To the Editor:

It recently came to my attention that Prof. Tony Brown, one of Vanderbilt's new "Heads of House" in the Commons, has taken it upon himself to stamp out underage drinking in his dormitory. In his effort, Prof. Brown has created an Abstinence Pledge for residents of his house to sign, and threatened to do everything in his power to expel those who signed and later violated it. He delivered this pledge as part of a four-hour meeting for the Freshmen to digest, and later posted a backhanded, sarcastic letter assaulting the character and leadership behavior of those who stood up for their rights. That letter is available online (at http://commonplace.vanderbilt.edu/display.php?i=160). 

Unfortunately, we have not yet given these freshmen the benefit of Philosophy 102 or Philosophy 105. Without courses in general logic and ethics, who could expect every one of them to identify the logical fallacies and philosophical absurdities plaguing Brown's argument? It seems lucky that two thirds of them did. In a high-pressure situation like that, it would take a strong character indeed to resist concurrent appeals to authority, vanity, and fear. 

Any student of the John Lachs school of personal liberty will find the situation mildly disturbing. Vanderbilt has been entrusted with the responsibility of caring for these young people, nurturing them, and helping them to develop into themselves. If Vanderbilt allows some of the more impressionable ones to be brainwashed by this ludicrous abstinence campaign, it will be a colossal and unforgivable shame. 

Abstinence-only programs of a similar nature in sex education have been statistically proven to fail. They decrease neither teen pregnancy rates nor STD transmission relative to standard programs. It is fatuous to think that such a program would work for something as socially charged as alcohol. How saddening, then, that someone in Prof. Brown's position of authority would do something like this. A culture of binge drinking exists in the United States precisely because people, from parents to police officers, create a culture in which drinking is an act of rebellion. In order to stop binge drinking, people must fight this culture. Brown's attitude merely stokes the flames of passion for drinking as rebellion against authority.  

It's worth noting that that rebellion comes from an ethically sound base---one with which Brown is apparently unfamiliar. John Stuart Mill summarized it in his "Harm Principle:"

"...the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right... The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign."

If Professor Brown insists on discussing this issue in an ethical context, it would serve him well to show some knowledge of the material that defines the subject. Put simply: no one has the right to legislate what anyone does to themselves. Happily, about two-thirds of the students under Brown's supervision know that disobeying unjust rules does not make one a bad person or a worse member of the community. Despite what Prof. Brown attests, not signing this pledge does model leadership and strength of character. Non-signers are showing their fellow classmates that they know how to stand up for their rights, even in the face of unjust laws and professors attempting to channel Dolores Umbridge. 

If past studies on the subject are any indication, this project will likely cause a polarizing effect. Brown will undoubtedly claim that more people in his dorm aren't drinking, but he is likely also to drive more students to drink, and to do so more heavily than they otherwise might.  

Alcohol is a complex issue for young people to grapple with, and they need to do it on their own terms. When it comes to booze, neither extreme is ideal. Excessive intake may prompt regret, but abstinence in college isolates people from the experiences of their peers. How many of the third that signed Brown's petition will wake up Sophomore year and realize they are missing out on all the fun? 

It boils down to two issues, really. As human beings, freshmen have the right to a liberty of body and mind that programs like this can infringe upon. But even from a practical standpoint, the abstinence campaign is unlikely to have the desired effect. 

It is this writer's sincere hope that the Administration does what it can to protect students from the backlash of this program. There are ways to decrease binge drinking on a college campus (a quick ProQuest search will find some), but this program is not one of them. 

Respectfully appalled, 

Drew Donnelly, Vanderbilt ‘08