Alcohol policy probation a necessary intervention

By Staff Editorial     2/24/11 6:00pm

We, as a student body, stepped over the line in the sand and now the consequences have arrived (see story, page 1). There was the alcohol forum, there were the alcohol talks at the residential colleges, there were the Thresher articles, there was the formation of a Student Association task force, there was the discussion all around campus - all addressing the issue of massive alcohol abuse around campus over the past year. Ignoring all of these endeavors, the student body has continued to consume alcohol with a total lack of responsibility; the recent abuse of alcohol has justifiably forced the university leadership to shift from idle threats to concrete action. The alcohol policy probation will cause a sweeping change to the party scene of campus; punch, a common staple of private parties will no longer be a legal choice of beverage. Ultimately the decision for this probation came at a time when forgoing intervention was an invitation for tragedy. Despite the calls for a return to our Culture of Care, alcohol abuse has yet to cease. It is unacceptable to have three or four students transported for hospital care from a single party on consecutive weekends; however, the lack of alcohol responsibility has made this sickening scenario an actuality. Therefore, it is difficult for us as a student body to strongly debate this decision. The administration has a definitive responsibility to protect its students and its university's reputation. This decision by the university leadership was not a tough one or even a controversial one. If the status quo remains, students will continue to endanger themselves to the point of injury and inevitably death.

This sort of drastic action will hopefully provide a spark of realization to all of us around campus. In the short term it slows the rate at which students can consume alcohol and it forces the student body to adopt a philosophical change in the long term or risk permanently losing the freedoms afforded by our previously generous alcohol policy. However, while this intervention is necessary at this point in time from administration's perspective, it is not a perfect answer.

Definite questions arise regarding the implementation, efficacy, timing and effects of this probationary period. The ultimate enforcement has been left to the colleges. The most obvious question regarding this directive is how it will be executed. How will colleges and RUPD ensure no punch is served at private parties without unprovoked raids? Furthermore, the presence of other unbanned substances like malt liquor, beer, wine and Four Loko (uncaffeinated) will give students equal opportunity to get drunk if it is a student's desire to drink irresponsibly. Finally, the decision to make this announcement directly prior to spring break was not the optimal choice. The process to discuss this sort of drastic action should have begun earlier, and the probation decision should have been announced prior to the days leading up to spring break. The late announcement and decision to wait a full week after the original announcement for college meetings will limit the possibility of thorough discussion regarding the new policy and immediate questions assoiciated with potential policy changes.

---

---

There is no perfect solution to this multi-faceted problem; however, the best of solutions have the backing of students. The decision for the probation was made with input from college presidents and chief justices, so this directive is not a purely top-down approach. Additional college meetings provide a starting point from which productive discussion may begin. However, for this new policy to be successful, students must uniformly support it and we must instill long-term solutions to address alcohol abuse.

In the immediate future, the answer to the question regarding enforcement of this probation lies with the students; RUPD will not be able to survey all the drinking that occurs on campus, so students have the duty of respecting this ban amongst themselves - because we believe it is in the best interests of the university, our friends, our suitemates and ourselves. This is the definition of Culture of Care. And this is not too much to ask. The dryness of O-week is already solemnly respected by students across campus; the respect for that policy is not out of fear of being caught (because RUPD does not actively seek out students breaking this rule) but out of a desire to do what is right and what is in the best interest of the community, namely new students. Similarly, we now hold the responsibility of ensuring that Rice reaps benefits from this probation.

Looking into the future, this university needs to overhaul its O-week alcohol awareness and education for incoming students to ensure future classes are fully cognizant of the risks that we have faced over the past year. Education dispersal is not sufficient for incoming students; there is simply no alcohol education during orientation outside of the guy/girl talk. Instilling modified versions of programs such as Choices and administering tests such as e-Chug during orientation could go a long way to equipping students with the knowledge necessary to make smart choices. Responsibility and good judgement are minimally effective without a proper base of knowledge when dealing with alcohol issues.

This is a crossroads, and we risk losing more and more freedoms as a student body if we fail to change our ways. This probation represents the grim state of affairs regarding Rice's alcohol policy, and it is imperative that we as students take corrective action before it's too late.

---