Nathan's view of hazing

[arajca]

We were advised by two AF AD former TIs.  They showed us what was good technique and what wasn't.  Importantly, they taught us what was going overboard.  But that was then and this is now.

Therein lies the very significant difference.

[flyerthom]

But let's not throw the "LAWSUIT!" flag without some basis for supposing it might actually happen under any reasonable guidelines that Nathan or others might propose.

Ned Lee
Former CAP Legal Officer

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3735/is_200201/ai_n9035275/

[flyerthom]

+1

There are way too many examples out there where this practice has gone horribly awry, under the ?supervision? of ?trained professionals?, to the point of death.

Can you point us to one of the examples you found where someone was "pushupped" to death?

That would really help the discussion.

Just one would be fine . . .

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=66299

[flyerthom]

The condescending attitudes are getting a little old.

First of all, if you had read the original justification,

You were saying...

The legal article is posted as well as just one example of PT death let alone  the Korey Stringer Case. The bottom line is we are not trained or skilled in the use of PT as punishment. Doing it because some cadets think it is more military or fun is flat out risky. 

[Ned]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3735/is_200201/ai_n9035275/


http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=66299

Tom,

Thank you for finding the articles, but I think both of them rather strongly support Nathan's position.

The first article is a law review article exactly on point - a professional discussion of institutional liability for hazing in both academia and professional sports.  Some of the descriptions were horrific, and the authors do a pretty good job of describing the legal standards involved.

And law review articles - by their very nature - are exhaustively researched and are fact checked by the journal before publication.

But as horrible as those incidents were, not one of them is remotely like anything Nathan is proposing.  None of them involved simple calisthenic-type exercises done in moderate amounts.  All of them were degrading and harmful practices such as forced consumption of adulterated food stuffs or invasions of basic human dignity such as full-body shaving and naked locker-room antics.  The only description of pushups were the ones done naked over warm beer with subsequent consumption of the beer.  (Eeeewwww).  If anything remotely like these things happened to me, I'd sue, too.  If anything remotely like these things ever happened in CAP, you or any other responsible officer would immediately stop it.

The point is that the authors couldn't find a single case where simple pushups had ever been found by a court to be hazing, or that any such silly lawsuit had ever been filed.

I must admit I'm a little puzzled about the second article, which describes a tragic death occuring during a military battalion run when a 42 year old soldier collapsed and died.  I don't know anything about your military background, but as a retired Army guy I can assure you that battalion runs are common, and have nothing to do with hazing.

You're a medical professional and know probably better than I do that, sadly, sometimes people collapse and die during strenuous physical exertion.  Particularly folks over 40 years of age like the soldier in the article.  This is the main reason that the Army requires a comprehensive "over 40 physical" (yes, that's what they call it) including an EKG before anyone 40+ can participate in strenuous exercise.

I'm just not sure how this tragedy illuminates our discussion one way or another, unless you are urging that CP should not include any running or physical activity at all.

Bottom line, based on your research it seems clearer than ever that there is no reasonable possibility of litigation based on the use of pushups in any sort of reasonable disciplinary program.

I'm not sure that is what you intended, but it does help the discussion.


Ned Lee
(Former CAP legal officer)

[AirAux]

I think Tom's examples do help and you helped point it out.  Just as people over the age of 40 have a tendancy to collapse during physical exertion, so do youngsters, especially in the 12-14 age group.  Anyone under the age of 18 relies on others to make serious decisions for them.  They are not considered competent.  For this very reason, they can't consent to hazing or to being overstressed through exercise, nor can they be counted on to make such decisions over others.  Therefore the stringent/rigid regulations regarding hazing and PT as punishment.

[Nathan]

I think Tom's examples do help and you helped point it out.  Just as people over the age of 40 have a tendancy to collapse during physical exertion, so do youngsters, especially in the 12-14 age group.  Anyone under the age of 18 relies on others to make serious decisions for them.  They are not considered competent.  For this very reason, they can't consent to hazing or to being overstressed through exercise, nor can they be counted on to make such decisions over others.  Therefore the stringent/rigid regulations regarding hazing and PT as punishment.

