Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I and everyone I went to high school with did drugs and drank in high school. My parents had addiction issues. I don’t drink most of the time as an adult. There’s no actual support for your beliefs here. Some possible slight increases in risk aren’t fait accompoli.

Children of alcoholics are four times more likely to have alcohol addiction problems themselves. It’s not an unreasonable thing for OP to be aware of and inform their children about.

DP, no but she makes it sound like, and I quote "it will be perfectly safe" to drink if they wait until they are over 21. That is a far cry from true, and I am in active recovery to prove it.

The post you are referencing/quoting is not OP’s.

Correct. It’s a poster giving bad advice I am refuting. That is still relevant and on topic. Regardless of the unclear pronoun reference in my post, the prior post I was responding to was giving the false idea that people who wait until they are 21 are perfectly safe from developing alcoholism. They aren’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I and everyone I went to high school with did drugs and drank in high school. My parents had addiction issues. I don’t drink most of the time as an adult. There’s no actual support for your beliefs here. Some possible slight increases in risk aren’t fait accompoli.

Children of alcoholics are four times more likely to have alcohol addiction problems themselves. It’s not an unreasonable thing for OP to be aware of and inform their children about.

DP, no but she makes it sound like, and I quote "it will be perfectly safe" to drink if they wait until they are over 21. That is a far cry from true, and I am in active recovery to prove it.

The post you are referencing/quoting is not OP’s.

Correct. It’s a poster giving bad advice I am refuting. That is still relevant and on topic. Regardless of the unclear pronoun reference in my post, the prior post I was responding to was giving the false idea that people who wait until they are 21 are perfectly safe from developing alcoholism. They aren’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I and everyone I went to high school with did drugs and drank in high school. My parents had addiction issues. I don’t drink most of the time as an adult. There’s no actual support for your beliefs here. Some possible slight increases in risk aren’t fait accompoli.

Children of alcoholics are four times more likely to have alcohol addiction problems themselves. It’s not an unreasonable thing for OP to be aware of and inform their children about.

DP, no but she makes it sound like, and I quote "it will be perfectly safe" to drink if they wait until they are over 21. That is a far cry from true, and I am in active recovery to prove it.

The post you are referencing/quoting is not OP’s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I and everyone I went to high school with did drugs and drank in high school. My parents had addiction issues. I don’t drink most of the time as an adult. There’s no actual support for your beliefs here. Some possible slight increases in risk aren’t fait accompoli.

Children of alcoholics are four times more likely to have alcohol addiction problems themselves. It’s not an unreasonable thing for OP to be aware of and inform their children about.

DP, no but she makes it sound like, and I quote "it will be perfectly safe" to drink if they wait until they are over 21. That is a far cry from true, and I am in active recovery to prove it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I and everyone I went to high school with did drugs and drank in high school. My parents had addiction issues. I don’t drink most of the time as an adult. There’s no actual support for your beliefs here. Some possible slight increases in risk aren’t fait accompoli.

Children of alcoholics are four times more likely to have alcohol addiction problems themselves. It’s not an unreasonable thing for OP to be aware of and inform their children about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I’m not sure this is true. I didn’t drink until I was 21, and by my early 30s I was an alcoholic in the grips of addiction. I am sober now, but if you have this devil in you it can emerge at any age. I was very functional — no one outside my immediate family had any idea how far gone I was.

There is a lot of research on the topic. I’m sorry for your experience, but it doesn’t change the overwhelming data that relates early exposure to alcohol with higher addiction rates.

For example
https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/early-drinking-linked-higher-lifetime-alcoholism-risk

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I and everyone I went to high school with did drugs and drank in high school. My parents had addiction issues. I don’t drink most of the time as an adult. There’s no actual support for your beliefs here. Some possible slight increases in risk aren’t fait accompoli.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to NCS and most of my classmates did not use drugs. There was the crowd that hung out in the bishops garden smoking pot and senior year some of the "popular" rich kids (the lifer/spring valley/went to dancing school/country club types), but I never saw it.

Maret and GDS and Burke had reputations for being very drug-gy.

I think the more rigorous the better because then you attract more serious kids, whereas the less rigorous schools are more likely to attract more slacker-ish/partying/rich kid types.

She has three boys so commenting on NCS doesn’t seem to be particularly helpful…or correct for the current times. I have an US at the school and drinking is rampant. It’s definitely not a weed school (more of that at GDS, Sidwell, STA) but there is some cocaine use. A few years ago, a middle schooler had to go to rehab…just awful for the family.

I would like to point out that illicit drugs and alcohol may not be your biggest problem…many kids misue prescription drugs, particularly those for ADHD, and especially at rigorous schools. A boy at Sidwell died a few years ago misusing what he thought were clean ADHD meds but had fentanyl.

You are right to be concerned…

My children attend Sidwell, and I have never heard about a fentanyl-related death of a student. Can you post a link to a newspaper article that cites this death? I’m sure this would have made the news.

Nothing that goes on at Sidwell makes the news. Not this and not myriad other things that have gone on there over the years.

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to NCS and most of my classmates did not use drugs. There was the crowd that hung out in the bishops garden smoking pot and senior year some of the "popular" rich kids (the lifer/spring valley/went to dancing school/country club types), but I never saw it.

Maret and GDS and Burke had reputations for being very drug-gy.

I think the more rigorous the better because then you attract more serious kids, whereas the less rigorous schools are more likely to attract more slacker-ish/partying/rich kid types.

