Summer Session bans hard alcohol on campus

Students who moved into the dorms for the summer were welcomed back with an email informing them that a new alcohol policy would be enforced during the duration of this year’s Stanford Summer Session.

The email, sent by Assistant Dean of Stanford Summer Session Jess Matthews, warned students that the storage or consumption of hard liquor would not be tolerated in dorms during the summer. The new policy defines hard liquor as “any alcoholic beverage with an alcohol content 20 percent or greater (40 proof or above). Examples include vodka, rum and whiskey.” The policy applies to all summer residents, regardless of age.

Those over the legal drinking age of 21 are allowed to be in possession of beer and wine but are subject to the same consequences as their underage dormmates if they are found with hard alcohol. This differs from the alcohol policy enforced during the regular academic year, which does not place restrictions on students who are 21 and older.

“This change is a product of several factors,” Matthews said. “Summer Session is a short, intensive academic experience, which means that we implement unique policies in order to foster an academic environment and support students so that they can be successful.”

Students who are found to be in possession of hard alcohol will be asked to pour it out immediately and will be subject to a conversation with residential staff regarding ways in which they can avoid further policy violations. Additional repercussions will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

While summer resident assistants are expected to enforce the policy, they are not being told to search specifically for hard liquor, Matthews said.

The new policy, which was developed in conjunction with the Office of Alcohol Policy and Education (OAPE), stems from the concern that most of the negative consequences associated with alcohol during the school year are recorded as having been the direct result of hard liquor consumption. The email that was sent to students cites hard alcohol as the primary contributor to 100 percent of emergency room transports and 80 percent of behavioral issues and police citations during the academic year.

According to data compiled by the Stanford University Department of Public Safety (SUDPS), the Stanford campus saw a 45 percent increase in medical alcohol transports this school year over last year, resulting in a total of 77 alcohol transports between September 2011 and April 2012. Data on the number of Summer Session transports has not been tracked by the OAPE.

The shortened length of the summer session in comparison to the rest of the academic school year is also being cited as a reason for the change in policy.

“We don’t have the same amount of time in which to do community norming,” Matthews said, “so our policy changes can be perceived as more top-down than those that occur during the other three quarters.”

Despite the OAPE’s advisory role in constructing this new policy, there are no plans to implement the change during the regular school year.

“This is only a Summer Session policy,” confirmed Associate Dean of Student Affairs Ralph Castro in an email to The Daily.

Dean Castro is, however, interested in seeing how the policy plays out over the course of the summer. He plans on discussing its outcome with the Summer Session staff and would like to hear from students regarding their thoughts on the policy and its effectiveness.

Students with further questions or concerns can speak with their RAs, house directors or Jess Matthews for more information.

  • Reconsider

    This is a bad idea. You’re not going to to stop anyone from drinking; you’re just going to make them do it in private. You’re also going to make yourself look out of touch with the way student life actually works, which is something that the OAPE should already be worried about. 

  • sstudent91

    “This change is a product of several factors,” Matthews said. “Summer Session is a short, intensive academic experience, which means that we implement unique policies in order to foster an academic environment and support students so that they can be successful.”

    “We don’t have the same amount of time in which to do community norming,” Matthews said, “so our policy changes can be perceived as more top-down than those that occur during the other three quarters.”

    Are we really expected to buy these excuses??  “Community norming”????  Also, summer session is shorter but generally people take lighter course loads and have less responsibilities than they do during the regular school year.  How Matthews thinks these statements are even vaguely passable BS is a mystery to me.  I would imagine car/bike accidents are responsible for a decent percentage of ER visits from campus as well, so I guess we should ban those next.

    (PS, the e-mail said hard alcohol was responsible for 100% of *alcohol* ER transports, not all ER transports)

  • tryna

    The number of alcohol transports is certainly alarming, so I think the university is trying to fight that. This is reasonable.

  • hi

    terrible idea. this is basically treating the stanford undergraduate (and graduate?) population as children.

