Isn't it time we lowered the drinking age in this country? France has a lower drinking age and less binge drinking among their teenagers. Wine is part of the culture and people have a healthier attitude toward it. We should bring the legal drinking age back to 18 in this country. If you're old enough to vote and die for your country, you can have a can of beer or a glass of wine.

Posted by dingus5 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If you are 18 years old and in the 10th grade or 11th grade, you got a problem bigger than the drinking age. Not to mention this is not about the drinking age, but about following rules. The rules are for everyone, not just the "bad kids". If you know Dr. Brewer, you would have no doubt that he and his staff made the policies and procedures clear to all these students before they went on the trip. Kids make mistakes and they need to learn from them. If the consequences are overturned what type of message does that send to every other student in Loudoun? Why do we always look to blame someone else when our kids screw up?

Posted by volleyball203 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Once again the parents attempt to thwart the authority of the schools. Once again we hear "The rules do not apply to My Child" cry rear its ugly head. Keep teaching our children that there is no such thing as respect for authority. Keep defending their bad behavior as if there should never be any consequences. What makes these children so special that they would not have to follow the clear instructions given in advance of the trip? They broke the rules and the standard punishment was doled out. That is how a system is supposed to work. That is what makes a society civilized. That is what I want for my children's future.

Posted by salm624 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 11:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I grew up in a big Italian family in New England. All the children had a little sip of wine w Sunday dinner - they still do. It's in a glass that's barely a thimble. None of us became alcoholics. I would have loved to hear the principal tell my mother I was suspended from school for that!! It IS a culture thing. And just like most things, if you allow children to taste, they more than likely won't overindulge. It takes away the whole "I have to have it b/c I'm not supposed to" temptation.

Posted by ms1234 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm losing faith in the administration to which we entrust the responsibility of educating our children.
.
Zero tolerance is a cop-out of an alcohol policy.
.
.

Posted by AFF3 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ms1234, I also grew up in a big Italian family (it wasn't Christmas without bracciole and stuffed calamari) and I know what you're saying about wine. But the rule is pretty clear: No alcohol on a school trip. None. Zilch. Nada. No exceptions. And they told the kids this before they went. My Dad would have laughed at the rule about vino, but if they told him I'd be suspended if I had any, he'd pointedly tell me "make sure you don't. Capiche?"

Posted by hphokie (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 12:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm not saying these students didn't break the rules (they did). I'm saying that these blanket "zero tolerance" policies, which apparently apply to students essentially on vacation in France, are a bit much.

Posted by dingus5 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 12:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

But it wasn't vacation. It was a school trip. My daughter went to London with school over the New Year's holiday. They were very clear about alcohol consumption, not only for the students, but also for the parent chaperones.

Posted by teden (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

But they weren't on vacation, they were on a school-sponsored trip in which rules and limitations were clearly stipulated and expressed. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Posted by ronin718 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The picture attached to the article is hilarious. Can we see more of it?

Posted by mazman128 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The punishment seems rather extreme to me, but the whole zero tolerance thing has been punishing ordinary, sometimes A+ kids for minor infractions for a long time. It needs to be reviewed.

Posted by GenuineRisk (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 2:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What this article didn't say was that the alcohol policy was not discussed with parents and students prior to the trip. In fact a chaperon told a parent privately that she would not punish a student for drinking. Also,not all students who violated the alcohol policy were punished, even though administrators knew about these students. There are many other factors involved(such as interrogating students in the middle of the night, removing the phones from their rooms)- read the Loudoun Times article.

Posted by bunkybear (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

People wonder why we have discipline issues in the schools? If the parents question the authority of school administrators how do we expect our children to respect it? It's not an issue of whether you agree with the policy or not. The policy was communicated appropriately, the rules were knowingly violated and the punishment was administered accordingly. Lesson learned, case closed.

Posted by mattjack (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 4:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Of course that is assuming we have all the facts, which according to bunkybear we may not....

Posted by mattjack (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 4:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Folks, Rules are Rules, if you do not like them then change them. But before you knowingly break them. Each one of those students, and their parents knew the rule, and the penalty (it is clearly spelled out in the student handbooks each parent and student has been reviewing, agreeing to each and every year). If you say now you did not know its no ones fault execept yours. not the schools. Each of these students did the crime. they should do the time.
Editorial comment: we spend way too much time saving our children from the logical consiquence of thier actions, as a result they feel they can do anything and mom (or dad) will always be there to save them.

Posted by beenaroundhere40ormore (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Question Authority? Absolutely! teachers and administrators are not perfect either but they aren't forced to accept zero-tolerance policies (or subjected to them) the way parents and students are. If we do not have the ability to question policy and complain about implementation then schools are dictatorships and children have no rights or freedom.
.
Respect for due process doesn't mean that one is unable to appeal a decision or speak out against an unjust process.

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 5:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ten day suspension for a taste of French wine? Totally worth it!

Posted by dingus5 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It is interesting that the policy is only unjust after the fact. That Policy, ie rule has been in place when these students were in 1st grade. Hasn't been a problem until thier son or daughter decided to break it.

Posted by beenaroundhere40ormore (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 5:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I just cant understand why it's acceptable for a 18 or 19 years old kid to go to war, but not acceptable to drink alcohol.

Posted by guer_j (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Times article:
http://www.loudountimes.com/news/2009/ma...

The students were drinking wine in their hotel room. This wasn't a case of "when in Rome do as the Romans." They weren't eating dinner with a French family where wine was served and they drank it. They did it on their own.

