Welcome Guest - Please Login | Subscribe |FAQ's | Why Register | Privacy Statement |
| Classifieds | Jobs | Cars | Real Estate | Directories | Yellow Pages+ | My Clips | 
     
 Today is August 29, 2008 Current Temperature: 70° in Lewiston, Maine 
Take our quiz


Printer Friendly Version      Email Story     Increase Text    Decrease Text
iPod Friendly
  Comments
Superintendent explains decisions from teen party

,
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
PHOTO GALLERY
« Previous | Next »
thumbnails | gallery

RUMFORD - In addition to discussing SAD 43's plan for consolidating with SADs 21 and 31, and Hanover, directors and Superintendent James Hodgkin addressed ramifications of last week's teen booze party in Roxbury.

At that party that started Tuesday night at Bunker Pond, and ended early Wednesday morning when state police broke it up, 19 18-year-olds and six 17-year-olds were summoned on charges of underage drinking. One 18-year-old was also arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct and released on $150 unsecured bail. All will be arraigned in August in Rumford District Court.

Most were Mountain Valley High School graduates, many were top students, and all were Drug Abuse Resistance Education graduates, Hodgkin said.

Since it became public, Hodgkin said that both he and Principal Matt Gilbert have fielded numerous calls from many parents, people and students, ranging from wanting examples to be made, to learning how it would affect graduation.

Because it wasn't done at a school function and happened off school grounds, Hodgkin explained it wasn't an issue with which the school should deal.

"From a disciplinary standpoint, it's not our job," he said.

However, summoned students who were on the boys and girls tennis teams were removed by the school.

Additionally, the National Honor Society removed a number of students from that organization and suspended others, Hodgkin said. By suspension, he meant they were not allowed to wear their earned NHS sashes at graduation.

"The biggest implication comes if they're planning on joining a fraternity or sorority in college, because they cannot now," he said.

It also affected some scholarships, awards and recognitions from outside the school realm.

Additionally, because Hodgkin considered the party one incident in the students' 13 years of schooling and successes, he said they shouldn't be disciplined for it at graduation.

Had it happened last fall, no one would consider its effect on graduation, he added, reading from his prepared two-page statement on the affair and how he handled it.

"Graduation and the events around graduation are a celebration of the entire 13 years of accomplishments. If we were to decide whether a student participated in graduation based upon a disciplinary act, most students would not get to participate. A major role for schools is to teach students how to learn," he stated in one excerpt.

Hodgkin said the statement was his alone and not that of the board. However, he asked for and got directors' permission to release it to the media provided it be used in its entirety and not edited. The complete version is available online at www.sunjournal.com.

"While I don't condone the choice made by these students, I stand by them and my claim that these are some of the finest young people I have ever met. I also stand by our decision not to mix the events of this teen party with their 13-year accomplishment," Hodgkin read.

In other business, Hodgkin went through the consolidation plan section by section explaining it at length and taking comments from directors.

Because there is still a chance that SAD 39 could pull out, the superintendent explained that numbers regarding the weighted method of voting by 17 directors and guesstimated costs savings, could change.

After suggesting minor changes, the board voted 7-3 to submit it to the Department of Education.

Mexico Director Betty Barrett, Rumford Director Ed Flynn and Roxbury Director Mark Henry were the lone dissenters.

"I certainly am not happy with this. I'd like for us to stay SAD 43," Barrett said.

Henry said he was following the wishes of Roxbury selectmen.

"They don't want us to be in this," he said.

CLICK HERE To Show/Hide Discussion Thread - (24 Comments)
Comments
Posted By:Ken at June 10, 2008 5:37 AM (Suggest Removal)
I still haven't read if the police are investigating as to who furnished the booze for these teenagers. This person should be brought to justice. Just imagine if one or more of these teens had decided to get in a car and drive, someone could have been killed.

| Add your comments
Posted By:jv at June 10, 2008 5:56 AM (Suggest Removal)
This article mentioned that all of these students were DARE program graduates. I took the DARE program when I was 11 years old. Back then, it was really easy for me to follow the program and think that I was always going to say no to drugs and alcohol. However, when you're 11 years old in 6th grade, the alcohol and drugs, though attainable, are not nearly as prevalent as they are in the high school years. I think the DARE program should be changed to be given at the high school level with a change in curriculum so it's age-appropriate. I think this program should be given at the freshman year of high school when these pressures become overwhelming. Not when kids are 11 or 12.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Robert at June 10, 2008 6:45 AM (Suggest Removal)
jv at June 10 ,I'm glad to hear your statement. This DARE program should be revamped and new statagies developed to acheive better results of learning when it comes to drugs and alcohol

| Add your comments
Posted By:helga at June 10, 2008 7:08 AM (Suggest Removal)
Bravo for letting them graduate!