  • MisguidedPolicies

    Agreed. These students are just going to drink with their doors shut. You are forcing them to make worse decisions.

  • Bad idea, housing

    How many alcohol-related transports are there for students over 21? I think that would be an interesting statistic. It’s one thing to be stricter than normal about enforcing the law, but treating legal adults as children is only going to encourage immaturity and general sentiments against housing. Apparently they don’t understand that if you expect people to behave responsibly, you need to give them responsibility, especially when the law says that they are entitled to it. 
    I understand that they are concerned about student safety, but an increase in alcohol transports might be reflective of less responsible students, not a fault of the open-door policy. An increase in alcohol-related ER transports is better than an increase in alcohol-related deaths.

  • Anonymous

    Stanford’s alcohol policy works because students trust their RAs and can come to them when they need help. That’s why our transports ARE transports rather than deaths. This fundamental trust needs to remain for an open channel to exist between students and those responsible for their wellbeing. By detracting from that trust (giving students any reason to avoid letting their RAs know about their alcohol habits), we limit the interactions of students and RAs. A sick drunk will be far less likely to ask his or her RA for help in an emergency if there is a risk of penalty. This is the first step towards a closed-door alcohol policy…one which Stanford has always been able to avoid in the past.

  • Alcohol-Related Death

    They’re going to see fewer transports, but eventually someone is going to die if policies like this continue. They don’t change behavior, they only change the culture of openness that encourages someone to call an ambulance or seek help when their friend is in trouble.

  • Beopen

    Stanford needs to be progressive in looking at all solutions.  Summer Session is a good time to experiment with new ideas.

  • Cool

     OAPE is trying to do the right things.  They are in touch with students who want a safe, fun and memorable social scene.

  • Guest

    Don’t think that this is a good idea either, I think the school’s regular-year policies are better.  There does need to be a solution to the high amount of transports, though, and I honestly think that needs to be done through somehow providing easier access to beer on campus.  It sounds strange, and maybe not a good idea, but as someone who buys alcohol and brings it back on campus it’s significantly easier to pick up a couple bottles of hard a — enough for a large number of people/long period of time — and throw them in a backpack than to get even an 18 of beer.  Wine is easier because of Franzia but I think most would choose hard over wine.  Once that hard alcohol is there, as OAPE points out things often get out of hand (especially for freshmen, who make up the vast majority of transports… and also are more likely to be biking or walking to get alcohol, and therefore more space-constricted).  Maybe Valero on campus should sell beer, or perhaps kegs should be allowed/encouraged in freshman dorms.  As always, it’s tough for Stanford to take measures like these that pretty blatantly violate the law, but it’d be worth it to reduce life-threatening incidents.

  • SParent

    As a Stanford parent, I have been so very happy that Stanford students aren’t forced, by way of campus policy, to participate in binge drinking and desperate attempts to drink as much as possible on the few occasions that they can find alcohol, like the students at so many other universities seem to do.  We have always felt that Stanford’s “open” attitudes towards alcohol have led to MORE responsible choices among the students on campus. I hope that the regular school year will continue to have the same Stanford alcohol policy that we’ve seen over the last 5 years while our two children have attended. We actually feel very strongly about this, especially because we’ve seen the wild behavior at our local state university, where the students are regularly arrested for having alcohol. It’s the forbidden nature of alcohol that makes it so attractive to these kids, and makes them over-indulge every time they get a chance.

  • guest

    “While summer resident assistants are expected to enforce the policy….”  Doesn’t this just mean that it won’t be enforced?  RAs have never been the alcohol police in my experience– just the opposite.  My freshman RAs would actually buy alcohol for us.  If you try to force RAs to accept this policing responsibility, you’ll probably just find that there are fewer applicants for those RA positions.  Free housing just isn’t worth it.

  • lol

     because they act like alcoholic children? Makes sense..

  • http://www.facebook.com/bobyrne Brendan O’Byrne

     Good question. We will try to find that out.

