This is the Shawnee Mission policy that has been in effect for many years. What do you think about it? If you do not agree with it, explain why and what you think would be a better policy.

HECK NO ITS NOT RIGHT!!!! Let them do anything they want to. We all know that training rules are "old school" and really don't mean anything. We all know that school sports really have nothing to do with schools anymore and that it is no longer special to represent your school and community; no sacrifice is necessary--ESPECIALLY if it means giving up something YOU like to do! or, <GASP>, committing yourself to something bigger than yourself.

Sorry for the rant. Just get so tired of people agreeing to rules and then being appalled and outraged when they are actually enforced -- on them.

If the kid and parent signed the agreement then why is this even an issue? Extracurricular athletics are NOT a required part of the student's education.

I personally think, that is a little harsh but I do like the fact that it is defined very clearly what the consequences are. To be out for the season for a 1st offense that seems more like a 2nd offense, if everyone was not given a second chance where would alot of us be today. A first offense to me would be missing 2 competitions and not being allowed to practice during this time along with written and verbal apologies to coaches, teammates, school admins and parents. Nothing harder in life than admitting you were wrong and then facing the people and apologizing for it but it does make a much stronger person. This is my personal opinion.

I agree with Egg. What is the true message being sent here when someone signs a contract and then doesn't think the rules apply to them. It is better that kids learn the consequences of their decisions at this age than down the road when they have possibly a spouse or children counting on their decision making. If an athlete feels that he/she can not abide by the policies set forth by the team then obviously that athlete can choose not to participate and probably should not.

Check that Shawnee Mission policy. I think its 28 days out for the first offense if its in season (different punishment if not in season) and then out for the whole season on the second offense.

The policy as stated in the opening post on this topic is direct from the SMSD policy. The link is below:

http://www.smesports.com/04-05DrugAlcoholContractX.pdf

The 2nd chance everyone keeps talking about is in effect the next season. If you are in violation during the fall season, you can again participate during the winter season, etc. Even with a 2nd violation, you are out for 1 year, but can come back the following year. The only time there is no 2nd chance is is you are a Senior, you don't have a next year.

First of all I want to say that I take any alcohol violations serious at any age. My sister was killed in a head-on collision by a drunk driver two years ago so I don't take any of this lightly. I also belive if you read, understand and sign a school policy then you know the expectations and should live by those rules (or work to change them). In most cases, these policies are a "no win," either 'too strick' or 'not strick enough.' I believe this; in some cases taking sports away from kids for the entire (or rest) of the season may be the worst option. All you've essentially done is free up more time for them to have nothing to do and be bored which usually leads to trouble (kids + free time + boredom usually = trouble). There are so many busted-up families today that very often the only quality relationships and discipline these kids have is through their coaches and teammates. Does the punishment fit the crime? That can always be debated. Is a suspension the only punishment, or are there other consequences? One last thought, although extracurricular activies are indeed NOT a required part of an education, they are one of the most important educational elements. Sports and competition prepares you for many real life situations (i.e. goal setting, hard work, overcoming fears, failures, making and handling mistakes, relationships with coaches/bosses, relationship with teammates/co-workers, navigating the politics, etc). I could go on. Just want to share the point that I use what I learned through sports and competition everyday. With all appologies to my math teacher, I haven't had to bust out an algebra formula to solve a problem in a long time. Not trying to say anyone is right or wrong here. Greats posts on this topic for a good healthy exchange of ideas. In the long run, I believe we all want what's best for the kids. After all, they may very well be the ones making decisions on our well-being tomorrow.

Coach M.

DJWcoach,

I wish to extend my sympathy for the tragic loss of your sister. I know you and her will be in all our thoughts and prayers. Too many people have lost friends and loved ones due to tragic accidents involving alcohol. That is a major reason why this is such an important topic.

Red Storm and Egg, I definitely agree with you that a student should be held strictly accountable to an agreement that the student and/or parent signs such as the one the Shawnee Mission School District has made a requirement for their student athletes to be eligible to participate in extracurricular activities. There is no controversy on that issue in my opinion and I think most people would agree with that.

