SAM NOVAK'S Sept. 21 Viewpoint column, "Bottling the message" presents a reasoned perspective on the issue of underage college drinking and the University's response to this serious problem. Novak accuses the University of following a double-standard in simultaneously warning students not to drink, while also providing resources to help students manage the consequences of drinking. Unfortunately, Novak fails to appreciate that the University's approach, far from being misguided, is ultimately the most pragmatic way to manage the problem of undergraduate drinking.
Novak asserts that the University should hold its students to a higher standard. Despite acknowledging that "most people are going to go out and drink in college," Novak suggests that the University's policies, in fact, do little to mitigate this behavior and indeed may even encourage it.
From the outset, let me clarify two matters: I honestly do not know all of the factors that have shaped current policy, so I will be speaking from an outside observer's perspective, rather than from institutional point of view. Second, I do agree with one of Novak's main points: We should treat every student like a mature, responsible person. I, too, do not condone underage drinking; however, when it comes to matters of institutional policy, we must concede reality.
Alcohol is a fact of college life, and drinking is an integral part of the social fabric. The University has, wisely in my opinion, navigated an appropriate middle course in attempting to recognize this reality and protect its students from further harm. No matter how much the University might stress the fundamental illegality, immorality and physical dangers of underage drinking, it is difficult to imagine the elimination of the drinking culture which is so prevalent both within the University's environs and society at large. The University, therefore, has tried to provide a safety net for those students foolish enough to ignore the inherent dangers which come with drinking.
Novak frames his argument in terms of holding individuals to a higher standard. In fact, the University does this already. Students have been given the responsibility to hold themselves to the University's Standards of Conduct. The University prohibits underage possession of alcohol within University housing and has strict policies against the serving of alcohol to underage students at all University venues. Crucially, the policies with respect to alcohol are enforced by students through the student-run judicial system. Indeed, given the basic similarity between University policy and legal guidelines pertaining to possession and consumption of alcohol, the University appears to treat students as mature, adult actors.
The University's decision to provide critical resources such as a Safe Ride program which protects the student as well as the community from drunk driving, or to make sure that students know that they should go to the hospital if they consume too much alcohol, should be seen as a responsible and practical response to dealing with the potentially harmful consequences of misbehavior.
To follow Novak's argument to its logical conclusion, the University would ratchet up its warnings against underage drinking, while providing no help to students in case of trouble. This would seem to be both illogical and highly dangerous.
Let us bear in mind that, for many students, the University is acting in a status akin to in loco parentis. The University is responsible for the actions of its students, and could face legal action if it abdicates its duty to safeguard their health and safety. This is the higher standard to which the University must hold itself.
Regardless of your opinion of underage college drinking, simply railing against it is not enough. When prevention fails, its consequences cannot be ignored. A lot of people make mistakes in college. Does it really make sense to sacrifice the physical health and safety of students on the altar of "a higher standard" of moral righteousness?
Obviously, I do not think so. If we are to conduct any serious evaluation of the University's policy toward underage drinking, we simply cannot ignore the safety concerns which likely motivate the policy.\n
Sanjiv Tata's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at s.tata@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
FREED: Before embracing AI, Virginia schools need an update
By Dan Freed | 17 hours agoAdvocates saving AI a seat in the classroom are in desperate need of a reality check.
EDITORIAL: Celebrate the Contemplative Commons and other non-academic student spaces
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoThe Contemplative Commons stands as a testament to the value of spaces that transcend commercial imperatives, fostering interdisciplinary engagement and experiential learning.
KURTZWEIL: What we lose in the name of efficiency
By Paul Kurtzweil | 4 days agoPenicillin was discovered in a moldy petri dish — this government would have it thrown out because it was wasting space on the counter.