  • Anon

    trying != doing. I am a student who wants a safe, fun, and memorable social scene who drinks responsibly, and this is punishing me for others’ mistakes.

  • Anon

    “they” are just a loud minority on campus

  • Anon

    This is actually a good idea. I remember as a freshman, I would always buy vodka rather than beer/lighter drinks because I could easily carry it in my backpack so I didn’t have to worry about getting harassed by police.

  • sstudent91

    It doesn’t matter if they’re in touch with one demographic… if they’re banning hard liquor in the dorms then they’re not in touch with a significant portion of the students and that is the problem.

  • annoyed…

    This is absolute nonsense.  Policies that simply encourage total abstinence from something (War on Drugs, abstinence only sex ed, marijuana prohibition, alcohol prohibition, the DARE Program) consistently fail.  The ultimate goal of OAPE should not be to “foster academic environment,” but to keep students safe.  Up until this point, they have done a great job of keeping students safe while still allowing students to explore alcohol.  The hypocrisy of the OAPE is staggering; they are essentially reversing the philosophy behind which they have operated for so long which is that open doors are safer.  So now, all the sudden over summer session that all changes?  Perhaps it is because there are more high school students running around, and perhaps the parents of these high school students are paying a lot of money in tuition and donations to the University.  How is this different than the school year?  Well, most of these high schoolers are still minors, adding much greater liability to the school.  My guess: this was a top down decision stemming not from OAPE, but from the Board of Trustees wanting to reduce their liability.  To ban alcohol across the board, however, will do nothing to stop kids from drinking.  What will is to come up with a more thought-out and detailed policy that keeps alcohol out of the hands of high school students.  At least then they can show they made reasonable effort to avoid contributing to the delinquency of minor(s).  

  • Seriously?

    Students will pour hard liquor into water bottles and nothing will change. The only potential difference is that doors will close when students are drinking. Whatever helps Ralph Castro sleep better at night, eh?

  • Student

    One of the worst outcomes of this policy is that it turns an unknown RA into the enemy. Last summer in Crothers I used to have parties and the door would always be kept wide open. Now this summer I keep the door shut out of fear my hard earned liquid will be confiscated or that I’ll be caught violating the NO MORE THAN 5 GUESTS in a room policy which was recently rolled out.

    I hope Stanford never repeats this backward step again.

  • fthesystem

    Plus, what about people who aren’t taking classes over the summer? The emails made it seem all students living in on-campus residences are enrolled students this summer, far from the truth.

  • fthesystem

    I thought about this last night.  The only problem I can see is that many people (seems disproportionately female) don’t like beer and would prefer a nice sugary drink mixed with vodka.  Solution? Mike’s/Smirnoff Ice AND beer are more available.  I think it’d be pretty tough to get a transport solely off these.

  • ridiculous

    Agreed. It’s complete nonsense for the University to promote educational measures for students with regard to alcohol and then come down on the entire undergraduate population because they are liable when something goes wrong. I understand that their policy does violate the law, but it’s contradictory to institute these policies and then punish the student body because of the liability it creates. It’s not going to address the problem, as has been mentioned above, and will only make people less willing to call the ambulance if they believe that someone is in danger. They’re really inviting a whole more liability than they would if they focused more on people’s safety and intentional solutions rather than simply trying to lower the number of transports.

  • Crothers

      I am living in the dorms right now and this isn’t an OAPE policy.  It is summer session’s.

  • rcnt_grad

    But every case of over-indulgence seems to be a result of hard liquor.  And trust me, kids at Stanford are just less crazy and removing hard liquor is not going to make the whole place go wild.  It’s not policy that keeps them from binge drinking.

    The University seems to be getting more and more boring each year, so it’s somewhat puzzling that the number of emergency alcohol situations is on the rise.  If anything, this is probably a result of there not being enough fun parties to blow off steam so people take shots of liquor to try to make their own fun.  Removing hard liquor from the equation is an interesting solution and I think it is worth trying.

Login to your account

Can't remember your Password ?

Register for this site!