This topic is asking us whether this zero tolerance policy of Shawnee Mission on a first time alcohol use in season is proper punishment or does it go too far. My first thoughts on the issue were that it was probably too severe for a first offense. But I am starting to change my mind. The use of alcohol my a teenager is potentially a very severe problem that can have devasting and tragic consequences for the offender and others. We all know how vulnerable teenagers are to accidents in their early years of driving. We also know that when you add alcohol into the mix that the dangers of driving for a teenager increase significantly.

I believe a proper punishment along with being a good corrective instrument for the offender needs to be a good preventive tool for others. That is why I am changing my mind on this Shawnee Mission policy for first time alcohol users in season. Due to the potential serious consequences both to the offender and others, I think this a good policy because I do believe it can prevent many young people from using alcohol. I would like to see the KSHSAA consider this Shawnee Mission rule for all schools under its jurisdiction.

as stated in the derby topic i dont believe this policy really prevents kids from drinking. i think kids drink thinking they wont get caught. once they get caught, that can change their mindset they they are untouchable. but, if they are done for the season, what incentive do they have to stop? i am personally opposed to this policy because i do not think "dropping the hammer" on kids should be the goal of punishments. i think changing behavior should be the goal and i think a less severe penalty offering a second chance is better for everyone and is just as likely(if not more) to change the behavior of the student.

The above quote came from another thread that I choose to not contribute to anymore. They may be the best comments on the whole thing as of recent. I wonder how many beer commercials will we watch on television tonight, especially with the Super Bowl? How about inappropriate behavior on television period? How many of our kids wrestlers have observed their kids or HS coaches drinking at various events over the years? How many parents have double standards? How many coaches violate their own standards of decency placed on their athletes by smoking or using chew, or any other form of team policy? How many of us have double standard of one violation of team rules being more important than others?

Another person made comment about checking on their kids or at places like myspace, how many parents have done so? I agree. I am concerned, we as parents and educators are practicing a double standard and it is no wonder many of our youth get into trouble. It is easy to get on here and place blame at a team or individuals when in reality those making the posts may have issues on their own and couldn’t be a role model to a cockroach at the trash dump. It is easy to throw blame around, and sometimes that blame is deserved. But I wonder how much blame do we as adults deserve over letting things get so out of hand? I’m not taking a morality trip here, but I am saying I firmly believe we as parents, and adults in general deserve some of the blame because these types of things are as much our fault as it is the fault of the youth. For anyone who doesn’t believe this type of thing, as well as promiscuous sexual activity is not a rampant problem, you simply have no clue. Not only all sports are facing this problem, but so are all students. With the behavior of some of our parents, coaches, and whoever, is it any wonder? The truth is, while many of us got away with it in the past, we knew there was a price to pay, but even then, it wasn’t readily promoted on the WORLD WIDE NET. Far more are guilty of these behaviors today than yesterday. We really need to ask ourselves what we can do to better resolve these problems. While no offense is intended, the schools have never been the answer. The answer starts at home, and even sometimes with the best of intentions, kids still make mistakes. A good home cannot compete with the peer and societal pressure that exists. While it is easy to talk about what is best for a kid, maybe we need to first ask, what can we do as adults to provide a better image, and be more appropriate. Yes we are all hypocrites, but we can change our own behavior, then, and I believe only then, will we have a right to talk about what is best for the kids. Many of us say, don’t do as I do, do as I say. When we live this kind of life, and express these kinds of “truths,” we have to expect problems. When those problems occur, maybe we shouldn’t be pointing the finger nearly as much as looking into the mirror. I would hope, and I firmly believe that the kids parents and coaches in the recent events have asked themselves the questions about what more they could have done to prevent the problem. If they have answers to those questions, hopefully they apply them, an easy way out is a policy that has serious or severe consequences. I also hope that we don’t always take the easy way out, but take the way that is likely to help the athlete or youth. Personally, I know as a youth I did things I should have never done, I also know that it was very hard to get by with those things on a school sponsored event because of the strict supervision by parents and coaches that was provided.

