Smoking Banned In All Houses

Smokers in the Houses will soon become well acquainted with the pathways and courtyards outside of their buildings.

After months of discussion and consultation with the Committee on House Life (COHL) and the House masters, the College announced yesterday its decision to ban smoking in the Houses beginning next fall.

The ban applies to all space within the houses, including student rooms, common areas and tutor suites.

"Because smoke is never confined to the single room or suite where the smoker is, the entire house can be affected by smoking that occurs only in certain rooms," said Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 in an e-mail.

Lewis also said he had heard concerns about whether non-smoking roommates felt pressured into allowing roommates to smoke in their suites.

A press release from Lewis' office cited the health risks of second-hand smoke as a motivation for the ban.

"Second-hand smoke is known to exacerbate a variety of respiratory ailments such as asthma, as well as to contribute to the risk of heart and lung diseases," the release said.

Currently, decisions on smoking bans are at the discretion of the individual Houses. Smoking is already prohibited in first-year dorms as well as Currier, Leverett and Winthrop Houses.

Success in making these areas smoke-free has prompted administrators to make the entire campus nonsmoking, Lewis said.

"The College has experienced few problems with the smoking bans in the freshman dormitories and the three houses that have these bans in place already," he said.

At a meeting of the COHL in early April there was student and faculty opposition to the proposal to ban smoking.

"It would have been a better idea to leave it to the discretion of the individual masters. Each individual house has a unique set of circumstances," said Eric M. Nelson '99, a member of the Undergraduate Council.

Due to differing types of rooms, Nelsonexplained, some Houses can accommodate smokerswithout disturbing non-smoking suites.

But James H. Ware, acting dean of the Facultyof Public Health and master of Cabot House, saidsuch policies draw an unnecessary dividing linebetween smokers and non-smokers.

"It segregates those who wanted to smoke fromthe rest of the house," he said. "I was reluctantto make that decision [in Cabot]."

Student representatives said the administrationshould allow individual students to take theirlives into their own hands.

"Smoking is legal," said council member JustinD. Lerer '99, who is also a Crimson editor."Students are mature enough here to make adecision like that for themselves."

"It is an area where the college shouldn'tmandate that students act in a certain way," saidLillian J. Epstein '00, a member of the councilwho has been working with the administration onthis issue.

"It encroaches on student liberty. Studentshave a right to a smoke-free environment but wheresmoking doesn't disturb others the College shouldnot ban it," she added.

But, despite her opposition to smoke-freeHouses, Epstein does not view the ban as a directcontradiction of student opinion.

"We did the best that we could to representstudent opinion on this issue," Epstein said. "Idon't think there is a clear consensus. It wasgoing to be a compromise."

Nelson, who is also a Crimson editor, said herecognizes the administration's general concernfor student health.

"I understand what the concerns are, and Ithink that they're real issues, so it's hard tocriticize the decision too harshly," he said.

While student representatives opposed the ban,the press release from Lewis' office cited studentopinion as a motivation for the decision.

A 1997 study conducted Henry Wechsler,principal investigator of the Harvard School ofPublic Health College Alcohol Study, concludedthat 56.8 percent of Harvard students favorprohibiting smoking in all college buildings.

House masters are divided in their opinion ofthe ban.

Ware said he believes the health benefits ofthe ban outweigh other concerns.

"I think as a public health measure it has tobe a wonderful thing," Ware said. "It placesrights and well being on both sides."

Some masters said they think the ban willnegatively affect the image of the Houses becauseit will force students to stand outside smokingcigarettes.

Others said the ban infringes on students'rights.

"I think that I would not implement a similarban myself," said Suzanne M. McCarthy, co-masterof Pforzheimer House.

"We felt that we wanted to support theindividual rights of students," she said.

But McCarthy said she is optimistic that theban will encourage students to quit smoking. "Itwas small things that prevented me from becoming asmoker," she said. "This could be one of them.

Due to differing types of rooms, Nelsonexplained, some Houses can accommodate smokerswithout disturbing non-smoking suites.

But James H. Ware, acting dean of the Facultyof Public Health and master of Cabot House, saidsuch policies draw an unnecessary dividing linebetween smokers and non-smokers.

"It segregates those who wanted to smoke fromthe rest of the house," he said. "I was reluctantto make that decision [in Cabot]."

Student representatives said the administrationshould allow individual students to take theirlives into their own hands.

"Smoking is legal," said council member JustinD. Lerer '99, who is also a Crimson editor."Students are mature enough here to make adecision like that for themselves."

"It is an area where the college shouldn'tmandate that students act in a certain way," saidLillian J. Epstein '00, a member of the councilwho has been working with the administration onthis issue.

"It encroaches on student liberty. Studentshave a right to a smoke-free environment but wheresmoking doesn't disturb others the College shouldnot ban it," she added.

But, despite her opposition to smoke-freeHouses, Epstein does not view the ban as a directcontradiction of student opinion.

"We did the best that we could to representstudent opinion on this issue," Epstein said. "Idon't think there is a clear consensus. It wasgoing to be a compromise."

Nelson, who is also a Crimson editor, said herecognizes the administration's general concernfor student health.

"I understand what the concerns are, and Ithink that they're real issues, so it's hard tocriticize the decision too harshly," he said.

While student representatives opposed the ban,the press release from Lewis' office cited studentopinion as a motivation for the decision.

A 1997 study conducted Henry Wechsler,principal investigator of the Harvard School ofPublic Health College Alcohol Study, concludedthat 56.8 percent of Harvard students favorprohibiting smoking in all college buildings.

House masters are divided in their opinion ofthe ban.

Ware said he believes the health benefits ofthe ban outweigh other concerns.

"I think as a public health measure it has tobe a wonderful thing," Ware said. "It placesrights and well being on both sides."

Some masters said they think the ban willnegatively affect the image of the Houses becauseit will force students to stand outside smokingcigarettes.

Others said the ban infringes on students'rights.

"I think that I would not implement a similarban myself," said Suzanne M. McCarthy, co-masterof Pforzheimer House.

"We felt that we wanted to support theindividual rights of students," she said.

But McCarthy said she is optimistic that theban will encourage students to quit smoking. "Itwas small things that prevented me from becoming asmoker," she said. "This could be one of them.