When DuBois College House Dean Trish Williams asked residents not to bring “drunken [non-resident] friends” to the house to take care of them, Sanchit Kumar, a Wharton and Engineering sophomore who lives in DuBois, was surprised.
Williams sent a house-wide e-mail Nov. 1, describing a new policy requiring that any DuBois residents who bring intoxicated non-resident friends to the dorm attend First Step, Penn’s harm-reduction program run by the offices of Alcohol Policy Initiatives and Health Education.
“I have no idea why [Williams] even brought up the issue,” said Kumar, who doesn’t believe DuBois has more alcohol incidents than any other college house. He pointed out that no other college house has employed this kind of policy.
In her e-mail, Williams said she is “annoyed” by residents who bring home intoxicated friends who require medical attention because the incident “goes on a university-wide report as an incident that takes place IN Du Bois, not in the house where the drunkard lives.”
Students who don’t comply with this policy, she explained, will be sent to First Step.
“If at all possible, escort the [intoxicated] person back to where he/she lives,” she added, “and keep an eye on them.”
Williams later clarified in a second e-mail to residents, sent Nov. 5, that the policy would not contradict Penn’s Medical Amnesty Policy, and that her initial statement was made in the best interests of “both the physical condition and reputation of the House.”
“I really hate the idea that anyone’s impression of the House might be influenced by a few de-contextualized statistics on alcohol incidents,” she wrote.
However, she emphasized that the safety of residents is her “first priority.”
In an e-mail to The Daily Pennsylvanian, Williams attributed her initial statements to the lack of alcohol incidents in DuBois, which caused her to “forget momentarily that Penn has an Amnesty Policy for students.”
According to Penn’s Medical Amnesty Policy, intoxicated students who assist another student in seeking medical attention will not receive disciplinary action.
“The University encourages all students to seek help for themselves or their friends,” Julie Lyzinski, director of Alcohol and Other Drug Program Initiatives, wrote in an e-mail, “without worrying about what sanctions will follow.”
Lyzsinki added that First Step is a “proactive, safe place” for students to discuss concerns, to problem solve and to live a “healthier life while here at Penn.”
Likewise, Penn’s Medical Emergency Response Team Operations Captain and Wharton junior Josh Lipman praised First Step as “educational intervention” used to “teach students about harm reduction tactics.”
He emphasized that participation in the program is not noted on any police or academic records and is not viewed as disciplinary action.
College Houses and Academic Services did not respond to requests for comment.
Still, Kumar said he and other residents feel that the new policy was a “scare tactic.”
“If someone is trying to help out, kudos to them,” said Kumar, who continues to believe the policy is “really just about protecting the image of DuBois.”
For the full text of the e-mails sent by House Dean Trish Williams, see thedp.com.
Comments
This seems to be misguided politicing
First I would like to say that I know it is difficult for a writer to choose a quote that accurately and faithfully distills the point of view of those being interviewed, so we may have the wrong impression of the quoted dean. It could very well be that this is a change for the better and the fact that none of the other deans have this policy would mean that they don't have the same foresight. There are a few reasons, however, that make it appear that this is not a change for the better and only an attempt on the dean's part to maker the dean and the house appear rosier on some internally circulated statistics.
This looks like political pandering pure and simple. These questionable actions seem to come from a thought that alcohol related incident statistics are a black eye for the dean. Either the dean believes the administration will not realize that statistics don't exist in a vacuum and that "correlation does not imply causation" (to quote every statistics teacher everywhere) or the administration has actually placed pressure on the dean to reform these alcohol statistics (which is even worse). Furthermore, one should infer from these statements that the dean believes that the administration won't listen to the dean's point of view about these events. I'm glad the dean has such confidence in the political machine at Penn to believe those in power will make good and informed decisions.
If students's safety is really the dean's top priority, then the dean should realize that any medical care will be the same from any one of the dorms (same hospital, same 5 minute ambulance ride). Additionally, after a certain hour a student can only sign another person into his or her own dorm and thus won't be able to get into the intoxicated student's dorm. Finally, some times external circumstances conspire to make one location a much easier location to get an intoxicated person out of the hubbub of the night and make the call that the intoxicated student needs help. Neither of these facts have anything to do with an internally circulated set of statistics, so any prohibitions placed due to these statistics really only serve to complicate the issue. By complicating the issue, regardless of the dean's intent, this introduces dangerous new parameters to a very serious situation.
The dean really should intead have had the rules used in the statistics compilation changed to reflect the home dorm of the intoxicated student. From the quotes taken above, that seems to be the dean's biggest worry. Why not change the offending policies instead of creating new ones that really only sidestep the problem. Or the dean should instead "damn the torpedoes" and open up Dubois as a safe haven to those who need help. Now everyone would know that the statistics are skewed for a reason, and that Dubois is doing everything in its power to help students. I have trouble respecting decisions to obfuscate the issue instead of fixing the problem (ie poorly defined statistics and misguided pressure from the administration and others) especially when it has the potential for causing so much harm. Then again, I moved off campus after freshmen year to avoid all of this crap and never looked back.