Posted by yaddayadda (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

to beenaroundhere40ormore: Legal processes don't allow you to complain about something unless you are affected by the rule. You need "standing." Someone who doesn't drink alcohol can't contest a zero tolerance rule against drinking alcohol. You have to break a rule and be punished for it before you can contest it. That is why we can have tons of laws on the books that are outdated but because no one is being proscecuted for them they really aren't valid laws at all. If you have recently read the student handbook you'd see that kind of legalism at play. Students have to test if an unjust law is enforced as the first step in getting unjust policy changed.
.
(An example: In Florida they want to keep a rule on the books that requires children to stand for the Pledge even though it cannot be enforced because a judge has ruled it is unconstitutional. However the VFW and other social conservatives are forcing the school board to keep the unenforceable rule as a political statement.)
.
These type of shenanigans is why we must teach children that there is a civic duty to test rules that appear stupid--it might be an unjust assault on their rights.

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 7:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

just because a rule seems unreasonable doesn't mean you don't have to follow it. and if you think a consequence is too harsh- DON'T BREAK THE RULE. if you kid broke a rule- your kid should be punished, PERIOD. as parents we should TEACH kids that you follow rules or suffer consequences, not aww, poor baby- the rule is stupid, or the punishment is unfair- let's wine ahem- WHINE about about. let's raise law abiding citizens not a bunch of cry babies who are coddled when they are caught.

Posted by tttrenee (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you for all the diverse comments. I, in theory, agree with those who believe "rules are rules!" What you need to know about this story is that MANY other students on this trip broke policy 8-35 by drinking, possessing, and distributing alcohol. Dr. Brewer knows this. The only reason the parents are protesting is because they do not understand why the school gave amnesty to some students and punished others to the full extent of the policy. If you look at the sign to the right featured in the article, it says the school acted "arbitrarily." The parents want an explanation for the preferential treatment and favoritism of some students. And, if there is going to be a policy of this zero tolerance nature, then the parents want the policy applied fairly and evenly. Otherwise, the policy is a mockery and so is the authority hiding behind it.

Posted by Eileenmary3000 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 7:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To suggest that the way to address a rule you disagree with is to first break it, or violate a policy in order to give yourself standing is the height of ridiculousness. There are so many things wrong with your logic I hesitate to go into it. But what the hay,
1st. These are rules not law, Enforceable by the organization that created them only. The principal did not call the Sheriff’s office as no Laws were broken, Only LCPS rules. He had authority and the mandate to exercise it and he did.
2nd. the students and their parents agreed to the rules (Despite the fact that they may have not liked some of them) when they enrolled their children in the LCPS (the student handbook sent home each year for review, understanding, and signing.
3rd. I can make an appointment with the superintendent of schools, raise issues with the school board, talk to administrators as I desire about whatever I desire without creating standing as you suggest. I can object to any rule I desire, submit arguments for change, and if desired go up the ladder to the organization that creates, and administered the rules, (The School Board).
4th if you were to read the Loudoun Times article you would have read the following:

John Brewer, principal of Dominion High School, said he was following School Board policy when he upheld the students' suspensions. Policy 8-35 states that "students shall not possess, distribute, use or be under the influence of alcohol … while under school authority, on a school bus, on school property or at a school-sponsored activity at any time." Brewer added that the students were aware that their French trip fell under school policy.
"It was made abundantly clear to these students and parents going on the trip that violating the alcohol policy was not OK," he said.
The students on the trip had signed a code-of-conduct agreement prior to leaving, which stated the experience was to be alcohol-free,

The parents also appealed the decision and were ruled against

This to me is a clear case of parents not allowing their child to suffer the logical consequence of their own informed choice therefore denying them the chance to learn to be responsible for their own actions.

Posted by beenaroundhere40ormore (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 7:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

ummm exscuse me, but I dont think you were there...i happen to be one of the students on the trip, and the way our suspension was handled was completely out-of-line. We aren't upset about our punishment, yeah it is a little bit over the top for a sip of wine, but we're upset for the way we were treated. We were forced to rat out each other and weren't allowed communication with our parents. Our statements were coerced in the middle of the night and we were not allowed communication with other people because the school was afraid of it getting out. Furthermore, we were not allowed to stay in our rooms, which we privately payed for, and were also refused the oppurtunity to tour Paris the next day, which we also payed for. On top of that, when we came back to the States, our chaperones who told us they "loved us and would support us through this" turned against us and even lied to our parents about the situation to make it sound like we were the real criminals. This article is totally biased to the administration. How about they try hearing the students' side of the story? So I'm sorry beenaroundhere40ormore, you don't really have a right to say all this stuff when you don't even know all the details...

Posted by jwai (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 8:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No I was not there, and I am sure I do not have “All the details” however the facts remain and are clearly not in dispute.

You were aware you were breaking a rule. One you were aware of and agreed not to break
You were made aware of the penalties, and chose to admit your wrong doing; you also chose to involve your peers. (Being made aware of what could happen should you not step up and take responsibility for your actions is certainly not a version of water boarding).
I am not sure I would have trusted you to return to your rooms unsupervised in the same situation, and allowing your tour on the final day these all fall under the same logic.and I also would have limited your contact with the other student.

Your version, (I.e. the students version) could only affect my opinion if.
You did not drink, after being clearly aware you were violating the rules. It is no more complicated than that.

Posted by beenaroundhere40ormore (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 9:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The public school is government for children.
.
Those who think rules are absolute should imagine themselves subject to these overly broad rules: "Conduct which may constitute cause for removal from school shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following [22 bulleted items, and] other sufficient cause." (essentially a blank check to allow the school to expell a student for any reason even if the conduct was not specifically prohibited.)(p 26 Student Rights and Responsibilities)
.
Or, this rule that students cannot have a toy weapon or look-alike weapons that "could" induce fear in another person. Common sense doesn't apply in rules like this because no student can know what someone else "could" fear. Since the rules aren't clear the only way to know is to make one's best guess with the stress of not knowing if one will be punished for misinterpreting.
.
School attendence is compulsory and there is very little choice other than the public schools for all but the rich. How many of you are prepared to homeschool a child in Calculus or Chemistry? Thus homeschooling K-12 is also not a viable option for all but the most talented and underemployed parents.
.
I never sign the acknowledgement page for school rules because agreeing to be subjected to open-ended rules interpreted on the fly by teachers and administrators based on whether they have a personal affinity for a student is not my idea of fairness. Since the school refuses to sign and acknowledge my edited version that is fairer to parents and students, we remain at an impasse and my children, remaining out of trouble, have not forced the issue.

