Hernandez 1
E. Hernandez
Emily Morgan
July 8, 2014
CO150
Word Count: 1490
Be The Designated University
Problem
College is supposed to be one of the best times in a student’s life. It is supposed to be a
time in which students experience new things, people, and lessons. However, it is too common
that students find themselves making the wrong choices in the wrong environments. Too many
of these environments happen to be fraternities and sororities in which underage drinking occurs.
The requirements and hazing strategies that these organizations use create a sense of drinking
culture that labels drinking as okay for all college age groups. Such mentalities include that “A
true bro, Lohse adds, can also drink inhumane amounts of beer, vomit profusely and keep on
going” (Reitman 346). Some fraternities and sororities inhibit a reputation for drinking that
attracts many underage students to fun experiences. Underage drinking within these
organizations not only yields negative effects on students, it also leads to negative effects on the
university and the community as a whole. Negative effects are often alcohol poisoning, sexual
abuse, car accidents, and a bad reputation for the university as a whole. Not to mention the
development of a person’s brain is still ongoing throughout the early college years. Alcohol
consumption could potentially damage that vital development.
Hernandez 2
In John Hechinger and David Glovin’s article, “Fraternities Scuttle Proposals to Ban
Freshman Rush after Drinking Deaths”, they present an image that establishes the effects of
underage drinking within Greek life. According to the image, almost half of the fraternity related
deaths since 2005 were among freshman students. This visual highlights the fact that
underclassmen within Greek life are more at risk of experiencing the negative effects of alcohol
consumption.
With the fall semester quickly approaching, CSU’s Public Safety Team suggests that “If
you choose to drink, don’t get so intoxicated that you are not able to take care of yourself”
(Public Safety 371). The problem is that safety measures such as this don’t do enough to prevent
underage drinking and its effects. Underage drinking within fraternities and sororities must be
strictly targeted to the extent of other issues such as plagiarism. Plagiarism has serious
consequences within universities, so why shouldn’t the consumption of alcohol? Students do not
learn lessons through warnings; they learn lessons through consequences and that is something
universities must address.
Exigency
Underage drinking within fraternities and sororities is of exigency to the university
president because it jeopardizes the safety, investment, and reputation of his/her school.
University presidents have the duty of maintaining safety on campus; controversy regarding
alcohol related incidents often leads a bad image on the institution. Without the action of a
university official, negative reputations will drive away students and possible assets to any
school. Enrollment and investment within an institution may drop considering a bad reputation.
Since students drink within fraternities and sororities, there is a higher risk of incident and
Hernandez 3
therefore controversy. There has been a “substantial influence of fraternity/sorority membership
on excessive alcohol use” (Asel, Serifert, and Pascarella 341). If fraternities and sororities do not
alter their underage drinking practices, the institution may face unwanted effects.
This issue is also exigent to the president of the university because organizations like
these hurt their students’ safety. If university presidents don’t address this issue, many unwanted
alcohol related incidents could occur. These alcohol incidents can sometimes become fatal such
as when “a 19-year old Cornell sophomore died of alcohol poisoning after taking part in an SAE
hazing ritual” (Reitman 349). If the university officials had prevented those drinking practices,
that 19-year old underclassmen would still be alive. Underage drinking should also be regulated
because it leads to another safety hazard such as sexual assault. Drinking within fraternities and
sororities “makes it more difficult for people to think clearly, communicate, listen, give consent
or assess risk, which can lead to sexual regrets or violation” (Public Safety 371). Alcohol makes
it easier for these incidents to occur; especially for the younger college students peer pressured
by upperclassmen. If the regulation of underage drinking within these organizations is not
achieved, the university will not only face negative media controversy but fatalities as well.
Solution
In order to combat the underage drinking problem within fraternities and sororities,
students must be exposed to the appropriate environments. In order to promote safety within
these organizations, Greek houses must be moved to on-campus locations. By moving Greek
houses to on-campus locations, fraternities and sororities have to follow the university clean
campus regulations. Most universities hold a clean campus policy in which neither alcohol nor
Hernandez 4
drugs are tolerated on campus. Resident assistants and on-campus enforcement will monitor
Greek houses multiple times throughout the day.
