Aamoy Gupta English Composition 3 Mattenson-Lecture 19 Assignment W1 Thursday, May 9, 2013 Faster, Undergrad! Chug! Chug!

One evening, on a whim, I elected to watch a comedy film in an attempt to relieve the stresses incurred by schoolwork. The film was National Lampoons Animal House, a movie known for its satirical depiction of fraternities on university campuses. As a high school student from a sheltered area, the debauchery portrayed by the film was quite shocking. The protagonists were nasty, delinquent, and imbibed liquor continuously. I took solace in the fact that the film was a satire, and ultimately a work of fiction. Upon attending UCLA, I began to realize that the consumption of liquor appeared to be a staple in the social life of college students here. It also became apparent to me that the administrative bodies, especially UCLAs housing administration, acknowledges and tolerates escapist drinking through closed door policies. The practice of unsafe drinking habits raises serious queries whose implications adversely affect UCLAs reputation as an academic institution, as well as the lives of the enrolled students. Administration and students should work together to further reduce incidents of alcohol abuse on campus and in dormitories in order to maintain a safe learning environment. While drinking is common in all higher educational institutions, it is particularly prevalent in a known few. One such school is the reputed Stanford University. Stanford is known by employers for its excellent engineering and medical programs, and by students for its drinking culture. An op-ed in The Daily accurately described the nonchalant attitude surrounding binge drinking. The author of the piece, Jeff Mandell describes an attempted intervention that was conducted in a Stanford University dorm. Mandell remarks: One suggestion was for everyone to start drinking earlier in the day so that our systems would have more time to handle the alcohol (Mandell). Though the suggestion may have been voiced in jest, it reveals the blas mindset students have towards drinking. On a much higher level, employers and institutions of further learning may conclude from such comments that while Stanford graduates possess great intellectual capacity, they are undisciplined, and unable to control themselves. 1

The ending message of the aforementioned intervention at Arroyo did not explicitly discourage students from drinking. Instead, it assured students that No one [would] ever get in trouble(Mandell), and that friends [would] always take care of each other(Mandell). Mandell further commented on the resolution, stating that a message that implies alcohol abuse has no consequences is not going to cause [students] to change their behavior.(Mandell). It is the responsibility of Stanford University administration to conduct interventions, but it is the students responsibility to take them seriously. A grave tone, coupled with reallife alcohol related anecdotal tragedies, may serve to re-sensitize students to the dangers which may result from excessive consumption of liquor. While drinking cannot be entirely eradicated from college campuses, it should not be a social etiquette. Students should not have to imbibe great amounts of liquor to impress their peers. Escapist drinking culture contributes to what Mandell calls a culture of acceptance that prevents alcohol abuse from being taken seriously. (Mandell). Academic ratings may stay high, yet the reputation of the school will suffer in the eyes of employers and institutions of further learning. Students must keep their drinking habits in check in order to maintain the image of the university in the eyes of society. This culture of acceptance (Mandell) is nurtured by administration as well. Stanfords alcohol policies, though robust on paper, are virtually nonexistent, and its administration seems to tolerate its drinking subculture. The author, Mandell, shared an experience with the reader in which fields were policed at night, while undergraduates drank in their dorms, just across the street. At the same time on Mayfield Avenuehundreds of students, many of them underage, were drinking more than is safe or healthy.(Mandell) It is difficult to imagine a police force so inept, that it is unable to detect scores of underage students drinking more than is safe or healthy (Mandell). Stanford Universitys drinking problem seems to have contributed to a decline of respect for authority, including the police force. For instance, the orders given by police officers for the students to clear the field were given this incredulous reply: After this inning (Mandell). Stanfords administration is clearly too accepting of escapist drinking subculture. UCLA, in comparison, has draconian laws concerning alcohol, as well as an involved and concerned police force. Nevertheless, UCLA harbors a closed door policy with alcohol. According 2

to Residential Assistants, residents may only be incriminated if Residential Assistants or CSOs see or smell the alcohol. In addition, it seems that students are only lightly reprimanded for their actions, and heavy punishments, such as removal from housing facilities, are almost never carried out. I have noticed that students drink to excess on the Hill frequently, from personal experience and observation. However, RAs and other staff seem to turn a blind eye to this behavior. Perhaps this is because housing staff, especially RAs, feel that they can relate to the students and understand the need for alcohol for social purposes. Personally, I do not believe in heavy punishment for drinking. However, I feel that students should be introduced to resources that will help alcohol abuse issues, so that they do not harm themselves or others as a consequence of their behavior. This kind of support, while in limited effect at UCLA, does not seem to be publicized. The inclusion of advertised alcohol abuse counseling and associated educational programs will surely cure misinformation, as well allow students to rethink the escapist drinking subculture. The concurrent establishment of enforced dry campus drinking policies will improve the reputation of the school in the eyes of parents and other concerned parties. At the same time, students would be able to fulfill their social obligations by drinking in legal establishments off of campus. This revised approach towards alcohol would serve as a win-win for UCLA students and university administration, achieving the common goal of upholding the True Bruin identity and the portraying UCLA as a professional and disciplined institution. It is difficult to deny that drinking is unsafe for students, and the welfare of their peers. UCLA and Stanford both allege that their student body comprises of responsible drinkers. Stanford Universitys Alcohol Policy states: the University does not tolerate reckless drinkingand its consequent harmful behaviors. The University is especially concerned about the misuse of distilled alcohol products (hard alcohol), and the dangers that arise from that misuse. Nevertheless, Mandell paints a very different picture in his op-ed: [We] could have been on first-name terms with many of the paramedics who serviced our dorm on a regular basis.(Mandell). Mandell reveals through his article that students neglect University policy and imbibe in alcoholic beverages. The fact that residents of the dormitory could have been on first name basis withthe paramedics(Mandell) implies that students engage in binge drinking, 3

