Letter to the Editor: Alcohol policy should promote safety

While Chase Johnson and Anthony Vitarelli bring up extremely relevant points in their Jan. 13 letter, "Alcohol policy denies climate of integrity." I question the motives behind the authorship of such a scathing review of the alcohol policy. While they find ample time to take cheap shots at the policy and those who do their best to interpret and enforce it, Johnson and Vitarelli neglect to mention that both are members of Wayne Manor, which got in trouble this past week in an issue related to the alcohol policy.

As a member of the residential staff of the WEL, I take personal offense to the harsh manner in which Johnson and Vitarelli addressed the issue of the alcohol policy--I do not believe that editorials should be used as venues for personal vendettas.

As a note, the opinions I express in this letter have nothing to do with my position as an RA nor do they effect my enforcement of policy as an RA: Despite my criticism, I am in agreement that the current alcohol policy is in need of an overhaul. However, I believe that Vitarelli and Johnson seem to have let their emotions carry them away in several of the points that they make. They ask the University to trust its students' decision making abilities; however they forget to consider the consequences of such a plan. Apparently they have not woken up early enough on a Monday morning before the cleaning staff has been through to notice the mess that gets left in their own dorm each weekend. They also easily forget the leniency of the current application of our alcohol policy in comparison to that of many other schools.

I agree that the alcohol policy should work to ensure the safety of all of Duke's students and that the current policy does not do this. In addition to being difficult to enforce and having many possible interpretations, the current alcohol policy also favors Fraternities and selective living groups.

Any revision of the alcohol policy needs to allow for non-affiliated students to register alcohol events and for the creation of an authority to oversee all on-campus alcohol events. Out of fear of being written up under the current alcohol policy many students are driven to drink behind closed doors--a liability for student safety and for the university. A revised alcohol policy should mandate that any room serving alcohol at a registered party leave its door open.

The application of a new policy should not have the goal of punishing those who do drink; instead it should consistently work towards keeping them safe. I acknowledge the difficulty in the wording of such a policy without direct violation of state drinking laws, and I also acknowledge the differing viewpoints on how a revised policy would be enforced; however, my disappointment in Johnson and Vitarelli's editorial stands, but most importantly I call for a revision to both the alcohol policy and how it is enforced.

Josh Allen-Dicker
Trinity '05