Students who hesitate to call for help when they or a friend are seriously ill as a result of alcohol or drugs may not only be risking lives, but also overly cautious.
In some cases, students who call administrators for help during an on-campus alcohol- or drug-related medical emergency are not subjected to judicial repercussions. Instead, they follow a procedure designed to teach them about substance abuse in hopes of preventing future incidents.
The practice is similar to “medical amnesty,” a policy growing in popularity among United States colleges and universities. In theory, medical amnesty encourages under-age students to call for medical or police assistance when they need it without fear of retribution for their own condition.
“We’re trying to make it so students do use the medical support services for medical emergencies,” said Sheryl Eyster, assistant dean and associate director at the Office of Student Life. “Because that is considered a medical emergency.”
At the University, there is no official policy in place; rather, it is a sort of informal practice, and there are some exceptions. In situations where the student in question caused another person significant property damage, injured others or provided alcohol to minors, judicial action would almost certainly be taken.
In serious or repeated accidents, the student may be required to meet with a counselor. But more typically, he or she will attend “diversion classes” to learn about substance use and abuse.
“They might have some other educational activities they have to do,” said Director of Residence Life Sandy Schoonover. “It’s all done really on an individual basis and what is best for the student.”
A “medical emergency” in the context of medical amnesty constitutes a life-or-death situation. Schoonover said it’s impossible to pin down an exact number, but there can be up to 20 medical amnesty cases per term. That number tends to decrease as the year progresses. Sometimes students get a reality check when they see their fall term grades, or they may want to tone it down after a first violation.
Carl Yeh, director of student conduct and community at the Office of Student Life, also carried out the medical amnesty practice as a University resident assistant in the mid-1990s.
“In addition to following that practice as a directive of the people who were supervising me, I also personally believed in it, too,” Yeh said. “Certainly it’s a practice, but it’s a philosophy that we take where we’re trying to make sure we know the most important thing.”
Yeh said he has never come into contact with any critics of the practice, but he imagined what they would say.
“‘Well, so you’re saying, Carl, that all I have to do is get really, really, really drunk and then I won’t be held responsible for my actions?’
“I really doubt that anyone would drink to that extent just to avoid being cited,” Yeh said. “If that’s the case, I think there’s a bigger problem for that person.”
Eyster said every so often someone asks whether the practice is the best way to go about discouraging reckless behavior.
“Some people criticize the policy and believe all people should receive retribution,” Eyster said. “Our primary concern is the health and safety of people. The conduct issues are secondary.” But, she added, “that doesn’t mean that they won’t be held accountable in some kind of educational way.”
Schoonover reiterated the importance of ensuring students’ safety, and this practice’s potential to teach them the seriousness of substance abuse.
“Obviously, it’s a matter of life and death,” she said. “When something like that has happened, examining their alcohol usage is really important, especially to make sure they stay safe and healthy.”
[email protected]