Let me ask these questions. On school sponsored trips, either for club or athletic purposes, how many parents or coaches will on occasion have a beer? How many will smoke a cigarette? How many will have a dip, even while coaching? How many will make a sexual comment? I could go on, but you likely get my point.

Voice of Reason, good points. I am reminded of a time when our now college-age son was in high school. Fortunately, our home was the hang out for his group of friends. We encouraged this and were glad that we knew his friends and saw them come and go from the house. We live in Johnson County so it is not like the small town I grew up in where my parents knew everyone in the school. Anyway, his friends often asked our son why we (the parents) never went out of town with the point being that they could not have an unsupervised party at our home. We answered that we had already done our "traveling" before we had kids and now we were focused on being parents. In the 4 years of having a large group nearly every weekend, we had 2 instances of alcohol in the house. These were easy to catch because we do not drink and could smell it 3 rooms away. In one case, the drinker was of legal age, but was escorted out of our home because he had no business hanging out with teens and in the other case; I drove him home to his parents. After this, my sons told me their friends were too afraid to come to our house with alcohol. This is a good thing.

One rule of our house is that you always come in and tell the parents you are home, regardless of the time. My parents had this rule with me over forty years ago and it just seemed natural to follow when I had teens. My younger son asked why we had this rule and then commented that it was a good one because we would always know if they had been smoking or drinking by the smell.

I am not saying we have not made mistakes, but we try to avoid those we can anticipate. We have very few rules: wear your seatbelt, don't drink, smoke or do drugs; basic safety concerns. We try not to sweat the other lesser rebellious ways of teens.

wrestle007, LancerM who recently wrestled at a Shawnee Mission high school disagrees with you as to how effective this policy is at deterring Shawnee Mission athletes from drinking. Here is part of what he posted on that issue in another topic.



I agree with LancerM. I think that if wrestling is important enough for a high school athlete that signing this Shawnee Mission agreement before the season and knowing that it is going to be enforced would prevent a dedicated wrestler or athlete of any sport from using alcohol. I believe it has already had that effect for many athletes in the Shawnee Mission area over the years.

i know this isnt really the derby kids arent this discussion, but they are the easiest example, so i will use them. do you think those kids thought, "hey, lets have this party and drink, and if we get caught its not big deal cuz we'll only be suspended a week." or do you think they thought, "we won't get caught". kids who drink dont believe they will get caught. every high school signs an agreement of whatever their policy is. everyone is going to sign it, those who have made the personal decision not to drink would still not drink without the policy. for what its worth i grew up in the KC area(Olathe) and new many kids from the shawnee mission area. i can't say i saw much of a difference in drinking there then olathe, blue valley, kck, or anywhere else for that matter. no i don't have the experience there as LancerM, but i would assert those he knew that didn't drink still would not have drank had the policy said, two week suspension for example.

A lot of kids probably drink "thinking they won't get caught" or thinking administrators/coaches/parents "will just let it slide" because too many people do just let it slide. If every kid who got busted had the hammer dropped on them -- whether state championship contender or JV freshman -- then it'd make some kids think twice. Not all. But some.
I went to a high school where athletes in the school's biggest sport had slaps on the wrist for first and second offenses while other sports cracked the whip on their kids. Most of the time the kids in the spotlight sport drank and took their chances because they knew their punishment for getting caught was sitting out a half or not getting to start for a game or two.
And I agree, why have contracts if they are not upheld? What message does that send? For a quick example of this, look at who started on the offensive line for the Colts in the Super Bowl last night. Former SM Northwest player Ryan Lilja. Remember the uproar back when he was a senior in high school? He got busted for drinking a beer at a party. He'd signed a contract, as had his parents, so he was done for the season. His parents tried to sue to get him back on the team, but the court said "you signed a contract." Lilja lost his DI scholarship, played JUCO ball for two years, went to K-State and still made it to the NFL.
Punishing the kid doesn't ruin his life unless the kid lets it. And if that happens, that's the kid's own darn fault.

