If history is any guide, some of our peers will find themselves this morning waking up at University Health Services (UHS) after having had too much to drink during their St. Patrick's Day or post-midterm celebrations. While being "McCoshed" is not a pleasant experience, these students will have been fortunate to have received appropriate medical attention. Certainly, the University's policy of not taking disciplinary action against intoxicated, underage students who seek assistance from UHS increases the probability that students who may be at risk of alcohol poisoning will receive the care they need. UHS and Public Safety do take actions, however, once a student is admitted that may very well deter an intoxicated student's friends or bystanders from making sure that the student gets medical help in the first place.
Currently, UHS asks students admitted for alcohol-related reasons from whom or from where they procured the alcohol that made them ill. Based on the information provided by the student, Public Safety may then carry out a serving violation investigation. There have been an increasing number of situations on campus where students, fearful of such an investigation, have tried to take care of their inebriated peers on their own, even going so far as to stay up all night to watch them rather than take them to McCosh Health Center.
As the number of students who are not members of eating clubs increases with the creation of the four-year colleges, the serving and consumption of alcohol will likely become more decentralized. This growing, dangerous practice of not seeking professional medical assistance in the case of a friend's intoxication is only likely to increase. More "room parties" mean more situations in which students will ingest more hard alcohol and more instances in which those directly responsible for serving alcohol will be the ones best positioned to assist their friends in getting appropriate medical care. Sooner or later, the disincentives presented by current UHS policies may lead to tragic consequences.
The administration has a duty to enforce New Jersey state law and should not condone student behavior that is illegal or contrary to University policy. The University must take this growing problem into account, however, and adjust its policies so that it can maintain the healthiest environment possible. Just as people are exhorted to not let their friends drive drunk, they should also be encouraged to help those in need of medical attention, without fear that the very act of being a Good Samaritan increases their risk of punishment. Public Safety should not be able to carry out a serving violation investigation if their only evidence is the admittance of a student to McCosh or evidence provided by such a student while he or she is under the influence of alcohol.
Read More
Keep academic authority in human hands
Lily Halbert-AlexanderThe Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
The Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
What do we owe society for a Princeton education?
Jia Cheng ShenThe social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
The social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
Notes from a so-called enemy’s classroom
Jennifer JenningsIt wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.
It wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.