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 11:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Were these teachers suspended from school for 10 days WITHOUT PAY? They were responsible for these group of kids. All this for sipping a little wine in France? Maybe the French Teachers and the administration should pick a visit to a french bread bakery here locally if they can't keep tabs on kids on a trip.

Posted by purplehayes3 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 11:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

and JWAI, it seems you and your friends have learned the most important thing from this trip....always stay young at heart, stand strong to your beliefs and learn from your mistakes.....those teachers are just as much at fault as you and they sold you kids out! You broke a rule. It seems you kids are dealing with it much better than the adults. both broke the rules...best of luck and hang in there!

Posted by purplehayes3 (anonymous) on May 27, 2009 at 11:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It's very simple... Read the rules, know the rules, and obey the rules... Don't blame others for your mistakes, take ownership...

One more thing, if you were one of the students caught drinking, I'd skip the France trip next year...

Tips from ASA...

Posted by thomas.furr (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 12:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

beenaroundhere40ormore should try to challenge a school rule as being unconstitutional or unlawful in court without having a child in school and see how quick it is thrown out. Yes you have free speech rights but you don't have any leverage to force government (schools) to listen to you or to obey the constitution, state laws, or it's own rules unless you can prove standing by showing personal impact.

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 12:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The sign at the top is a joke. It should read Students Have Responsibilities Too!

Posted by sunnydog71 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have in fact challenged many school rules, some with success, some not. And it actually may come as a surprise to you; I did it by actually talking to people and not filing suit in a court of Law. By the way whether or not you or your children actually signed the agreements you receive each year (Student Handbook) you are still bound by the rules as a condition of attendance. We face rules, not laws in most of our society, from HOA’s, to community centers, and in all of our jobs. Most do not carry the rule of law but all must be followed or there are consequences to be paid. This is the price we pay to live in a society. I applaud your stance in combating unfair, or even unconstitutional or unlawful rules. However to take the stance that in order to change the rule you must first break it is beyond my understanding, of course the knee jerk reaction to everything now days is to call your lawyer so I should not be surprised. It does surprise me that so many people feel that underage drinking while engaged in a school sponsored activity is acceptable.
To the students involved, I hope this is a life lesson, yes it is unpleasant to have to suffer the consequences of your choices, but get used to it, that is how life actually works. I would not like to see my 18 year old son in the same situation but I have learned to let him suffer the logical consequences of his actions, to do other would be and I feel is not being a responsible parent. We would be raising a generation of persons who feel that if a rule or policy is inconvenient it’s ok to break it, and by the way is always ok if you do not get caught, and if you do then let’s just sue. Wait to late we have already raised at least 3 generations who feel that way.

Posted by beenaroundhere40ormore (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Good thing they did go to Holland! What part of Zero Tolerance is not clear. Home school thats the answer. Good Day.ph

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 9:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by hogfarmer55 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 10:41 a.m.

If there was not an even-handed distribution of punishment to ALL who violated the policy (which it sounds like there wasn't) then the students who were punished were unfairly prosecuted. Justice, regardless of what 40 years says, was not dispensed in this instance.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LCPS parents should stand in support of the administration's decision to suspend.
Even if nine of the ten kids don't learn a thing, the one that does could be one less drunk driver, one less alcohol poisoning case, and one MORE member of society who takes responsibilty for their mistake(s) and moves forward. I say to the suspended students: Are you going to choose to learn from this and move on, or choose to blame others for your actions?

But then again, how can you ask a kid to take responsibility when his/her parent is telling them not to?

Posted by ams40 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 12:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

These kids should be happy that the suspension is not reported on their high school transcrips or to college admissions. But I agree with the suspension. What part of "NO" do these kids not understand? They obviously knew the rules going into the trip. Parents need to realize that kids NEED to receive a consequence for their actions. Kids, by nature, want to push their limits. If they get off the hook on this, and do not learn from their mistakes, what will it be next time? It could be far worse consequences for a far worse infraction. The sooner parents learn to let their kids suffer consequenes for their actions, the sooner the kids will learn to be a productive, law-abiding citizen of our community. Who said life was fair?

Posted by luvlsbg (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well said, ams40!

Posted by luvlsbg (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 1:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think everyone using the 'rules are rules' line on this board who exceeded the speed limit this morning on the way to work should go down to the police station and have a ticket written for them. Rules are rules, and turning yourself in for breaking them is a moral imperative. Stats show that speeders cause more deaths than underage drinkers on trips in France. I hope you all sleep well at night.

Posted by permagrin (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 1:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

But school officials were clear about the district's alcohol policy in advance of the trip, Brewer said. He said that students knew they needed to follow Loudoun's rules, not France's.

The students and parents shouldn't complain about the penalties because the students were aware of the rules and chose to break them.

Posted by why6 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 1:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am a parent of a student who went on the trip. My daughter should be punished if she broke a school rule. I totally get that.

However I am not happy with the way in which the matter was handled. The Washington Post did not report that the chaperones forced the kids from their beds, ripped phones from the wall, made them sigh confessions in their nightclothes in the hotel lobby at 1.00am. Are we supposed to let school officials ride rough shod over our kids? The school chose to sanction some students and not others.
How else should we complain when the school won't acknowledge its' own mistakes??

