Though the sentiment behind these ideas represents an admirable effort to emphasize individual responsibility and to decrease high-risk drinking, extending the Honor Code is not the proper avenue to achieve these goals. Extrapolating our formalized academic Honor Code to the vague notion of alcohol responsibility endangers the integrity of the code and sends mixed messages to students.
Neither of the ideas proposed in the workshop would be viable options. The “soft” version, a pledge without disciplinary repercussions, would cheapen the Honor Code by associating it with a pledge to the inherently vague concept of responsible behavior. Though those at the workshop clearly hoped to capitalize on the gravity associated with the concept of the Honor Code, this is a misguided idea that would devalue the Honor Code and confuse two very different notions of responsibility.
More problematic is the “hard” alternative: Enforcing the pledge with an analogous disciplinary committee. The student obligations required by this kind of pledge would be ambiguous. As a result, it would be extremely difficult for a student committee to adjudicate their peers’ violations. Requiring students to intervene and help others who are dangerously intoxicated is not at all analogous to reporting cheaters. Unlike cheating during an exam — which is an explicit and discernible action — it is not immediately apparent which situations involving alcohol would mandate a student response. Variables such as the observer’s relationship to the intoxicated student, the level of intoxication and the observer’s familiarity with appropriate responses make it difficult to assign blame or responsibility in these situations.
If the ACC seeks to instill a culture of personal responsibility to discourage high-risk drinking, it would be better to alter the incentives around seeking help for students. USG president Connor Diemand-Yauman ’10 is committed to liberalizing policies for students seeking or receiving help in alcohol-related emergencies. This strategy is more likely to increase student responsiveness to dangerous situations. The ACC could also bring its drinking dialogue to other groups on campus by launching an ambitious education campaign. The committee has already promoted awareness of this issue, and continuing to bring new voices to the conversation will cultivate greater responsibility in and of itself. Though the sentiment behind the social Honor Code is laudable, the ACC should seek more appropriate and effective ways to combat high-risk drinking on campus.