The Greek houses that will be moved on-campus will be held in old residence halls and
establishments that the university must make room for. Collective living communities will house
these organizations and as a result will preserve the brotherhood or sisterhood feel. Fraternities
and sororities will use their traditional fundraising strategies to move up in the quality of their
establishment. Organizations that come up with more money or dues will have more quality
establishments on-campus and vise versa.
In order to combat underage drinking within fraternity and sorority members, the
university president must label all off-campus establishments as not affiliated with the university.
Regardless of regulations, it will be certain that people will break laws in order to drink.
However, if these people go off-campus and drink, the university will not be liable for the
consequences or behavior. Since no fraternities or sororities can reside off-campus, the university
will not be responsible for any events that occur. No off-campus Greek life will be allowed by
this new proposal, which leads to less controversy and safety issues against an institution.
A variety of universities have attempted to lower the drinking problem at their
universities, however, they haven’t realized that targeting Greek life would really benefit the
cause. Reitman points out that “such initiatives are not directed at fraternity culture itself, which
many see as the heart of the problem” (Reitman 360). If university presidents adopt this proposal
to move all Greek life on-campus, the drinking culture within universities will certainly be
affected.
Objectives
Hernandez 5
1. Create a safer university environment by decreasing the number of alcohol related
incidents. By mandating that all fraternities and sororities be kept on-campus, an
institution can implement its clean campus regulations on all Greek life students.
2. Reduce the amount of sexual violence incidents by eliminating alcohol use within Greek
life. If underclassmen are not exposed to alcohol within Greek life, it is more likely that
they will practice safer choices. Rape, unprotected sex, and sexual violence will decrease
as the consumption of alcohol decreases as well.
3. Create new on campus work-study opportunities. Greek life residence halls and houses
that are on-campus will yield new positions for residence halls assistants. These new
work-study positions will monitor the behavior of Greek life and will enforce the clean
campus rules and regulations.
4. Enhance the reputations of many universities across the United States that carry
controversy because of drinking. If implemented by the university president, this
proposal will cut down on all bad controversy and media that otherwise hurts a
university’s image and affairs.
5. Enhance neighboring communities around college campuses that are affected by alcohol
related parties. Residents around college campuses often experience the effects of Greek
life parties. With the help of this proposal, neighborhoods can see peace and quiet
because fraternities and sororities have been moved on-campus.
Potential Objections
1. As a result of this proposal, many privacy issues will arise within fraternities and
sororities. Greek life organizations will not be able to have alcoholic events within the
Hernandez 6
premise of the school and will be subject to routine inspections by RA’s. As a result of no
alcohol tolerance, traditions within Greek life with be broken such as alcohol related
hazing.
2. Neighboring liquor store businesses will see a slight decline in sales for alcoholic
beverages. Greek life under clean campus regulations will prevent underage drinking,
which will lead to a smaller demand of alcohol. Owners and businesses will be upset at
the new proposal because it is jeopardizing their business. However, it is in the best
interest of the university president to keep his students safe.
3. The proposal will see a lot of objection from the Greek life population. Many students
join fraternities and sororities in order to go through the college experience of partying
and drinking. This proposal has the potential to drive away students interested in that
lifestyle.
Conclusion
Four years of education is a gift that lasts forever, it is something that can be passed on to
others regardless the situation. However, any wrong choice taken in the wrong situation can alter
the path of a student. Underage drinking within Greek life organizations must be an issue tackled
by this proposal. With the help of the university president, this proposal has the potential to make
Greek life a more thriving and safe environment for underage students.
Hernandez 7
Works Cited
Asel M, Anthony, Tricia A. Seifert, and Earnest T., Pascarella. “The Effects of
Fraternity/Sorority Membership on College Experiences and Outcomes: A Portrait of
Complexity” ethics in higher education. Ed. Nancy Henke et al. Fountainhead Press,
2009. 331-343. Print.
Hechinger, John, and David Glovin. “Fraternities Scuttle Proposals to Ban Freshman Rush After
Drinking Deaths” Bloomberg. 14 Oct. 2013. Web. 10 July 2014.
Public Safety Team. “Spring Safety on Campus” ethics in higher education. Ed. Nancy Henke et
al. Fountainhead Press, 2013. 369-371. Print.
Reitman, Janet. “Confessions of an Ivy League Frat Boy: Inside Dartmouth’s Hazing Abuses”
ethics in higher education. Ed. Nancy Henke et al. Fountainhead Press, 2012. 345-367.
Print.