Posted by lindholli (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 1:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

School officials were NOT clear about the alcohol rule. At meetings beforehand the French teacher urged the kids to immerse themselves in the culture. She did remind the female students to wear a T shirt over bikinis when swimming (dress code...so important)The contract and money for the trip was paid to a private company and parents filled in the permission trip themselves (in 2 cases at least) with incorrect dates. The school signed nothing.

Posted by lindholli (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 1:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It's really sad that the parents of these students do not understand Loudoun's zero-tolerance alcohol policy. "Hello...McFly!" ZERO = ZERO! Yes, the punishment fit the wine. I applaud Mr. Brewer for following through with the punishment and not being "bullied" by some students parent that thinks the rules do not apply to their child. No means no! The world is murky and ambiguous (not just a trip to France) and the decision to bring a child into this world was made. The parents of these students are not teaching "life" to their children by crying to Loudoun about a policy that was put into place for a reason. We have to follow rules. No one can run around like they want to and just do what they want to do without consequences. That may be how some of these parents run their household. Sad to say, this experience is a lesson for both the parents and students involved. I hope the parents realize their child is not as responsible as they thought. Please hold off on purchasing that brand new car. If you decide not to, please explain to your child that they must follow the driving rules in order to do so. Better that this experience of suspensions and substance abuse classes than being charged with first degree manslaughter for drinking and driving under age. If there was ever a problem with the parents and the zero tolerance policy, it should have been fought way before now. Go Loudoun!

Posted by johnson34 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

thomas.furr said "It's very simple... Read the rules, know the rules, and obey the rules"

... And that's all true, but at the same time it is the responsibility of the administration to have rules that make sense.

These students may well have failed to uphold their responsibilities, but the administration is every bit to blame for failing the students with ridiculous rules. Neither side upheld its end of the bargain in this case.

Posted by Cirrus42 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I love how some of the posters seem to want to make Loudoun a dry county. Underage drinking does not equal substance abuse and drunk driving. You have been sipping the Kool aid too long. Zero-Tolerance is lazy and ineffectual.

Posted by bschweiker (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

First of all, they are US students traveling with their highschool to a foreign country. Most highschool students are under the legal drinking age for the US which is their home country of citizenship so therefore as MINORS on a SCHOOL field trip they must abide by the law of THEIR homeland. Now if their PARENTS feel that in LOUDOuN COUNTY their MINOR aged children can go to the liquor store and or drink freely at home, then that's a problem in itself. If your child does not know how to be responsible when outside of the parent's reach that is also a home problem. I am quite pleased with the fact they are being reprimanded because this is ridiculous and unacceptable behavior. Let's say a minor student in the US was drinking and driving and hit one of these "INNOCENT" youth from Loudoun, you would want them under the jail if not sentenced to death, so stop whining because Sally and Billy have finally eaten their lunch! This so reminds me of the Senior highschool students who go to Cancun and disappear because they don't stay in groups of 2 or more, they don't hold themselves accountable for one another, and then they binge drink like it's the first and last day of their life they will ever see alcohol. Maybe now that they have consequences, they will think twice about their decisions and now realize that Mommy and Daddy cannot get them out of everything using Money or any other leverages.

Posted by ljohnson34 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What IS it with you Johnson34? Are you, AMS40 and luvlsbg being intentionally obtuse? Do you NOT see that some kids were punished and others were not? Where does the Zero tolerance policy law take us if some kids were not punished? What do you think these kids are learning? Why are you glossing over this issue in your rush to exert your holier-than-thou attitude on these parents? "Hello...MCFLY!!"?? Indeed...you have about the same intelligence as the character that uttered this phrase...

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"...as MINORS on a SCHOOL field trip they must abide by the law of THEIR homeland."

In what Country/World where YOU born?

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

ERIC 101

Thank you for your attention and reply. Your child must have been affected. Sorry you feel that underage drinking is okay. Once school is released for the year, make sure you stay up to date on the increase of underage drunk driving accidents and the hidden troubles of substance abuse of minors in Loudoun county that come to fruition as they do every summer school is out.

Make sure you attend your city council meetings so that you can voice your opinions and make a change to the zero tolerance policy that you are so adamant is over the top.

Also, do not be so personally offended, I am only commenting from the writing of Mr. Birnbaum.

Posted by ljohnson34 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am a citizen born in the US. My law states that the legal drinking age is 21. Did you know that or is this the first you heard?

Posted by ljohnson34 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LJ,

Nope no horse in this race - just know injustice when I see it. You have very selective vision on justice apparently.

And by your logic, as a Virginia citizen you believe that only Viginia law should apply to our students when they travel to saw Washington DC. You stated, after all that "...they (students) must abide by the law of THEIR homeland." I must have missed this in civics class.

Oh, and BTW, in case you did not hear, the US does not have a drinking age - states have drinking age and the federal government has no jurisdiction in the matter. Did you know this of is this the first YOU heard.

Still no concern from you and your superior parenting friends on the kids who were NOT punished - no zero tolerance for them I suppose...

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Unequal application of the law happens everyday. That's a life lessen also.

Posted by mitlen (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Eric101, the article does NOT state that some kids were punished while others were not. We can only go by what the article says - any other comments on here are just heresay. Even if there was uneven punishment amongst kids, this will not be the first time they will ever encounter that in their lives. Who told you life was fair?

Posted by luvlsbg (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The legal age for drinking wine and beer in France is 16 years old.