leading to acute alcohol poisoning, and consequent hospitalization. Paramedics repeatedly showed up, which indicates that alcohol abuse on the part of the students is a recurring problem which must be solved with rapidity through policy and practice. Mandell remarks that University policies regarding drinking are paternalistic laws(Mandell) which are practically unenforced on campus(Mandell). Yet, at the same time, Stanford University claims to not tolerate reckless drinking and subsequently claims that it is especially concerned about the misuse of distilled alcohol products. UCLAs alcohol policies are less tolerant, as they rehash federal and state laws, and lean towards the dry campus model. The major principle of the policy is as follows: alcoholic beverages may be present at events where attendance is likely to consist of students under 21 years of age only in regulated settings that give the highest priority to standards for student health, safety, and responsibility that apply across entire populations.(UCLA) Despite this, it is evident that students under 21 years of age(UCLA) are drinking in their dorms which dont qualify as regulated settings(UCLA). While Residential Assistants and Campus Security Officers patrol the dorms from time to time, they employ a live and let live approach to enforcing the alcohol policies. The situation at UCLA is not as dire as that at Stanford University. However, paramedics still frequent the hill, medevacing intoxicated students in public view. The stench of flavored vodka is discernible in the elevators after Thirsty Thursdays. The Residential Assistants continue to patrol, unfazed by the evidence before them. UCLA claims to give the highest priority for student health [and] safety.(UCLA), but the informal alcohol policy followed by housing administration contributes to alcohol abuse, and is indicative of an escapist drinking subculture.(Mandell). It is clear that the drinking subculture at both universities results in consequent harmful behaviors. While under the influence, students become a danger to themselves and to others. Their constant hospitalization places a strain on emergency room resources, and endangers the lives of other emergency room patients. The lack of mental judgment caused by unsafe drinking practices can lead to bad decisions that further [impact] physical and emotional health (Mandell). These bad decisions may include, but not be limited to liver and kidney damage, violence, and sexual abuse. Particularly publicized incidents would serve to thrust either school into the limelight, degrading its reputation as an academic institution. Students should 4

[have] the courage (Mandell) and place an importance on consuming alcoholic beverages in a modest fashion to avoid bad decisions (Mandell) that may garner negative press. Housing administration should also strive to enforce stated policies, so that students will respect their authority on the campus, and behave in a safe, healthy manner. It is high time that we the alcohol abuse rampant among our respective student bodies, and commit to the containment of escapist drinking culture. While the consumption of alcohol may be an integral part of the social life of a college student at Stanford or UCLA, binge drinking and other unsafe practices have no place on campus. Such behaviors are a detriment to physical and mental health of the student body. They may also lead to the degradation of the credibility of a university through a tainted public image. The blame falls on students and administration alike. In short, students must use their newfound freedom in a mature and responsible manner. University administration should take steps to effectively enforce their liquor policies, as well as provide rehabilitation and counseling to students who are dependent on alcohol. Both students and administration must march in lockstep towards the common goal of curbing alcohol abuse and improving the reputation of their respective schools.

Works Cited "CDC - Frequently Asked Questions." Alcohol and Public Health: Frequently Asked Questions. Center for Disease Control, 07 Nov 2012. Web. 18 Apr 2013. <http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/faqs.htm>.

Mandell, Jeff. "Modern Manners: The National Pastime."The Stanford Daily. Stanford University, 05 Apr 1012. Web. 18 Apr 2013. <http://www.stanforddaily.com/2012/04/05/modern-manners-the-national-pastime/>.

"Stanford University Student Alcohol Policy." Office of Alcohol Policy and Education. Stanford University, n.d. Web. 18 Apr 2013. <http://studentaffairs.stanford.edu/alcohol/policy>.

Montero, Janina. "UCLA STUDENT ALCOHOL POLICY." UCLA STUDENT ALCOHOL POLICY. University of California, Los Angeles, 07 Aug 2007. Web. 18 Apr 2013. <http://www.studentactivities.ucla.edu/docs/Alcohol Policy.pdf>.