Anonymous wrote:That DS went to Sidwell because the Secret Service was already there, not because Sidwell takes everyone else's problem children.

And the word is rudder, not rutter.

The PP's point was different, and contrasted which school accepted a kid with a drug offense and which school kicked the kid out. Schools don't admit kids with drug records just because the Secret Service has already set up shop on the campus. Admissions decisions don't happen just because it's easier for the Secret Service than if they had to scope out a brand new private.

Ummm , the secret service is at many private school in Washington. Some schools just prefer to keep that information to themselves .

That DS went to Sidwell because the Secret Service was already there, not because Sidwell takes everyone else's problem children.

And the word is rudder, not rutter.

IMO this whole thread reeks of someone trying to goad others into fighting.

Long live STA! Bastion of self righteousness. Nobody there is ever admitted under dubious circumstances or treated dfferently. They are simply superior.

Actually, parent interference is not the "norm" ; decorum is the norm. I know of one private that suspended the son of a sitting US Vice President because it was in the best interest of the school community to apply the rules equally to everyone . The parents of that DS then applied and was accpted guess where?? Sidwell.

Again 12:20, this is not taking pleasure at another's expense. I'm sure you and I have similar HHI and I have DC's also at a Private.We did not choose to apply to Sidwell because we were turned off by the parent community. This is genuine dissapointment as a graduate of a Quaker school that Sidwell has lost its rutter.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Hughely was a troubled kid with a dysfunctional father. Both had severe substance abuse issues. This I know for a fact. His problems were extremely deep.

You can "guess" all you want about the Sidwell kids, but you are just guessing. The behavior was atrocious and should be handled appropriately. My point is that to label a whole institution including admin, teachers, parents and the student body is absurd, particularly for such a great institution. Whatever bias people have against Sidwell comes out when they pile on with no knowledge of the facts. These students are still learning their way in the world and, while their acts should be condemned, it still doesn't make them horrible people. [/quote]

This is not bias against Sidwell, this is dissapointment. There is a valuable differnce between the two in that one only have holds accountable those one has high expectations of. Were the Sidwell of today more true to its Quaker traditions and less incumbered in their efforts to instill them in the student body ( re: free of the pressure of interfering parents$$$$) there is no way that this would have happened. It is not an isolated incident ; it is the tip of the iceberg. [/quote]

Parental meddling is prevalent at all private schools.

What is everyone's obsession with tuition costs and the incomes of private school families? Is there some satisfaction in knowing that the wealthy don't have "perfect" children?

[quote=Anonymous]Hughely was a troubled kid with a dysfunctional father. Both had severe substance abuse issues. This I know for a fact. His problems were extremely deep.

You can "guess" all you want about the Sidwell kids, but you are just guessing. The behavior was atrocious and should be handled appropriately. My point is that to label a whole institution including admin, teachers, parents and the student body is absurd, particularly for such a great institution. Whatever bias people have against Sidwell comes out when they pile on with no knowledge of the facts. These students are still learning their way in the world and, while their acts should be condemned, it still doesn't make them horrible people. [/quote]

This is not bias against Sidwell, this is dissapointment. There is a valuable differnce between the two in that one only have holds accountable those one has high expectations of. Were the Sidwell of today more true to its Quaker traditions and less incumbered in their efforts to instill them in the student body ( re: free of the pressure of interfering parents$$$$) there is no way that this would have happened. It is not an isolated incident ; it is the tip of the iceberg.

And the fact that he got a pass over and over again all along the way because of his family and their influence had a lot to do with the shaping of his character.

Anonymous wrote:wow, some people really like to extrapolate based on a few facts provided on this site.
all kids make mistakes. it doesn't make them bad people. the student s and school can learn from this.
nor is this an indictment on the school any more than any event elswhere is.
the pettiness of some of you, particularly those who keep harping on the cost of tuition at sidwell as somehow making this incident even more atrocious, or that this is somehow the result of an admissions surge 14 yrs ago, is striking.

Get over yourself. This action by the student(s) are the reaction by the Sidwell administration (or lack therof) is an indictment of the school's culture and character. Same thing with the Landon Sex Fantasy League thing. Even if it's a few students, this type of episode gives insight into how the school operates and reacts to bad behavior.

I completely agree with the prior post. Twenty bucks 10:12 is a highly successful professional (or a SAHM married to one), and judges one's parenting skills by the schools their kids end up attending, sports they play and grades they make.

Hughely was a troubled kid with a dysfunctional father. Both had severe substance abuse issues. This I know for a fact. His problems were extremely deep.

You can "guess" all you want about the Sidwell kids, but you are just guessing. The behavior was atrocious and should be handled appropriately. My point is that to label a whole institution including admin, teachers, parents and the student body is absurd, particularly for such a great institution. Whatever bias people have against Sidwell comes out when they pile on with no knowledge of the facts. These students are still learning their way in the world and, while their acts should be condemned, it still doesn't make them horrible people.

attitudes like 10:12 are what is the problem,"kids make mistakes, that doesn't make them bad people" .Just what has he done to be described as a "good kid" .Let me guess: he's an A student and is headed for an Ivy League school and his parents are patting themselves on the back. A" good kid" respects women and the community of which he is a part. A good kid would have never written that garbage, and if it did get that far somehow a he would have the decency to follow the re-direction of the Head of School when he was told it was offensive, been embarassed and apologized.That is of course something that is learned at home. Instead, he published it in hard copy and organized an act of dissrespect inside the Quaker Meeting because his "poem" was rejected. Sorry but, the "kids" you should be concerned about are the girls described as whores and if PP is correct that there are enough details in the poem to identify them, that is a cold and cruel act of someone with very little empathy for others .
Just how many passes did that Hunkley ( sp) get while he was at Landon and then at UVA because he was "a nice kid" from a "good family" .