However obtuse ones, NO ONE is condoning drunk driving/minor drinking. No parent is "wining' about their child getting caught. All the kids have done their time for their crime.
We are whining about the way minors were questioned and how the school policy was not applied to all those who infracted it.
Please read my comment above and see if you still think it is OK for teachers to interrogate CIA style

Posted by lindholli (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This decision was based on student violations of rules and regulations that were spelled out ahead of time. As an educator, I can tell you that countless parents want their "good" kids protected from rule violations. This has led to an atmosphere of rudeness, defiance, and disrespect in many classrooms today. There are plenty of other rules/laws that are different in other countries (e.g. laws regarding drug use, sex, violence). Where do we draw the line? It was ok for them to break a rule because it was a "small" rule, or they were "good" kids. I am a parent as well as a teacher, and while I believe the penalties were heavy, the kids and their parents knew ahead of time. Shame on you for encouraging bad behavior.

Posted by bisonwalker (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

bschweiker, you say "zero-tolerance is lazy and ineffectual" -- are you saying it is OK and should be tolerated for an underaged person to drink? What other laws should be broken too?

Posted by luvlsbg (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

lindholli, were you there to see the kids get interrogated "CIA style"?-- or did you just believe your kid's description? Are you absolutely sure that any kids who were not punished also broke the rules? Or did you take your kid's word for it? My point is, unless you were there and witnessed it, we cannot always believe everything our kids tell us.

Posted by luvlsbg (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Bisonwalker - shame on you for turning a blind eye administration NOT administering the policy with an even hand. You encourage ADULT bad behavior which is worse than teenage bad behavior.

You people with the holier-than-thou atitude. Don't you get it - the ADULTS are supposed to set the EXAMPLE. They failed across the board - chaperones, teachers, and administration. They handled this like it was a NSA operation and then threw the book at SOME of the kids while letting others go free.

What did the kids LEARN from this exercise? "Life is unfair" is the best luvslsbg and mitlen can offer.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The hypocrisy here is that we send our students on trips so they learn about other cultures. Not drinking wine in France is about as normal as visiting the US and not taking a shower every day. Vive la difference!

Posted by NicolaasJansen (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"...are you saying it is OK and should be tolerated for an underaged person to drink?"

They weren't drinking underage in France.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That's it.

Posted by mitlen (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"My point is, unless you were there and witnessed it, we cannot always believe everything our kids tell us."

Yet you believe everything the administration tells you, eh? I don't - and with good cause. We have a parent on this blog with first hand knowledge. I will take their word over administration's ANY day of the week. It should at least raise a few red flags - well not any from the really GOOD parents here but from the rest of us at least.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 2:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mitlen,

While "life is unfair" is a valuable lesson, I hardly think it is intended goal of the zero tolerance policy. Nor is a very difficult message to pick up as these kids move through life - I think it come through loud and clear.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 3:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Eric101, the parent on this blog does NOT have first-hand knowledge. They do not necessarily know all the details, although I am sure they think they do. I am not going to believe that parents word any more than I would believe the word of their kid, or of the administration. Nobody on this blog truly knows the whole story, we only know what is told to us in the article and the parent only knows what is told to her by her kid.

Posted by luvlsbg (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I understand Eric. My son is a senior at another Loudoun HS. I don't necessarily "trust" the adminstration either. But, there is, was and always will be unequal "justice" ... under the "rules", the law ... and yes, zero tolerance. Maybe this will motivate one of them to get into law and insure it's applied equally. It's ALWAYS been about who you know and how much "justice" you can afford.

Posted by mitlen (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 3:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Exactly, luvlsbg. We don't know everything so my problem with people jumping to condemn the silly parents who dare to defend their own children as weak and afraid to let thier children learn a lesson. You even said:

"Parents need to realize that kids NEED to receive a consequence for their actions. Kids, by nature, want to push their limits. If they get off the hook on this, and do not learn from their mistakes, what will it be next time."

You assume that these kids are guilty and you further assume that they were treated fairly. There are very believable reports that they were not that you choose to ignore. And why do you believe everything written in this article? Who do you suppose provided the information to the reporter? Administration perhaps?

Mitlen, You and I are not far apart on this issue. Perhaps I just am not as jaded as you.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am a rising Junior at the University of Maryland. I am 21, and in fact since I turned legal most of the appeal of drinking has been lost upon me. Let me speak from personal experience; rules like these do more harm than good. My entire freshman year was spent on an all-freshman floor in an apartment complex. I saw serious damage and destruction done by kids who had no idea what they were doing once they didn't have parents or teachers to enforce ridiculous and hypocritical alcohol rules upon them. More clinical evidence: The first time I truly drank, I chugged straight from a vodka bottle. Imagine if I had died from alcohol poisoning? I believe that kids in high school need proper supervision and experience before they are unleashed into the world. Other wise it turns into a sort of "screw my parents I'm going to get wasted" complex. What good does a zero-tolerance rule do in this situation? It serves to further infuriate youth towards authority and in the end make them want to rebel more. The French culture gets along just fine with their alcohol policies (probably better than our culture in fact). When a high school makes asinine rules such as these it flies in the face of the entire point of the trip. It was to experience French culture am I correct? Wine has a very prominent place in French culture. And to further reiterate, the students were not underage according to French law. Rules like these serve to show what exactly is wrong with America: we constantly believe our way is the only way, even when guests among others cultures. This flies in the face of individual liberties, and shows that these teachers are simply trying to make students conform to a false and insidious idea of what it is to be "American". This colonial attitude is completely antiquated and may explain the negative reactions I have received every time I identified myself as an American while abroad. The school's response in this situation is completely absurd. Personally, I believe that the punishments should be reversed. It is doing more harm than good.

Posted by tamcgath (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 3:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Eric101, Yes I did assume the kids were guilty. I don't think anyone is denying that they drank wine. However, I do not assume they were treated fairly. If you'll recall, I said "life is not fair". Plain and simple, if you take all the parental drama out of this story, what you have is that the kids broke the rules and they are suffering consequences as a result. I hope that the kids learn from this experience.

Posted by luvlsbg (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rules is rules because there is a flip side to all of this. If some student were to drink wine, yes, just a thimbleful will do and were to get into some sort of accident, whether or not the wine caused it, these same parents would be suing the school.

