Phi beta sigma fraternity, inc.

1. Phi beta sigma fraternity, inc. The Truth About Hazing/Pledging

2. The Facts • “In the late 1980s, fraternities and sororities were ranked by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners as the sixth worst risk for insurance companies – just behind hazardous waste disposal companies and asbestos contractors.”  • 80% of college athletes have been victims of hazing;  (Alfred/NCAA survey of college athletes)  http:cnn.com/US/9908/30/sports.hazing/index.html

3. Facts cont • Among high school students, close to 25 percent of students reported being hazed when joining a sports team • 82% of deaths from hazing involve alcohol. Source:National Hazing Prevention Week’s Fact Sheet • Since 1970, there has been at least one hazing-related death on a college campus each year

4. Historical Decision The End of a Tradition: Pledging Banned February 15-18, 1990 Ad hoc Council of Presidents Attending the Black Greek Summit are (seated): Dr. Eunice Thomas, Dr. Katie White, Janet J. Ballard, and Dr. Yvonne Kennedy, (standing) Carter Womack, Dr. Ulysses McBride, And Dr. Moses Norman, represented the fraternities. Not pictured but in attendance was Dr. Henry Ponder

5. The End of Pledging • No pledging or pre-pledging • Each organization would develop its own membership intake process which was limited to ceremonial ritual(s) • Each organization would develop its own education process

6. Why End Pledging? • Abuse and violence (hazing) during the pledge process • By banning pledging, it was believed hazing would end • Greater potential for lawsuits

7. What was pledging?

8. Pledges dressed alike Pledges walked in straight lines Pledges were required to wear and carry symbolic items Pledges were only allowed limited communication with non- fraternity members

9. Pledging occurred over a period of 4-12 weeks Pledges were required to perform chores and run errands for chapter members, as well as perform other duties

10. PA Hazing Law • "HAZING." Any action or situation which recklessly or intentionally endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student or which willfully destroys or removes public or private property for the purpose of initiation or admission into or affiliation with, or as a condition for continued membership in, any organization operating under the sanction of or recognized as an organization by an institution of higher education.

11. PA Hazing Law Cont • For purposes of this definition, any activity as described in this definition upon which the initiation or admission into or affiliation with or continued membership in an organization is directly or indirectly conditioned shall be presumed to be "forced" activity, the willingness of an individual to participate in such activity notwithstanding.

12. PA Hazing Law • The term shall include, but not be limited to, any brutality of a physical nature, such as whipping, beating, branding, forced calisthenics, exposure to the elements, forced consumption of any food, liquor, drug or other substance, or any other forced physical activity which could adversely affect the physical health and safety of the individual, and shall include any activity which would subject the individual to extreme mental stress, such as sleep deprivation, forced exclusion from social contact, forced conduct which could result in extreme embarrassment, or any other forced activity which could adversely affect the mental health or dignity of the individual, or any willful destruction or removal of public or private property.

13. Sigma defines hazing as… • “Any action taken or situation created, intentionally, whether on or off fraternity premises, to produce mental or physical discomfort, embarrassment, harassment, or ridicule. Such activities may include but are not limited to the following: use of alcohol; paddling in any form; creation of excessive fatigue; physical and psychological shocks; quests, treasure hunts, scavenger hunts, road trips or any other such activities carried on outside or inside of the confines of the chapter house; wearing of public apparel which is conspicuous and not normally in good taste; engaging in public stunts and buffoonery; morally degrading or humiliating games and activities; and any other activities which are not consistent with fraternal law, ritual or policy or the regulations and policies of the educational institution.”

14. hazing MYTHS VS FACTS

15. Myth • Hazing is no more than foolish pranks that sometimes go awry

16. FACT • Hazing is an act of power and control over others — it is victimization. Hazing is pre-meditated and NOT accidental • Hazing is abusive, degrading and often life-threatening

17. Myth • As long as there’s no malicious intent, a little hazing should be O.K.

18. fact • Even if there’s no malicious “intent” safety may still be a factor in traditional hazing activities that are considered to be “all in good fun.” For example, serious accidents have occurred during scavenger hunts and kidnapping trips • Ask yourself, what purpose do such activities serve in promoting the growth and development of the individual being hazed and chapter members

19. Myth • Hazing is an effective way to teach respect and develop discipline

20. Fact • Respect must be EARNED—not taught - victims of hazing rarely report having respect for those who have hazed them • Just like other forms of victimization, hazing breeds mistrust, apathy and alienation

21. Myth • If someone agrees to participate in an activity, it can’t be considered hazing

22. Fact • In states that have laws against hazing consent of the victim can’t be used as a defense in a civil suit. • Agreement to participate in a potentially hazardous action may not be true consent when considering the peer pressure and desire to belong to the group

23. Myth • It’s difficult to determine whether or not a certain activity is hazing

24. Fact • It’s not difficult to decide if an activity is hazing if you use common sense

25. Identifying hazing • Does the activity comply with all state laws • Does the activity comply with all school rules and regulations and/or policies • Does the activity add to the growth and worth of the individual, chapter, and the organization • Is the activity one that you have no problem discussing with institutional administrators, faculty, parents, or fraternity officials

26. Identifying hazing cont • Is the activity one that the fraternity or individuals involved would go to court to defend the merit of the activity • Will both organizational members and those seeking membership participate equally in the activity • Can the activity be written into a new member manual and shared with other chapters, leadership consultants, and national officers of the fraternity

27. Identifying hazing cont • Is alcohol or drugs involved • Does the activity risk emotional or physical abuse • Is there risk of injury or a question of safety If you answered "NO" to any or these questions, the activity is “more likely than not HAZING”

28. Why hazing doesn’t work • Once the person is initiated will he continue to perform in the best interests of the chapter? In most cases, when the kick in the rear end stops, so will the work. • Could lead to an individual voluntarily quitting intake who might otherwise become one of the top members of the chapter

29. Why hazing doesn’t work • Can create the attitude that membership intake is a hardship, not an educational process and that initiation is the end of one’s work • Could result In a lack of participation and/or interest in the chapter members and/or organizational endeavors • Could result in “clicks” within the chapter of who endured the most severe hazing

30. Why hazing doesn’t work • The candidate is glad to be initiated, not so much for the honor of the event, but for the right to be finished with the hazing

31. Alternatives to hazing • Incorporate team building exercises and other projects that will involve the entire chapter • Promote academic endeavors • Encourage newly initiated brothers to offer suggestions concerning the business and activities of the chapter • Try to incorporate the ideas of all Brothers into the activities of the chapter

32. Alternatives to hazing • Plan and participate in social activities • Adhere to the “Golden Rule” • Recognize individual talents, differences, and interests • Praise individual achievements

33. Sigma expects members • To come into the Fraternity with sincerity of purpose, in faith and trust in the principles of the Fraternity; and that you sincerely adhere to them • You exhibit behavior consistent with the principles of the Fraternity. The Fraternity is measured by the character of its members • You have self-control, self-respect, and personal pride

34. Consequences for hazing • Discipline from the fraternity • Ruining the reputation of the fraternity • Suspension and/or revocation of the chapter’s charter • The fraternity ceases to exist • The fraternity loses liability insurance • Suspension or expulsion from your institution • Arrest, thus creating a criminal record • Being sued • Injury • Death

35. Questions and comments

36. Sources Slides: 2,14-32 are from the FIPG Manual Slide:5, Ivy Leaf, Spring 1990