that they were connected, it should only reflect bad on that group of guys at that school, not all fraternities in general.