The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

Lead editorial

Responsibility: personal or parental?

At the age of 18, a University student can vote, and he doesn't have to hold his mother's hand while he marks his absentee ballot. He can vote for any candidate, and he doesn't even have to know anything about the issues. But if he's caught swilling a Corona one too many times in his dorm room, the University will turn him over to his parents for possible discipline.

At the age of 19 or 20, a University student can live off Grounds. He can work to pay his rent and to buy groceries. He can set up his own phone line, and if he doesn't pay on time, he'll have to deal with the wrath of Sprint on his own. But a phone company customer service agent won't call home to complain about his delinquency.

College is a stepping stone between the shelter of home life and the Real World. It is a relatively protected environment in which students learn how to take care of themselves--in which students are supposed to develop a sense of personal responsibility.

But the federally mandated parental notification policy forces a student to answer to her parents, and does not exactly foster personal responsibility. It doesn't give the student a chance to think about her actions and come to her own conclusions. Rather, it puts her through two potential punishments. If a student is caught drinking on Grounds, for example, and his RA files judiciary charges, the student will have to face the University Judiciary Committee. This sort of disciplinary action will foster personal responsibility because the student can choose to deal with it on his own. A call home, however, implies that a student is not capable of dealing with problems on his own. It denies the student the option of taking responsibility for his actions by subjecting him to his parents' discipline.

In addition, parents may interpret the call home as a request by the University to take matters into their own hands. And so the parental notification policy goes from being well intentioned to harmful.

Yes, drinking while under 21 is illegal. And yes, students continue to break both national and University laws. But calling Mom and Dad isn't going to change that, and in the long run, the parental notification policy will quash the development of personal responsibility among students who get caught. It's just not worth it.

Limits

The above roasting of the parental notification policy is not intended to be an excuse for underage drinking. While we won't go so far as to say that no one under 21 should drink, period, responsible limits should be observed. Alcohol-related deaths at colleges across the nation provide evidence that irresponsible drinking most definitely is hazardous to your health. At the University, the deaths of Lu McGowan and Leslie Baltz prove that we are not immune to alcohol-related tragedy.

It is all too easy to go overboard your first year here. You're away from home, you don't have to answer to anyone, and alcohol is easily available. The party circuit may seem crazy and fun, but all too easily, it can lead to tragedy. Watch out for your friends and roommates. An exorbitant blood alcohol level is not necessary for a good time, and people will not think you're cooler if you drink ten beers. By all means, have fun--after all, this is college. But observe reasonable limits. It's not that difficult, and you're better off sober than dead.

Comments

Latest Podcast

The University’s Associate Vice Provost for Enrollment and Undergraduate Admission, Greg Roberts, provides listeners with an insight into how the University conducts admissions and the legal subtleties regarding the possible end to the consideration of legacy status.



https://open.spotify.com/episode/02ZWcF1RlqBj7CXLfA49xt