| Add your comments
Posted By:AJ at June 10, 2008 7:45 AM (Suggest Removal)
Ken, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of teens did decide to get in their cars and drive. They are the ones sitting at home thinking about how lucky they are not to have stayed at the party.... I don't have a better solution, but it's a shame the ones that stayed there to sleep in their cars instead of driving home are the ones being punished.

| Add your comments
Posted By:topcat at June 10, 2008 8:42 AM (Suggest Removal)
The violators that were caught and the lucky ones that left the party before the bust, but arrived home safely, can breathe a collected sigh of relief that the punishment was softened, because of the forgiving attitude of the SAD 43 administration. Good decision?..., possibly, if the scare has detered future risky behavior. Hopefully, the embarrassment of the disgrace and harsh reality of losing scholarships, team and group memberships was enough of a punishment that taught them a valuable life lesson that others could learn from. What is really amazing is that parents continue to make the lame excuses that this behavior is a right of passage and that this sets precedent for non-compliance to school rules for our present day students.??? These parents and community members are still not admitting to their flawed rationalzation; therefore, we can probably expect more of the same old behaviors from our local students in the future. Students at Oxford Hills were not as lucky, the administration decided that this was the time to draw the line, and the violators were not allowed to graduate or be on school grounds for the graduation. Time will tell which consequences worked best, hopefully, both have the desired impact.

| Add your comments
Posted By:David at June 10, 2008 9:52 AM (Suggest Removal)
Had the 18 year olds been not so many miles to the north, in the province of Quebec, their drinking would have been entirely legal. It is fascinating that, for so many things, 18 year olds are considered adults, but must wait until they are 21 to consume alcohol legally (?) Maybe the fault doesn't lie with the individuals but with an archaic law.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Past Graduate at June 10, 2008 9:57 AM (Suggest Removal)
I attended OHCHS graduation and yes it was sad to see students who were banned from their own graduation but everyone needs to realize every action has a consequence! Yes, we all have done something that we have regretted but did that change the fact that what we did was wrong and was someone else hurt? We won’t always be around to tell our children right from wrong but they need to learn and it hurts but they do learn. To say that we did the same thing is a copeout but that still doesn't make it right. Someone said schools have no right to get involved well my kids were in school 8 hours, home with us 8 (maybe) and sleeping 8 so we were happy for any help from the school, church and the local police officer who stopped by to say hi.

| Add your comments
Posted By:jv at June 10, 2008 10:56 AM (Suggest Removal)
Past Graduate - you're right, every action does have a consequence. But the consequence has to fit the action. In this case, the actions did have legal consequences. Many of these kids were issued citations. They each face fines and probation and possible license suspension. These kids are not avoiding consequence. Not letting them graduate to recognize the 13 years of hard work they've done would be a big mistake.

| Add your comments
Posted By:oijo at June 10, 2008 11:07 AM (Suggest Removal)
I totally agree about having a DARE program for the high school age level. That is a wonderful idea. I wonder if the DARE Officers are reading this? Or ever hearing it from the community? Excellent idea! It would be a great reinforcement to hear the information on drugs and alcohol all over again in 9th grade.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Oceanwitch at June 10, 2008 11:09 AM (Suggest Removal)
It's too late for those who could not participate in their graduation however this has been going on for years Are we suppose to reward those who didn't follow the rules which they have been taught for years just because you think they had 13 years of hard work? What about the parents who missed a lifetime of helping with homework, driving them to activities, they are the ones who missed out! They work hard to teach them lessons they will need as adults now you want to say it's okay to make a mistake and because you worked hard for years one night of a making a mistake is alright? Take a look around it is happening all over the country not just in Oxford Hills or Mountain Valley areas. It's not like these young adults haven't been warned for weeks before graduation.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Parent at June 10, 2008 11:52 AM (Suggest Removal)
I think the decisions made by administrators at both Mountain Valley and OHCHS were correct ones. You cannot compare the two incidents. OHCHS students got caught under the influence at a school sponsored event and were not allowed to participate in graduation ceremonies. MV students were not at a school sponsored event and were allowed to participate in graduation but will have to deal with whatever our legal justice system decides. I think both superintendents made the right call.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Contrary to belief... at June 10, 2008 12:45 PM (Suggest Removal)
Mac - what were the circumstances for the OHCHS students? I don't remember that story. Thanks!