Choose people, how much law do you want? I don't blame the schools at all for demanding a "ten commandment" type rule.

Posted by jhtlag1 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am a grandfather of one of the kids who went on the trip. I have been around along time. Some of the comments on this site are very short sighted. Schools should not be given the right to threaten and force kids into signing confessions. The kids were wrong for possessing wine or drinking wine. But, the school authorities acted in such a nazi like style. If you let school administrators force confessions what will they be doing next? Schools need to follow the same laws governing citizens in the United States. These kids are citizens in this county. Schools should not be above the law. The Principal at Dominion High School said that the schools are not held to the law of the United States, they have their own rules. How did this happen in our country that we have given schools so much power? And, yes, I believe the students should receive a punishment. But, I also believe the Dominion High school authorities should also be held accountable for this violation of these kids civil rights. It could have been handled so much better and still achieved the same goal. The parents of these 10 kids are not saying that these kids did nothing wrong and don't punish my kid. They are trying to show the community that the schools have exceeded their authority and they do not have the right to do whatever they deem necessary to make kids confess. The Loudoun County School policy needs to spell out how a school can question the kids without violating their civil rights. And parents should be notified when this happens.

Posted by dianne5 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 5 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I went on a school trip to Germany in high school and they gave us waivers for our parents to sign, allowing us to drink beer and wine, if we were of the legal age there.

They didn't do anything illegal. It seems extremely far-reaching of the school to impose punishments for this, especially when it was done in the presence of host families.

Posted by knnn (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 5:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Frankly I think that this punishment is extremely harsh and does not fit the "crime". These students did not sneak into a bar or purchase liquor from a store using a fake ID, they drank wine under the supervision of their host families - something that is extremely NORMAL in french culture. Children often drink wine with a meal at their families home. I think that the school board is ignorant and unaware that there are different customs abroad.

Posted by pinkarma21 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 6:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

knnn: That sounds like a good idea. Return control back to the parents and away from government schools.

Posted by dingus5 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 7:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is a complicated situation. A few points, though. When a school takes a group of students on a trip, they are assuming a huge responsibility. They have to set rules. They have to make sure the rules are followed. The parents set rules for their children at all other times. If kids or their parents are against the school's rules, they shouldn't go the school trip. If I were a chaperone or an organizer of a student trip, I would not want to assume responsibility for underage students drinking alcohol, even if it was legal in the country visited.

From what I read, the students were drinking wine in their hotel room(s), not at a host's home. Big difference. BUT, that said, if they were not to consume alcohol at all, they shouldn't.

I have heard a teacher quoted a few times. Allegedly this teacher said,"embrace the culture". I don't know why this was taken to mean it was OK for the students to drink wine if it was clearly stated that must not consume alcohol. There is alot more to French culture than wine.

As usual, we don't know all sides of this story. We don't know what the chaperones, teachers, and admin have to say. I did watch the school board meeting the other night and I did hear all the parent comments that were made at the meeting. I can understand some of their concerns. I think they certainly have a right to give their opinions. If the students were coerced, I believe it could have been handled differently. However, we do not know the other side of the story. Due process is important, including for school personnel. If these students were told by a teacher or other chaperone that it was OK to sip wine, drink wine or accept bottles of wine when it clearly was against the rules, that is wrong. That should be investigated. If an adult told these kids that they did not have to follow the rules, then I think the punishment was way too harsh.

Perhaps the school board should review the zero tolerance policy. At the least, I think they should look at all sides of this situation and find the real truth.

BTW, I have a young teen. I am dreading the whole issue of drinking and other risky behaviors. My child is a good kid. However, I have observed that when she tells me she did a little bit of something, it often is a dramatic understatement. I find it hard to believe that a group of teens would open a bottle of wine in a hotel room, with no direct adult supervision, and only have a "sip" of wine. It doesn't make them "bad". It is part of being a teen. Learning boundaries and accepting the consequences of their actions is also part of being a teenager.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 8:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am an educator so I do see the situation from both sides.
However, LCPS overstepped the mark in the manner in which children were questioned. No parent would agree with that (not in Washpost story).

Not one child was "caught drinking" as the papers report. Suspensions were all based on coerced statements after the fact. This is not just what my child has reported but what all the kids say and Dominion high school has NOT ever provided me with evidence of my child's supposed infraction.

I don't agree with a zero tolerance policy but this is beyond that...the next thing will be having an overweight teacher sit on my kid and suffocate him to death!

Posted by lindholli (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

the fact is there is no solid proof besides confessions and the very few amount of students that got caught red handed. no breathilizer (sp?) tests, no pictures, no video, just he-said-she-said. for the ones that got caught solidly, well, then they deserve a punishment (although even for them, the 10 day suspension is them maxmium and has rarely ever been enforced, even for kids who bring weapons to school, etc.). is the future of these kids worth the punishment of the crime that no one knows 100% was committed? aren't we, as american citizens, as they are too, entitled to the presumption of innocence?
I speak about their future because think: 10 days out of class= less learning, more pressure to catch up, less time to study, especially in this 4th quarter during EXAMS which directly affect semester grades. Also, students are not given the opportunity to register for APs (some missed them altogether, byebye .7 AP weight...) or to take SOLs, and if they are given a chance to take a make up, they have to do so under a hostile environment (a myriad of studies have proven that taking standardized tests with your peers is beneficial) or the harder version of these tests (form B AP is nearly always harder).
So in the end, is this crime, not even definitely proven beyond hear-say for most of the students, worth the destruction of their futures? Just to preserve the school's image of a firm grip? Most of these students have no previous record and excel in their academic/social/cultural efforts.
Before jumping to drastic effects of alcoholism, consider the fact that the suspects are just that-suspects, after all.

