Today marks the end of our series detailing the problematic issue of alcohol use at USC. We argued on Thursday that, given the nature of popular culture today, students belong to a society that pervasively idolizes drinking and the party scene. Restriction and punishment, while effective in their own way, just can’t replace the value of education.
USC must definitely keep this lesson in mind for future plans, but it must also pay great attention to what other schools have done in terms of student alcohol use.
Other state universities have seen the same challenges and suffered the same devastating losses due to alcohol abuse. Many have responded with harsher punishments, which have in some cases lowered the number of incidents. Again, we do not feel like this is a sustainable solution, and USC should be wary of the examples these policies set. They bring forth an attitude of fear from students, one that keeps them not from drinking, but from seeking the help that they need.
More inspiring is the medical amnesty policy at the University of Florida and its tailgating restrictions. These moves provide resources and structure for a gradual yet permanent change in how students treat their use of alcohol. Amnesty could save students’ lives, as well as provide a chance to encourage safer habits while not endangering their academic records. Tailgating rules can give authorities some control while leaving students free to exercise their judgment. Shared input is better than an attempt at a total crackdown, which often lets more students through the cracks than it saves.
This is only one small part of what should be a lengthy and heavily-considered conversation among everyone involved — administrators and students alike.
This can’t end here. As this semester has shown, the stakes are too high.