| Add your comments
Posted By:carey at June 10, 2008 12:45 PM (Suggest Removal)
If they would be in certain countries they could do drugs legally...have sex with children etc etc...lets stick to the point this is not Canada...

| Add your comments
Posted By:carey at June 10, 2008 12:47 PM (Suggest Removal)
Well Oxford Hill's will work best because parents will say no not until after graduation but I do think its unfair. Had they done this on the first day of school do the kids still not graduate. I think maybe considering a parent/student contract like sports for graduation week might be in order containing the things the kids lost and project grad which is just spitting in the face of the people who committed time and money to project grad. Loss of graduating should be a very last resort. Let us move on and have a safe summer.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Johnny P at June 10, 2008 1:23 PM (Suggest Removal)
The statement about Canada is wrong anyway. The Drinking age in Quebec is 19. So the point is moot.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Johnny P at June 10, 2008 1:35 PM (Suggest Removal)
I think this has been blown so far out of proportion it is pathetic. We're talking about a bunch of teenagers having a grad party. People need to lighten up.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Parent at June 10, 2008 2:06 PM (Suggest Removal)
Carey, if the students at OHCHS had been under the influence of alcohol or drugs in September, they would have received the same punishment...a five day suspension that prohibits the student from participating in any school related activities or events. The Seniors were forewarned before graduation week that any infractions that resulted in suspension would include graduation ceremonies. They were also informed that anyone acting suspicious of being under the influence would be subjected to a breathalizer test. Unfortunately, for all involved the, the OHCHS seniors made a grave mistake.(no pun intended.)

| Add your comments
Posted By:rob at June 10, 2008 4:39 PM (Suggest Removal)
Archaic law? You're right: perhaps we should be more like Vermont circa 1983, and have twice the per-capita alcohol-related fatality rate of the rest of New England. Their drinking age of 18 sure did wonders for them, didn't it? Fact is, lowering the age won't do any good until we change the mentality we have in society around alcohol, which sets the standard that being excessively drunk is a badge of honour.

| Add your comments
Posted By:real at June 10, 2008 6:17 PM (Suggest Removal)
I get so frustrated with if you are old enough to fight for your country thing....a small amount of brave young people join the military and serve their country the statement only works if you are serving your country...I do not believe anyone involved is currently serving their country and if they are their would be problems within the military for underage drinking which is illegal...I dont think you will find many soldier/Marine/Sailor/Airman in a logging road in roxbury...there is a reason for this law call MADD they will give you a million.

| Add your comments
Posted By:ays at June 10, 2008 8:54 PM (Suggest Removal)
actually real there was one military member at this party and the only consequence he got through the military was that he did'nt have the choice to contest the ticket. His recruiter got it so he could just pay the fine and get it over with because he ships out next wendsday.

| Add your comments
Posted By:ays at June 10, 2008 9:14 PM (Suggest Removal)
Just want to apologize for spelling wednesday wrong before our fellow blogger, "citizen" see's it because he/she is an expert spell checker.

| Add your comments
Posted By:dr. dosh at June 11, 2008 12:03 AM *'>(Suggest Removal)
S A D day in Rumford . G E D , get 'er done ! Maybe the judge will let them join the services or something . M A D D ? Mom's Aganst Drunk Drivers ? The french foreign legion takes any one , mostly males . Draft beer, not women Alo'ha'ha (=>*

| Add your comments
Posted By:Kelly at June 11, 2008 12:21 AM (Suggest Removal)
david, you are right. march them t die in Iraq, but don't let them have a drink.

| Add your comments
Advertisement
CMMC College of Nursing and Health Professions
will offer five general education courses during its fall session.
read more >>
Cancer Education Series in Bridgton
“Holistic Approaches to Wellness for Cancer Patients, Survivors and Caregivers” is the subject of a six-part series being presented by The Patrick Dempsey Center for Cancer Hope and Healing in Bridgton beginning September 9.
read more >>
Cancer Education Series in Rumford
“Holistic Approaches to Wellness for Cancer Patients, Survivors and Caregivers” is the subject of a six-part series being presented by The Patrick Dempsey Center for Cancer Hope and Healing in Rumford beginning September 4.
read more >>
Contents of this site © 2008 Sun Journal
| Forgot Password |Blog Policy | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Advertise With Us | Contact Us | About Us | Faq's | Help |