College kids drink.
This isn?t a revelation. Everyone knows the average college student, especially on this campus, has been fall-down drunk at least once in the last month.
A report released Tuesday by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism illuminated the possible consequences of the rampant drinking culture and told people what they already know: College students are drinking more than is healthy.
The report said drinking by college students results in 1,400 deaths, 500,000 injuries and 70,000 cases of sexual assault each year. It also said that 40 percent of college students drink and 20 percent of those surveyed have binged, or had five or more consecutive drinks for a man and four or more for a female, three times or more in the last two weeks.
These statistics reveal what college kids have always known: Drinking is not uncommon. It has become part of the college culture; maybe it always was.
Various groups have attempted to prevent alcohol use to no avail; this report offers a solution.
The NIAAA report stated three groups must be targeted to effectively curb drinking: the individual drinker, the student population as a whole and the college and its surrounding environment. The report?s suggestions range from motivational interventions, to regulating the density of liquor stores, to reinstating Saturday morning classes, to expanding alcohol-free dorms.
The Alcohol License Review Committee met Wednesday and was presented with a subcommittee report aimed at reducing student drinking. The report released March 29 did not take into account recommendations from the NIAAA, and suggestions by the ALRC do not mirror those given by the NIAAA.
The ALRC report recommends, among other things, a ban on drink specials after 8 p.m. and taking pictures of people who have been taken to detox. Although the NIAAA report mentions banning drink specials as a possible solution, it does not unconditionally support it. A consistent recommendation from the ALRC and NIAAA is a more strict regulation of the minimum drinking age.
The ALRC recognizes that one possible effect of enforcement of the drinking age may be pushing people to house parties. The subcommittee also recognizes in its report the possibility of danger at such house parties, but this does not change the members? minds.
Like the NIAAA, the ALRC recognizes the need for a multi-tiered approach to solving the drinking problem. The ALRC doesn?t recognize the different people and communities as does the NIAAA; instead, ALRC recommends that “the city take a dual approach to the issue of over-consumption that includes both education and enforcement.”
The report from the NIAAA acknowledges more research needs to be done on college campuses before a definitive solution can be reached. Although the ALRC recognizes the need for a reallocation of funds to effectively deal with the problem, the report does not refer to any pending research.
Both reports have good intentions and both have the same goal, but the methods to alleviate the problem are not consistent. Neither method has been tested, so it is equally likely they will be successful or unsuccessful.
The ALRC did not come to any conclusions at the meeting Wednesday, so the future of drinking in Madison is still undecided. Maybe the ALRC will take into consideration the recommendations of the NIAAA so there is a united effort to curb drinking and preserve the health of students.
