Editor’s Note: In the original version of this letter to the editor that appeared online and in print, it was implied without supporting evidence that students of color are more susceptible to alcoholism and drug addiction. It was not the authors’ intention to exclude readers. To be considerate of the diverse range of backgrounds students at DU come from and avoid reinforcing stereotypes, this portion of the article has been changed.
To the DU community,
If DU is truly committed to inclusive excellence, the school needs to address its medical amnesty policy and its enforcement. Currently, the school’s medical amnesty policy allows students to call for medical and emergency help for themselves or others, without getting into any trouble for being drunk or around alcohol. However, the policy in its application often fails to uphold its core principle of protecting students.
Attracting diverse students is an important step towards inclusive excellence, but DU has an obligation to continually keep their needs in mind. The current DU medical amnesty policy disenfranchises diverse populations because, in our opinion, it seeks to punish instead of protect. The policy laid out in the Honor Code is vague with its language, writing that people repeatedly calling for help for themselves or others “may or may not be offered” medical amnesty. It also offers sparse details around the process of medical amnesty, leaving room for interpretation regarding enforcement. This flexibility ensures that the policy is applied unevenly, and loopholes for getting around the policy are commonplace.
There’s no denying that people of color, women, LGBTQ+ populations and many other marginalized communities have not been able to trust those in power and the establishments that support them. DU’s ambiguous medical amnesty policy is just another example of institutions letting down those they are supposed to protect. By keeping the policy ambiguous, already vulnerable communities are put in harm’s way, and they are more likely to be targeted than a person in a position of privilege.
Women, and those who identify as female, are one population at risk under DU’s current medical amnesty policy. Recent stories about sexual assaults and the failure of institutions and policies to ensure the safety of women make it clear that women often face an uphill battle when it comes to receiving adequate support. DU’s amnesty policy does not make it easier to receive such support.
The Red Zone, a term for the first few weeks of college when undergraduate students are most likely to be sexually assaulted, is already a major concern for women (though all genders are at risk). Why make the college campus an even riskier place with a wishy-washy medical amnesty policy? If women, and their friends and acquaintances, are scared to call for help during a sexual assault because of the repercussions associated with alcohol, who is DU really protecting?
The impact of the “Red Zone” is not only felt during the first few weeks of students of colors’ time at an institution—they are constantly dealing with the repercussions of the Red Zone. Eighteen percent of black women, 24 percent of mixed race women, and 34 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native women will be raped in their lifetime. These staggering numbers should encourage DU to reach out, empower and protect their students of color. Unfortunately, the current medical amnesty policy discourages these positive practices. The medical amnesty policy should be making it easier to support students of color, not endangering their lives.
For some students, alcoholism and drug abuse is prevalent in the family, and they have not been exposed to healthy habits. But instead of talking about the safest ways to drink and combating addiction, DU doesn’t acknowledge it. The fact that many underage DU students drink means that they are facing these issues with little to no support and are especially vulnerable to a poorly constructed medical amnesty policy.
Students who identify as part of the LGBTQ+ population experience extremely high rates of substance use, more than twice that of non-LGBTQ+ students. The fear of harassment, discrimination and especially of being outed to friends and family discourages many LGBTQ+ students from reporting. The lack of an inclusive and well-defined amnesty policy only serves to push these students further away from lifesaving support services.
An unevenly applied medical amnesty policy is also very damaging for the international student population on campus. As international students are bound by extra regulations and tied to their visa status, they can be subject to larger consequences just by being caught beside alcoholic substances even when not partaking. International students tread on thin ice daily just by being in a different country. The lack of a well-constructed and evenly enforced amnesty policy makes partaking in the U.S. college culture of partying riskier and more stressful for our international student population, which can push them into solitude. This adds an extra burden of integration and can hinder their ability to build community.
A culture of covering your own bases and pushing off responsibility helps no one and enforces the idea that DU is not here to support students, especially students in marginalized communities. Adopting a medical amnesty policy that puts student safety above institutional risk management is of highest importance. Not doing so fails to uphold DU’s commitment to inclusive excellence. The medical amnesty policy should be applied every time a student calls for help either for themselves or another student. The language in the current policy stating that students “may or may not be offered” medical amnesty should be abolished. Students should never have to hesitate when they’re reaching out for help.
Sincerely,
Abdulrahman Ayad, Diversity and Inclusive Excellence Senator
Dajah Brooks, Sophomore Senator
June Churchill, Natural Sciences and Mathematics Senator
Lisl Davies, Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences Senator
