Hazed and confused

Hazing is a misdemeanor in the state of North Carolina and is banned at Duke. Yet nearly everyone in a fraternity will tell you that it exists.

In recent days, fraternity recruitment practices have been cast into nationwide discussion as a result of new policies at Cornell University and Princeton University. On Tuesday, Cornell President David Skorton demanded that the university’s fraternities cease pledging or face dissolution. The statement was prompted by hazing that resulted in the death of a student earlier this year. At Princeton, incoming students will be required to wait until sophomore year to rush, in hopes that older students will be less susceptible to hazing.

Princeton’s tactic of suspending rush doesn’t stand to accomplish anything at Duke. Allowing freshmen the Fall semester to transition to college life is important prior to joining a greek organization. Spring recruitment allows for both a semester of individual growth and a semester to foster group community through greek life.

Although Duke officials have been vocal in their condemnation of hazing, it is time for the University to follow the lead of its peer institutions and take direct action to ensure hazing does not occur.

Students and administrators share the responsibility of ending hazing. But given the difficult situation of students bearing the burden to turn in their peers, the University should play a more dominant role in the process. Although Princeton does not officially recognize any greek organization, the administration has nonetheless taken action to ensure students’ safety. Duke, too, must look out for the well-being of its students, particularly in University-affiliated activities, a category that includes most fraternities.

Duke administrators have taken several important steps in doing their part to halt hazing, such as the Duke Hazing Policy. The document defines hazing as “any action taken or situation created… that is harmful or potentially harmful to an individual’s physical, emotional or psychological well-being.” It also outlines infractions and resulting punishments, and encourages students to report hazing incidents to a confidential hotline. Still, students experiencing hazing are often too nervous to report it, for fear it will lead to retaliation by the accused group. Therefore, University officials must proactively expose incidences of hazing.

Duke has also demonstrated that it will not shy away from taking a stand against fraternities who are convicted of hazing. In 2008, the Duke University Police Department investigated a hazing complaint against Alpha Delta Phi fraternity. In this instance, the student reported being hazed to DUPD. Such candidness by a student is unfortunately an anomaly, and thus it is important that Duke officials seek out the information of such events on their own, rather than relying on students to report them.

The University should be more attentive to fraternity recruitment happenings and not hesitate to closely examine suspected hazing instances. Administrators must take a firm stance and conduct investigations into fraternity behavior where necessary. It would also be prudent to shorten the length of the recruitment process and mandate that pledging be completed prior to Spring break.