I have no idea why you say that 12-14 year olds are in any way physically comparable with a 40 year old. When I was in the 12-14 age range, I was doing mandatory PE class at school. If I had collapsed during PE, it would have been due to a medical issue that had been ignored either due to me not disclosing the issue or my PE teacher's incompetence, not because of the danger of doing physical exertion as a teenager. 12-21 year olds are likely in the best shape they will ever be.

Second, cadets are allowed to undergo stress by parental permission. If not, then we would not be permitted to do ANY sort of PT at all, regardless of the purpose of the PT. Being dropped for five push-ups is not more stressful than running a mile for testing purposes. Cadets are not allowed to legally consent, but when their parents cosign the membership applications, they are giving CAP the permission to supervise exercise and other sorts of "strenuous" activities. If they are not, then we have a lot more to worry about than punitive PT. The number of push-ups I am advocating per set is less than any PT requirement, and the total amount per day is only 30, spread out over the course of a MINIMUM of three hours. Most 12-year olds can do that, and I would even bet than most 40 year-olds can do that.

Third, nobody is advocating letting cadets "haze" one another. When they start hazing a cadet, then things have gone too far. But the act of doing push-ups cannot be considered hazing. It is just an act. The context needs to be taken into account. With that in mind, push-ups are no more dangerous than allowing a cadet to make a schedule, call out drill, or conduct a mentoring session.

The opposition needs to stop taking the idea of doing push-ups to the extreme by insisting that we are "hazing" or "overstressing" cadets. That is not what I am advocating. If a cadet cannot do five push-ups, then said cadet is in less shape than we expect a 12 year old female C/Amn to be. There is nothing more distressing about push-ups than there is about any other tool that we use. In fact, I would argue, from my experience as a member of a group punished by both push-ups and a loss of honor points as a cadet, that I would rather do a set of five push-ups every day of the week than to lose honor points and with it the motivation to succeed as a flight.

[heliodoc]

Well then

How does that 'ol Aerobics book handed out in approx 1974-1980 shake out for that good 'ol CAP PT program

We used to "USE" the drop an d "gimee" 20 for old times sake, such as one of the C/COL (me) would just look at a NBB type from the day

Like wise  when I went to PJOC in 1978 (probably the 2nd time it 'twas held for CAP) I fully expected the comraderie from the NBB  types when it was a hmph hmph a REAL program and a lil , shall we say, tougher.... iwent down for my 20, 40, 60 those CAP evenings back in 1978 'cuz it was the fun coming from those programs.  Best shape I was in BEFORE ARMY BCT.....    Go ahead and over analyze the CAP PT program and the hazing....... CAP needs to put the fun back into dis "fun"ctiion. 

Let's get some more articles from the CAP law side of the fence that go and prove all this "STUFF" were being ICL'd and have so called "regulations" about.  Prove it in CAP articles and more than just the two provided in the threads.

U  drop and give me twenty  fits for the fun in CAP,    oh wait a minute that was 1978 ..... oh wait a minute...izzat hazing?

Wow  the CAP of 2010?  Better go active duty and see how many out house lawyers are driving by giving the DI's their "twenty."

Wow  I can believe 8 pages of CAP discussion on dropping for twenty.......moe paralysis of the analysis

[AirAux]

And yet we never tire of beating a dead horse, do we.  It is what it is..

[High Speed Low Drag]

Well then

How does that 'ol Aerobics book handed out in approx 1974-1980 shake out for that good 'ol CAP PT program

We used to "USE" the drop an d "gimee" 20 for old times sake, such as one of the C/COL (me) would just look at a NBB type from the day

Like wise  when I went to PJOC in 1978 (probably the 2nd time it 'twas held for CAP) I fully expected the comraderie from the NBB  types when it was a hmph hmph a REAL program and a lil , shall we say, tougher.... iwent down for my 20, 40, 60 those CAP evenings back in 1978 'cuz it was the fun coming from those programs.  Best shape I was in BEFORE ARMY BCT.....    Go ahead and over analyze the CAP PT program and the hazing....... CAP needs to put the fun back into dis "fun"ctiion. 