Posted by whataboutmiranda (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 10:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

what next.... send a group of kids to amsterdam and expect them not to smoke. why were they put in the candy store and told not to touch the candy. wine is to france as apple pie is to the u s of a. give me a break.

Posted by mark.riggins (anonymous) on May 28, 2009 at 11:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

We know our kids will drink. As parents it is our job to teach our kids how. If you tell them not to the will. It is the nature of youth. Our whole approach is wrong in America!

Posted by dnaich (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

All you Americans, tell me again that this is a free country. It's a 'free' country where the parents have nothing to say about their own children's behavior if the government disagrees. How ironic that the French know more about freedom and responsibility than the self proclaimed "teachers of liberty to the world". You people have so many rules and regulations at the level of daily life that would make any Saudi proud.

Posted by alientech (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 8:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"...aren't we, as american citizens, as they are too, entitled to the presumption of innocence?"

Not in LCPS. It has been my experience that there is a culture in the system that the child is most likely guilty first and foremost. Blue Ridge Middle School is one of the worst out there in this regard.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have heard horror stories about the zero-tolerance policy from other parents. One kid was supsended for clipping his nails in class. LCPS must consider a fingernail clipper to be a weapon, even though there are lots of other common objects in classrooms that could inflict more bodily injury. Another kid was expelled for bringing a small plastic replica of a hand weapon to school. Parents live in fear that their child may be expelled for unintentionally doing something like leaving a butter knife in their lunch box after making peanut butter sandwich.

This is nothing but bullying by the school system to absolve themselves of responsibility for any judgement calls they should be making. Expecting a child to comply 100% with a lengthy and sometimes bewildering code of conduct policy is unreasonable.

Posted by Loudountag (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

alientech,

In defense (or perhaps explanation)of America, there is a different standard applied to minors and fully consenting adults. This is an issue of children/student rights - they have few. There are a few rules that fit your characterization - a drinking age of 21 vs 18 jumps to mind - but I think they will be going by the wayside in the future. Also, this law is intended to help deal with an issue of drunk driving and underage drinking is a misdemeanor and a minor one at that. MADD means well - they are just wrong in this case. You should try not being so holier-than-thou as well. France (if that is where you are from) has its own faults - every country does.

Posted by Eric101 (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Some on here have criticized my comment, I just want to say that Zero Tolerance is a seperate issue. Honestly, this suspension is not the end of the world. To me the bigger issue is just that coping skills are so important in life. Good people make dumb mistakes all the time, but it's the ones who react well that make awesome people.
This is a GOLDEN opportunity to teach these kids how to be accountable and cope. If they are so worried about explainng this on college admisions, I can tell you an admissions officer will be far more impressed with the kid who accepts responsibility and owns up when writing their explanation.
If the parents act like this is the end of the world (and it's sooo not!!) the kids will too. As a mother of three I cannot imagine standing outside my kids school protesting this. It makes me cringe just THINKING about the example that sets.

Posted by ams40 (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Can anyone tell me exactly what is meant by "Coerced Confessions"? What was done to these poor children that was so terrible? After reading this blog from top to bottom I have learned that the children were awakened at 01:00, removed from their rooms, brought to the lobby of the hotel, questioned, asked to sign confessions and then told not to communicate with others. This has been characterized as "Nazi Like" and "Unfair Tactics". OK, so either I missed something in the article or in this blog or there is more to the story but nowhere did I read anything that sounded improper or unfair. Someone please provide the gory details I can't seem to find. Of course when you add words like “Forced from their beds” and “Phones ripped from the walls” and "In their Bedclothes", it does add a bit of the drama I am seeking. So, exactly how were the children "Coerced"?

Posted by salm624 (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 12:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oddly enough, the kids who did NOT break the no alcohol rule had nothing happen to them. Now they know that if they had broken the rule that justice may have been served unequally. Lesson learned for them.

Posted by yaddayadda (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 1:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To answer the question how were the kids coerced. Basically, the kids were told by the School Vice Principal that if they didn't sign forced confessions on the spot and tell on each other, they would receive 30 days suspension from school instead of 10 days suspension. The kids were afraid and felt like they had to do what she said. They were also sequestered in the hotel lobby for the entire next day. The phones were taken away from the kids so they couldn't call their parents plus the Vice Principal told them she didn't want them to call their parents. The Vice Principal cried and told them that she was afraid she would lose her job over this. The Vice Principal never saw any of them drinking and never saw anyone drunk. She decidied they were quilty based upon the comments of other kids and the confessions she got them to make when she threatened them with 30 days suspension. I don't think it was handled properly. The kids did something wrong and should be punished. But, the bigger question is how far to we let school authorities go. Threatening kids with a harsher punishment is illegal. What will happen next??? Will school administrators be allowed to physically confine our kids??

Posted by dianne5 (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 3:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

what happens in France should stay in France... or Rome, or Vegas. Although this was a school sponsored trip I doubt the school paid for it - I assume the students and their families paid for it. If they had consumed the alcohol on school property I could see this type of punishment - otherwise this is out hand.

Posted by dohara1 (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 4:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you for the response and additional information dianne5. "Threatening kids with a harsher punishment is illegal", I am not sure this is true. Was that a viable punishment for the children or was it a lie? I don't think it is illegal to lie. Using it as leverage sounds like a good method to get at the truth. Isn't that what she was trying to do? Perhaps she never saw them drinking but someone must have been caught or perhaps a complaint was made. I find it hard to believe that she woke up at 1:00 and decided to do an interrogation of all the students. There is still more to this story that we don't know.

Posted by salm624 (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 4:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Not in LCPS. It has been my experience that there is a culture in the system that the child is most likely guilty first and foremost. Blue Ridge Middle School is one of the worst out there in this regard."

so it's the right thing for LCPS to do so? it's okay for them to lose that right?