Since life seems to be an instance that all seem to want to use as an analogy for this discussion, then we must be honest about how life is not fair.
1. Contracts are constantly nullified or voided;ie, how corporations are backing out of their commitments to retired employees.
2.Some individual's have made mistakes and often gotten away with them based on their family name or who their parents may know.
3. Slavery was abolished after the Civil War, but it took another 100 years for civil rights. Jim Crowe laws in the South were often more destructive to the ex-slaves, tha slavery itself.
4. Children today face a much more rigidly structured environment in school, due in part to the fact that many parents work too much and need someone else to raise their kids. Children today take countless tests, face rigid rules that does not allow for failure or the ability to make amends, and children realize at this age that many of the people before them did the same things they are attempting today and turned out just fine.
5. While all of the above points are just a rant by War Veteran turned school teacher, I just wished to point out various arguements that could be brought forth by the children reading these postings.


I am dedicated to educating our children, but sometimes honesty is forgotten in the equation when dealing with them. We as educators and coaches often speak openly and honestly when behind closed doors, but speak in another way when talking to our adminstrators and boards. Why? Because we often have a clearer understanding of the nuiances that life operates on.
Should we be firm or lax on enforcement? That is a difficult for an individual to truly discuss without knowing the kid or the instance of violation in an up close and personnel way.
I do believe in honor and living by a code with the highest standards, but I also believe in having compassion and temperence when dealing with our young children, who are often just starting to learn who they are themselves.

It is against the law for anyone under the age of 21 to consume alcohol.

wow bystander, that totally added to the conversation

bystander,
It is also against the law to go 31 mph in a 30 mph speed zone. Do we lock them up and throw away the key for that also? I think there is a place for disciplinary action but it seems that our schools are trying to act as probabtion officers and social case workers rather than educators. Suspending a kid for violating school policy is more detrimental to them then keeping them in the class room. I know some schools suspend kids that violate the alcohol policy from activites such as SADD. How much sense does that make????? I am all for disciplinary action when a student violates the school policy but I can guarantee you that most of the individuals that enforce these penalties on the students have violated many, many policies in their day.

I totally disagree with you on this. I think the severity of the punishment absolutely can have a deterrent effect on the actions of student athletes. Since you brought it up as an example, I think that this recent episode involving the Derby team would not have happened at all or at least several of the people who committed the infraction would not have used alcohol, if they had at the start of the season signed a zero tolerance agreement on alcohol, tobacco and drug usage like the Shawnee Mission policy agreement and they believed it would be enforced. I believe that the thought of being thrown off the wrestling team for the rest of the season would have definitely stopped more than one of them from using alcohol that day. I believe wrestling is too important for several of them involved. I just do not accept the idea that the severity of punishment does not have an influence on preventing people from committing an undesirable action.

Of course you would prefer that a person not commit the undesirable action for a positive reason and not just because they fear the punishment, but that will not always happen so society has to have consequences in place to deter certain offenses.

first of all i'm sure they signed some type of agreement at the beginning of the season agreeing to the school policy regarding substance abuse and usually that they won't use them is included. so if they didn't adhere to one signed document what makes you think they'd adhere to another?

i think you are thinking like an adult would think in that situation. when you say "wrestling is to important for several of them involved" that statement assumes they thought of the consequences before they acted as a responsible adult would do. we aren't dealing with adults here. i don't believe they considered the consequences before they acted, had they considered the consequences before they acted i believe at least some of them wouldn't have done it given what the consequences are. do you really think nathan furches thought all of this was worth it? i mean, i know how most high school kids think and i flat out do not believe that the thought process was, "well, if we get caught we're only out for a week so lets just do it anyways because even if we do get caught, hey its worth it for the good time." i mean, someone used speeding as an example, when you speed you don't think about how much the ticket would cost you. you think about how many people speed and don't get caught.