I'm sure this will come as a shock to some, but my kids (both of whom are about 30 years old) never did the Spring Break thing. My "wild" daughter didn't even have a desire to go, and my son didn't see the point in it and stayed home.
Even more shocking is that my kids were neither scarred nor underdeveloped as a result of foregoing the opportunity to travel away from home and act like jackazzez. Amazingly enough, the money not spent on booze, motel rooms, bail, gas, food, cover charges and souvenirs assisted them both, significantly, with their first years of college.
It's amazing to me that there's tacit approval by parents for kids to go do things the parents would never allow them to do around home, with all the accompanying risks, in a place far enough away for it to be a PITA for the parents to come bail the kids out or visit them in hospital.
It is a mystery to me why parents would want their kids to go out there and prove they aren't ready to be out on their own, prove that there's a reason for drinking-age laws, prove that you can get pregnant or very sick from having sex, etc.
So, yes, I really do think it's important to distinguish "want" and "need" here, and to show that although boring, staying home is the better alternative.
. I did not approve, but let them go anyway and nobody died or got pregnant, everyone came back safe and sound.
I still haven't filled her in on ALL the shenanigans from my trip, but she knows enough to know I had a blast and was prudent.
