Drinking Ourselves Broke
Why CMC's Alcohol Policies are gambling with more than $13,000 of your money
Chase Gray
Last Updated: 12/30/09 Section: Features
Last spring, 19-year-old Arman Partamian died during a fraternity initiation at SUNY-Geneseo. His blood alcohol level at the time of death varied between .39 and .55 in different parts of his body. Just last month, his father filed a $2.5 million lawsuit against the university.
In September, Rider University settled a lawsuit with the parents of Gary DeVercelly, a student who died at a campus party in 2007. Mr. DeVercelly's blood alcohol content was measured at .42 upon arrival at the hospital. Financial terms were not disclosed, but Rider University publicly agreed to ban alcohol in dorms, inform parents of alcohol-related incidents, and strengthen sanctions against students who violate the new policies.
That same month, a Claremont McKenna student was rushed to the hospital with a similar blood alcohol level. He thankfully survived, but the event should serve as a warning to students and administration at the College. Regardless of personal opinion about the proper drinking age, the fact remains that it is illegal for an individual under the age of 21 to possess alcohol in California, and Amethyst Initiative or no, it is the standing law that would be applied to CMC in the event of a tragedy.
This is hardly a moral argument. I know what we do at CMC, and I love it that way. The open culture is a big part of what attracted me here in the first place. I just couldn't see myself enjoying pounding eight shots of Popov behind a locked door before going out every Thursday and Saturday night. Thankfully, there's no need for that here. At the same time, though, I think almost all CMC students can agree that an alcohol policy which does not minimize the College's liability does a disservice to all of us. In the unfortunate event that a student were to die from alcohol poisoning on CMC's campus, the school would be naked to a potential lawsuit.
Matthew Bibbens, CMC's in-house legal counsel, approached the subject cautiously, stating that "the liability implications for the College and other potential parties, including ASCMC, would depend upon the unique facts and circumstances of the particular incident." But unfortunately, the "unique facts and circumstances" are unlikely to treat CMC favorably. According to a 2006 report entitled "Law, Alcohol and Higher Education" in New Directions for Student Services, "Criminal liability can be found for merely serving alcohol to a minor." Group liability can be established if a student group votes to participate in a criminal act. Constructive liability occurs when a past pattern of illegal conduct is continued. Accessory liability can be proven if a school, group, or individual provides "a facility or resources for unlawful behavior, such as…giving alcohol to a minor."
In September, Rider University settled a lawsuit with the parents of Gary DeVercelly, a student who died at a campus party in 2007. Mr. DeVercelly's blood alcohol content was measured at .42 upon arrival at the hospital. Financial terms were not disclosed, but Rider University publicly agreed to ban alcohol in dorms, inform parents of alcohol-related incidents, and strengthen sanctions against students who violate the new policies.
That same month, a Claremont McKenna student was rushed to the hospital with a similar blood alcohol level. He thankfully survived, but the event should serve as a warning to students and administration at the College. Regardless of personal opinion about the proper drinking age, the fact remains that it is illegal for an individual under the age of 21 to possess alcohol in California, and Amethyst Initiative or no, it is the standing law that would be applied to CMC in the event of a tragedy.
This is hardly a moral argument. I know what we do at CMC, and I love it that way. The open culture is a big part of what attracted me here in the first place. I just couldn't see myself enjoying pounding eight shots of Popov behind a locked door before going out every Thursday and Saturday night. Thankfully, there's no need for that here. At the same time, though, I think almost all CMC students can agree that an alcohol policy which does not minimize the College's liability does a disservice to all of us. In the unfortunate event that a student were to die from alcohol poisoning on CMC's campus, the school would be naked to a potential lawsuit.
Matthew Bibbens, CMC's in-house legal counsel, approached the subject cautiously, stating that "the liability implications for the College and other potential parties, including ASCMC, would depend upon the unique facts and circumstances of the particular incident." But unfortunately, the "unique facts and circumstances" are unlikely to treat CMC favorably. According to a 2006 report entitled "Law, Alcohol and Higher Education" in New Directions for Student Services, "Criminal liability can be found for merely serving alcohol to a minor." Group liability can be established if a student group votes to participate in a criminal act. Constructive liability occurs when a past pattern of illegal conduct is continued. Accessory liability can be proven if a school, group, or individual provides "a facility or resources for unlawful behavior, such as…giving alcohol to a minor."
Be the first to comment on this story