Alcohol Amnesty Policy May Return to Drafting Board

Little more than a year after its implementation, the College’s amnesty policy—which promises no disciplinary action against intoxicated or drug-impaired students seeking medical attention and those who help them—may be headed for a revision.

A meeting organized by the Alcohol and College Health Committee and University Health Services concluded that there is potential for a revised amnesty policy, according to a participant. The meeting, which was closed to the press, brought together College administrators, medical professionals, and student leaders to discuss concerns students have raised about the policy.

Students’ qualms center on the “responsibility” aspect of the policy, which states that the hosts and executive leadership of a student organization-sponsored party in which dangerous drinking occurs could face punishment if a party-goer seeks medical attention.

“Imagine this situation: You’re hosting a party at the Spee and you’re the president of the South Asian Women’s Collective. Some random person comes to the party and is pretty drunk and may need to go to the hospital,” said the participant, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Do you bring that person into UHS at the risk of your organization and the Spee? No.”

“I think it’s really important to tweak the policy in such a way that there would never be a disincentive for people to seek medical attention when they need it,” the source continued.

But according to Associate Dean of the College Judith H. Kidd, who was at the meeting, UHS statistics show that there has been no decrease in amnesty policy referrals and that no student organization leader has appeared before the Ad Board as a result of the policy.

But she stressed the importance of an “educational” policy that informs students of the consequences of dangerous drinking and hazing. “[The policy] is not good if there’s that much concern,” Kidd said. “But I don’t know how it should be changed.”

Kidd emphasized the “exploratory” nature of the meeting and confirmed that discussion on the policy will continue. “No decision has been made and that is why we prefer not to have [the discussion] too public,” she said. “We don’t want people to think something’s being railroaded through.”

Undergraduate Council President Matthew L. Sundquist ’09, who attended the meeting, said that if a change in policy were to take place, students, House masters, and other individuals integral to residential life should be included in the process—as was not the case when the current policy was established.

“The more people you subtract from that conversation, the more likely you’ll run the risk of creating a policy with these concerns,” he said.

—Staff writer Ahmed N. Mabruk can be reached at amabruk@fas.harvard.edu.