Sophomore Sibs Weekend cancellation unfair, unfounded
Editorial
The recent cancellation of Sophomore Sibs Weekend by director of Student Activities Joe Cassidy is unfortunate, unfair and unfounded.
The several reasons Cassidy cited for the cancellation of the growing tradition are rife with hypocrisy, particularly the arguments that families are too small or live too far away.
Despite the national trend in decreasing family size, more students than not have several siblings, and it is irrelevant to base the decision to cancel a local, campus event on a national statistic.
The average number of siblings students actually have, however, is immaterial in discussing whether or not such siblings should be able to visit during an organized weekend. "[T]he likelihood that a sophomore student would have an eligible sibling in the right age [middle school] is very small," said Cassidy. There is no "right" age to visit a brother or sister at Notre Dame. Limiting the age group to middle school is unfair to siblings younger and older than this age and creates an elitist attitude that they need to be the "right" age and somehow don't belong if they are not.
It is also wrong to base, in part, the decision to cancel Sophomore Sibs on the notion siblings do not have equal opportunity to attend because of travel distance. Does the University cancel Parents Weekend during football season or Junior Parents Weekend because some families live too far away? No. Does the admissions office decide who is admitted based on where they are from and whether or not they can afford to travel? No. This University is definitely not an "equal opportunity lender" when it comes to considering the distance people travel to visit, whether it's for four years or a weekend.
Another reason Cassidy cited was low attendance. According to that logic, we should cancel most of our guest lectures, more than half of our sporting events and almost anything SUB orchestrates. Failure to fill an expected attendance quota is not a legitimate reason to cancel an event.
Neither is the concern for underage drinking. If Cassidy and the administration are so concerned about underage drinking by visiting siblings, maybe they should consider orienting their efforts toward a more effective solution to the student underage drinking that is already here.
Each of the concerns Cassidy cited about Sophomore Sibs could have been easily remedied; it is absolutely absurd to cancel the event without exploring and testing options for improvement. If Student Activities really cared about the problems with this event, it would solve them. Such a rash and unjustified decision is just one more item to add to the swelling list of ways administrators let students down.
Kudos is in order to members of the Class of 2002, however, for taking a strong stand in their appeal to Cassidy's decision last semester. Their efforts to fight for tradition and classmates are to be commended and celebrated. By voicing their concerns, they defended the right to be heard in the atmosphere of petty dictatorship that all too often guides the way decisions are made on this campus.
All Viewpoint Stories for Tuesday, February 1, 2000
