The dangers of entitlement

Last Wednesday, Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity was charged with one count of providing alcohol to a minor. Under New Hampshire law, this is a felony charge and carries with it a maximum fine of $100,000 if the fraternity (a corporation in the eyes of the state) is convicted. This prompted a predictable yet disappointing outcry from the student body.

Some background: Dartmouth has something known as the "Good Samaritan" policy, whereby individuals or organizations can contact the Department of Safety and Security for help when a student is dangerously intoxicated. Both the calling party and the student on whose behalf the call is placed will not face College discipline for violations of the College's alcohol policy. The purpose of the program is to encourage students to seek help for those who need it without being hindered by fear of administrative reprisal, especially if those calling are not entirely sober (or of age) themselves. One thing the policy does NOT promise to do is inure students from the legal consequences of violating New Hampshire state liquor laws (how could it?).

Two weeks ago, a Good Sam call was placed to SAE fraternity for an intoxicated nineteen-year old female, according to a report by The Dartmouth. Responding personnel determined that ambulance transport was necessary, and per Town of Hanover policy, police officers were dispatched to the scene along with the ambulance. The article states that a subsequent investigation revealed that she had been playing beer pong at SAE (with SAE brothers) prior to her incapacitation. Hence, the filing of charges.

The student body was up in arms as soon as the news of the charges broke. In a series of impassioned and increasingly irrational editorials, various members of the Dartmouth community voiced their outrage at the Hanover Police Department's actions. The perceived violation of the sanctity of the Good Sam call was especially vilified. One consistent refrain went something along the lines of, "If this is what happens when we call for help, then we're going to stop calling for help."

The above position, idiotic as it may be, reveals a startling truth about the dangers of entitlement thinking and its accompanying lack of personal accountability. There seems to be a widespread sentiment that the act of calling for help should absolve those complicit from their involvement in the situation. I cannot think of any rational basis for holding that view. One editorial, entitled "D is for Drinking," offered this explanation: "The 'D' in Dartmouth stands for drinking, and that's something that will never leave our campus culture. But it's becoming more and more crucial that we become smarter drinkers ... for the sake of protecting other students' right to drink."

Right to drink? The legal drinking age in New Hampshire is twenty one, and it's illegal to consume alcohol underage or to provide alcohol to individuals who are underage. Where else do you hear vociferous defense of the right of criminals to break the law without penalty? I reject the assumption that Dartmouth students are entitled to drink illegally simply because they're at college. There is no such thing as a "right to drink" and those who choose to ignore that reality must be aware that unpleasant consequences may attend that choice.