LETTERS: Consequences of alcohol abuse

To the Editor: Coincidence or not, the two together are an example of the mixed messages students get about alcohol and the social life at Penn. No wonder freshmen are confused and apt to make some poor choices when it comes to deciding how much is too much. It's all part of the national conversation about college students and excessive drinking. Recent accounts of the incidents at Louisiana State, Colorado State and Michigan State vividly describe the association between excessive alcohol use and violence, vandalism, injuries and (even) death. Where does Penn fit compared to the national picture. More importantly, where do you fit? Does the college experience have to include taking care of roommates or friends who didn't seem to know "when to say when?" Does the college experience have to include sloshing through another persons vomit after a night of party hopping? Does the college experience have to include a trip to Student Health or HUP's emergency room to be hooked up on a ventilator until the alcohol clears the system and normal respiration takes over? The Drug and Alcohol Resource Team conducts workshops in every dormitory including Hill, in most fraternity and sorority chapters, with most athletic teams and for many other interested groups on campus. In our many conversations around campus -- floor by floor, frat by frat, sorority by sorority, team by team -- the answer seems to be -- NO! Over 50 percent say they don't need to drink like that and they would prefer if others didn't as well. For the record, Graduate Fellows from Hill had contacted DART about scheduling workshops before the incidents this past weekend. We all play a part in educating our newest members about Penn. Let's all encourage them to take advantage of the best that Penn has to offer (see the many activities listed in the New Student Orientation handbook) and we don't mean our hospital! Kate Ward-Gaus Health Educator, DART Advisor Office of Health Education u To the Editor: This letter is in response to the DP article titled "LSU suspends frat after alcohol incident," (DP, 9/12/97). The aforementioned article includes some very inaccurate and very critical information regarding the suspension of the SAE chapter at Louisiana State University. The DP suggests that the incident involving the death of Benjamin Wynne occurred during a "pledge night" in which "two dozen pledges" went to a bar where brothers "[made] their pledges consume" alcohol. Completely on the contrary, the actual event was a celebration for the rushes who had been given bids by the fraternity that night, a few hours earlier. Simply, pledging was not an issue. for the DP to imply either insensibly or explicitly that hazing of pledges was involved in this story is completely unfounded and inaccurate. These implications just contribute to the stereotypical and obsolete model of a fraternity being a drinking club. Further, these implications cloud the real issue from which every student (male, female, Greek, non-Greek) can learn. The real issue of this tragedy focuses upon the ability of college students to drink responsibly and to use sound judgement. Clearly, what some students of this fraternity did in New Orleans was wrong. They did not, in any way, use sound judgement or common sense. And for that, they should be criticized and they should be responsible for the repercussions. It is critical to understand, however, that every involved student acted upon their own volition, and, in no way, does the responsible party reflect the true ideals or principles from which any fraternity is based. That is why the chapter at LSU has been suspended. It is equally important to understand that every student on this campus who ever picks up a drink of alcohol must be aware of the inherent dangers. The more students who realize what alcohol does to body function and how alcohol should not be abused, the less incidents like this will occur. John Zurawski College '99 President, Sigma Alpha Epsilon Keep the food trucks To the Editor: Last Monday's column on the food trucks made me wretch ("Create a food vending zone," DP, 9/8/97). Regulation of the food trucks at the University's whim will reduce choices for students and increase our costs. The University's only serious motive in this fight is to increase its monopoly power over retailers in the area. The Sansom Common shops like the Shops at 3401 Walnut represent money to the University's coffers. The food trucks take away from those revenues by diverting student dollars to cheaper -- and tastier -- alternatives. Controlling competition against Barnes & Noble from Campus Text and others is another aspect of the planned regulatory regime. City Councilperson Jannie Blackwell and her staff are not working with the best interests of the voters and student body at heart. Students should continue to voice their vigorous opposition to a plan which serves only the purpose of limiting their choices to paying more money to the University of Pennsylvania (not-)for-profit machine. Erik Oliver Law '98