She has three boys so commenting on NCS doesn’t seem to be particularly helpful…or correct for the current times. I have an US at the school and drinking is rampant. It’s definitely not a weed school (more of that at GDS, Sidwell, STA) but there is some cocaine use. A few years ago, a middle schooler had to go to rehab…just awful for the family.

I would like to point out that illicit drugs and alcohol may not be your biggest problem…many kids misue prescription drugs, particularly those for ADHD, and especially at rigorous schools. A boy at Sidwell died a few years ago misusing what he thought were clean ADHD meds but had fentanyl.

You are right to be concerned…

My children attend Sidwell, and I have never heard about a fentanyl-related death of a student. Can you post a link to a newspaper article that cites this death? I’m sure this would have made the news.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have boys. We've always been very open and matter-of-fact about this sort of thing. The two biggest drivers of addiction tend to be 1) a genetic susceptibility to substance abuse - meaning check the family tree; and 2) age of first use. But, we also explained that genetics are not destiny. The brain adapts and changes according to its environment. If a 14 year old kid with a family history of alcohol or drug abuse begins to experiment with drinking and vaping and drugs and so on, that child is likely screwed and will face a lifetime of addiction issues. This is because there is so much going on in the adolescent brain that when you introduce drugs and alcohol to kids who already have a genetic predisposition to addiction, it often rewires the brain and derails normal development.

But if that same 14 year old waits until they're over 21, when the brain is more mature, then generally it will be perfectly safe to have an occasional drink or whatever. Particularly if they've grown up in a safe, loving, and supportive environment. Their family tree might be a disaster, but they won't be because they waited until the brain was more fully developed and over the years they've learned to enjoy and deal with life without resorting to substances to mediate how they feel.

Knock on wood. So far, so good. They know what addiction is and how it can destroy lives. They're both in college now and totally normal. Neither ever drank or used drugs or vaped in high school. But in college they seem to be pretty normal. The oldest has an occasional beer. The youngest doesn't like it. Neither do any drugs. They're both gym rats and runners and extremely fit. Neither has displayed any proclivity towards substance abuse. And I think that's entirely because we really explained how vulnerable they were to addiction given the family tree. And we drilled that early - like beginning of middle school. There's no avoiding drugs or alcohol in any high school. All you can give them is the information they need to make their own decisions.

I’m not sure this is true. I didn’t drink until I was 21, and by my early 30s I was an alcoholic in the grips of addiction. I am sober now, but if you have this devil in you it can emerge at any age. I was very functional — no one outside my immediate family had any idea how far gone I was.

There is a lot of research on the topic. I’m sorry for your experience, but it doesn’t change the overwhelming data that relates early exposure to alcohol with higher addiction rates.

For example
https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/early-drinking-linked-higher-lifetime-alcoholism-risk

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They all have a drinking and/or drug culture to some degree—most all privates and public schools. It might be less of an issue at certain area boarding schools, like Episcopal, but I’m not certain. St Anselms Abbey might be another possibility. BASIS in McLean perhaps?

Attending St Albans as a boarding student while coming home on the weekends, or certain weekends, is another possibility.

+1 My child’s single sex boarding school doesn’t have much of a party or drug culture. There is a bit, but the one case I heard of thru the grapevine was promptly kicked out for vaping. There is zero tolerance for this there. I think it is the same at most single sex boarding schools. I think also the more rigorous and smaller school - the less partying. It is much easier to keep track of. My child said administration told the students “we saw drinking on your social media account” (as a warning), so evidently they check that way, too? Plus, my kid and all their friends are scared to mess up their college chances. I vote for St. Anselms or St. Alban’s if they can get in. I feel less sure about Episcopal due to the co-Ed environment. Maybe a parent can weigh in.

Anonymous wrote:Guys, OP is asking which private school in the DC area have more or less drugs. Let's focus on her question.

yes, there are additional ways to handle this, but yes, some schools have more drugs than others. Let's be honest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to NCS and most of my classmates did not use drugs. There was the crowd that hung out in the bishops garden smoking pot and senior year some of the "popular" rich kids (the lifer/spring valley/went to dancing school/country club types), but I never saw it.

Maret and GDS and Burke had reputations for being very drug-gy.

I think the more rigorous the better because then you attract more serious kids, whereas the less rigorous schools are more likely to attract more slacker-ish/partying/rich kid types.

She has three boys so commenting on NCS doesn’t seem to be particularly helpful…or correct for the current times. I have an US at the school and drinking is rampant. It’s definitely not a weed school (more of that at GDS, Sidwell, STA) but there is some cocaine use. A few years ago, a middle schooler had to go to rehab…just awful for the family.

I would like to point out that illicit drugs and alcohol may not be your biggest problem…many kids misue prescription drugs, particularly those for ADHD, and especially at rigorous schools. A boy at Sidwell died a few years ago misusing what he thought were clean ADHD meds but had fentanyl.

You are right to be concerned…

My children attend Sidwell, and I have never heard about a fentanyl-related death of a student. Can you post a link to a newspaper article that cites this death? I’m sure this would have made the news.

It happened and please let it go.

Googling gets me nothing, not even a whiff of a Sidwell student dying of anything (except a 5th grader in 2019 in a bombing in Sri Lanka). So either pp has some real close inside knowledge about something that was completely covered up, or this is bs.