Posted by whataboutmiranda (anonymous) on May 29, 2009 at 4:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This whole situation is ridiculous. These students were in another country when they broke American rules that don't apply there. The sensible thing to do would have been to allow the students to drink on the trip if they had a waiver from their parents. I went to France 10 yrs ago on a school trip and that's how we handled the issue. Everyone came back unharmed. It's a cultural experience that the school board has no business getting involved in. Smoking, pornography, tattoos are all acceptable in European countries and do not require ID to purchase or obtain. Since these are also illegal to anyone under 18 here would they have persecuted the students for those infractions as well? The school board should focus on activities the students partake in here in the US and let what happened in France stay there.

Posted by lanorigb (anonymous) on May 30, 2009 at 1:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

lanorigb, as long as students are on a school trip, they are the responsibility of the accompanying school personnel. The schools have not only a right but a responsibility to set rules and enforce rules for any school trip, including overseas.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on May 30, 2009 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It's all sad. I chaperoned more field trips than I could count over the years. Several of them were overnight and out of town. There was never any question that we were under school system poilices regardless of the day of the week, time of day, or locale. What seems to be the real issue is the questionable manner in how these students were confronted. That is what the suspension appeal process is for. That is the family's opportunity to make it clear to the Supervisor of Secondary Education that their students's right to fair treatment was violated. I just hope that the day does not come after enough of these trip incidents that the school system starts to rethink allowing them for future students. Every student deserves to have the opportunity to enrich the curriculum with off site experiences. The majority of these trips are trauma free.

Posted by kjd5966 (anonymous) on May 31, 2009 at 5:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The students and parents knew or should have known all the rules for alcohol from the first day the children entered high school- they're printed right there in the student handbook - rules and consequences, and that includes policies for athletics. There were no surprises in the disciplinary actions taken.

Simple fact of the matter is the children made a bad choice. Instead of pointing fingers or dissecting policy, everyone should be helping the students understand what led them to choose to drink and deal with the consequences of THEIR actions, towards the goal of helping them in the future to make better decisions when confronted with a similar dilemma.

So what lessons are the children learning now? I read one comment stating the trip put the children in an environment that promoted their drinking. So now, in addition to the situation being the fault of zero tolerance policies, host families, failure to review the rules and whatever else, the blame lies with France for having a culture condoning drinking! Enough said.

Posted by jrsherrill (anonymous) on June 1, 2009 at 7:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

hi. i'm one of the so called "dominion 10". i just read all of this and i really wanted everyone to get OUR side of the story, even if we may be "lying". whatever.

i'm not saying what i did was right. i know it wasn't. i'm okay with the fact that i got suspended because i realize that i broke the rules. however, since when is it fair for me to be taken out of my room at 1 in morning, in my pjs, practically blind because i don't have my contacts/glasses, and forced to write a confession? my assistant principal told me that if she found out i was lying, she would make my punishment harsher. she didn't let us talk to our parents before it. she didn't let me go to my room until she got the version of the story that SHE wanted. she wouldn't let me leave until i gave her all the names. she took our phones away from us and we couldn't even talk to each other. she sent us back up at 2:30, and by the time i'd calmed down, i slept at around 4:30/5. the next morning we had to meet her downstairs at 8. 3 hours to sleep?? then she made us sit in the lobby and do absolutely nothing for 10+ hours. we couldn't even go to our rooms. we were all sleep deprived. she would've let us even nap on the chairs. we were calling our parents in the middle of the hotel lobby, crying our eyes out, in front of dozens of strangers. tell me how this is fair. i know what i did was wrong, but to this extent? i realize that the ten days suspension is what i deserved, but to be treated this badly by administrators that supposedly have nothing but my best interest at heart? bull****. why is it that i got suspended for drinking alcohol under the zero tolerance policy (that states that you can't even POSSESS alcohol), yet the administrators/teachers didn't get in trouble FOR POSSESSING AND BRINGING ALCOHOL TO AMERICA FOR A GROUP OF STUDENTS? where's the justice in that? so they get to drink their wine and possess it and not get in trouble and treat us like scum and get off with it?

yeah, **** you too. thanks for coming on this trip that WE paid your tickets and rooms for and screwing us over and making us feel like ****. love you too.

Posted by dominon10 (anonymous) on June 11, 2009 at 8:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

dumbest story ever.....

Posted by SO4XWIN (anonymous) on June 12, 2009 at 3:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How can people on here say that the article is the only thing they can trust? Have they not heard of the freedom of speech and bias? I would trust the students, who all admit they did something wrong and are only trying to get the truth out their, and their story, before this article any day. The problem is not that rules are rules, the rules were broken and that has already been established-don't respond to good arguments by avoiding what they said and rambling about following laws. The students have already been punished and are fine with it. I know them personally and believe their story is true. The problem is the procedure-how they got the confessions. Those confessions don't count as anything. They need to be in front of a parent admitting it- which the administrators tricked most of them into doing upon returning to the US by having 'meetings' with the parents and children to discuss what happened (and those who didn't admit it got yelled at). One person even took the liberty to record the meeting-which they are allowed to do-and got screamed at. The administration and school system are obviously insecure about what happened-they know they are at fault and are choosing silence in order to suppress the truth. Also, students who did drink did not get in trouble. Stop talking about they did it and they should get punished. Almost all the students did. Not all got in trouble. That is a problem and does not show 'zero tolerance'. corruption...

Posted by jd991471 (anonymous) on June 18, 2009 at 8:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If the students had committed a crime they would be subject to French law, not US law. Likewise, having a drink in a country that permits it for students of their age should not be punishable. Prior to the trip, the students should have been informed that they would be served alcohol, to not abuse it, and drink responsibly.

Posted by ogradys (anonymous) on June 23, 2009 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)