Let's get some more articles from the CAP law side of the fence that go and prove all this "STUFF" were being ICL'd and have so called "regulations" about.  Prove it in CAP articles and more than just the two provided in the threads.

U  drop and give me twenty  fits for the fun in CAP,    oh wait a minute that was 1978 ..... oh wait a minute...izzat hazing?

Wow  the CAP of 2010?  Better go active duty and see how many out house lawyers are driving by giving the DI's their "twenty."

Wow  I can believe 8 pages of CAP discussion on dropping for twenty.......moe paralysis of the analysis

I have to agree - when I went to NBB in '85 (India Flight), it was "fun" getting dropped for push-ups.  While I can't say I enjoy doign push-ups, the really fun part was the bragging rights that went with it when I got back home - heck even before got back home.  Use newbies at the end of NBB were "looking back" fondly at gettign through the thing.

I see nothing wrong w/ push-ups as discipline, heck it would even improve the PT conditioning of the cadets.  Just set reasonable limits based on the current CPFT standards.

[Spike]

Serious question, since push-ups are part of the PT test, can I just tell the entire Squadron to drop and do 20 push-ups when one Cadet does something stupid??

[AirAux]

Spike, a dead serious answer to your question, if you do, and I see it or hear about it, I will immediately report it to higher authorities and request an IG investigation.  I would expect the same from any other honorable, duty bound member..

[raivo]

I have honestly never understood why there's so much to-do about this. If nobody is getting injured (and I do see the need for reasonable restrictions to prevent this from happening) then I fail to understand why there's such a problem. Really, I'd be quite surprised if someone comes into a military-style program like CAP *not* expecting to be told to drop-and-give-20 occasionally.

Spike, a dead serious answer to your question, if you do, and I see it or hear about it, I will immediately report it to higher authorities and request an IG investigation.  I would expect the same from any other honorable, duty bound member..

Well, somebody's gotta clerk the shoes.

[Gunner C]

Wow, misread the message above.  Gotta get new glasses.

Then I saw what I thought it said when I went to the previous screen:

The next time I get asked what a "shoe clerk" is, I'm quoting this post.

I guess my vision's better than I thought.

[raivo]

Wow, misread the message above.  Gotta get new glasses.

Then I saw what I thought it said when I went to the previous screen:

The next time I get asked what a "shoe clerk" is, I'm quoting this post.

I guess my vision's better than I thought.

I frequently reword things for no good reason.

[Nathan]

Serious question, since push-ups are part of the PT test, can I just tell the entire Squadron to drop and do 20 push-ups when one Cadet does something stupid??

Erm, no. That's not what I am talking about. Singling cadets out for punishment in a public venue is hazing, and no example I have given advocates that. ANY time that punishment is going to take place in public, it has to be non-specific in regards to the target, ie, a whole flight. If a cadet feels singled out for public humiliation, then that's crossing the line regardless of what punishment is used.

[raivo]

Heh. In my first squadron, if you turned the wrong way on a facing movement, my flight sergeant would give you a pet rock. You would have to give it a name and carry it around with you for the rest of the night.

Can't do that now, it's hazing.

[Nathan]

Heh. In my first squadron, if you turned the wrong way on a facing movement, my flight sergeant would give you a pet rock. You would have to give it a name and carry it around with you for the rest of the night.

Can't do that now, it's hazing.

You take it too far, and it is hazing. You're publicly singling out a cadet for screwing up, and the result is a punshment designed to make obvious to everyone the cadet's failure. Sounds humiliating.

I did a variation of this, though, as a teaching tool. If someone was not able to figure out which way was right or left, then at some point, out of sight, I would hand them a small pebble and tell them to keep it in their right hand. Whenever I called a "right" facing command, he or she was to turn toward the rock.

It worked out pretty well, did not single the cadet out, and fixed the issue.

[BillB]

Nathen, you're putting an adults defination of what is hazing, not a teenagers. For years, I gave a pet rock to a cadet that was new and had problems which is right or left. It wasn't a punishment, but a teaching tool. And did the other cadets make fun of the mistake? No, since most of them owned a pet rock in their past. A few years ago I wan into a former cadet who was a Captain in USAF and she proudly told me she still had her pet rock.