Scare tactics won't curb drinking

By Daniel Farkas

Two weeks ago, President Bill Clinton, LAW '73, approved Congressional reforms allowing universities to notify parents of students under age 21 of any drug or alcohol related crimes. The law is intended to make students think twice before reaching for a cup of beer or that bottle of Jack Daniels. Such a measure is not only an infringement on students' freedoms; it is an ineffective attempt to deal with the binge-drinking culture that exists at universities throughout the country.

Essentially, the new measure gives universities permission to use parents as a way to frighten students away from alcohol. This scare tactic, however, is an unrealistic way of dealing with underage drinking.

Tens of thousands of college students in this country consciously choose to drink illegally, a fact that the government has been unable to change. With such harsh regulations, students may find an even greater thrill in tweaking authority by breaking the law.

Another downside to this bill is that it will push underage drinking even further underground. This is harmful for several reasons. First, when somebody does get sick, students will be reluctant to call for help for fear of being caught and reported to their parents. Second, when students get drunk with friends behind closed doors, they easily lose perspective of what constitutes responsible behavior. As a result, it is more difficult to distinguish those who abuse alcohol and actually need help from those who simply drink at social functions.

This new law is an excellent example of our government's stance toward alcohol: it is a dangerous substance that should be avoided at all costs. Such an absolutist approach, however, is ineffective. While alcohol can be dangerous, there is nothing wrong with an occasional drink. How are we to learn about tolerance? How many long trips to DUH do students have to make before they know their limits?

A better way to combat the rising wave of binge-drinking is to teach moderation, recognizing the reality of alcohol as a part of our society. By understanding the effects of alcohol and what his or her limits are, a person will be more careful about going out and getting smashed. This is especially true for the freshmen who come to college unfamiliar with the effects of alcohol.

Our government's absolutist mentality toward alcohol is also reflected in the established drinking age of 21. One way to curb binge-drinking is to lower the drinking age. After President Ronald Reagan pushed states to raise the drinking age to 21, binge-drinking surged. The problem has only become worse, and now, several college students die every year from consuming too much alcohol. Congress has tried for years to deal with this issue, but all attempts have proved futile.

Young people would approach alcohol with a more mature outlook if they did not feel that they were rebelling against anything. More importantly, introducing teenagers to alcohol at a younger age would help them realize their limits before arriving at college.

Until then, how many more students have to die before we realize that we students must be in control--and not our parents?

Daniel Farkas is a junior in Morse.

Back to Opinion...