Who Is to Blame for Death Due to Hazing

In 2017 alone, four hazing-related deaths took place. These four deaths add to a growing list of tragic deaths related to hazing activities in college campuses. With every tragedy, two questions arise–

Who is at fault for this incident?

Whose responsibility is it to ensure that no more hazing-related deaths occur?

In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled that the university is required “to take reasonable steps to protect against foreseeable acts of hazing, including student abduction on the university’s property, and the harm that naturally flows therefrom,” in light of the case of the injury of Jeffrey Knoll, a Phi Gamma Delta pledge at the University of Nebraska.

Knoll was handcuffed to a radiator and forced to drink alcoholic beverages until the point of sickness, where he was then moved and re-handcuffed to a toilet pipe in the bathroom. He tried to escape the fraternity house by sliding down a drainpipe from the third-floor bathroom; however, he “fell and suffered head injuries, leaving him brain-damaged.

”

As the fraternity house is on-campus and is considered a form of on-campus housing, the fraternity house is under the coverage of the student code of conduct, enforced by the university. As it is then the university’s responsibility to maintain this code of conduct, the university should be responsible for the failure to enforce the code before this tragic incidence took place. In fact, the University of Nebraska was previously aware of criminal conduct involving members of Phi Gamma Delta and aware of hazing activities taking place in various houses on campus.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified

Proficient in: Hazing

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, the lawyer of the Knoll family, James M. McQuillan, remarked the significance of the case, as higher education institutions now have to recognize and assume responsibility to protect their students from hazing.

This responsibility is reiterated in Addressing Contemporary Campus Safety Issues, as J.A. Rund argues that there is a strong positive correlation between academic achievement and safe, healthy environments that support it. He goes on to establish that the student affairs staff have a responsibility to foster this safe, healthy environment. If a safe environment is integral to student success and that environment is to be upheld by higher education administrators, then the negative effects on those that are leaders and victims of hazing, the result of an un-safe, un-healthy environment, rest in the hands of the administration, as the Supreme Court ruling suggests.