The Campus Life Council (CLC) debated recommendations for du Lac revisions Monday, specifically focusing on medical amnesty and clarification of language.
“We wanted this in written form for two reasons,” student body president Grant Schmidt said. “One is to have this on record for future reference, and two, we wanted a response from [Vice President for Student Affairs Fr. Mark Poorman] as to why or why not these recommendations would be adopted.”
The Council passed four resolutions to be sent to Office of Residence Life and Housing (ORLH) after considerable discussion.
The Council focused on the recommendation for a medical amnesty policy.
“We realize that we want this to be educative,” chief of staff Ryan Brellenthin said. “We want it to change student behavior so they can actively seek out help for their friends.”
Debate was raised over whether a rigid policy should be recommended, or if ORLH should present a more formal statement similar to an honor code.
“Having the guidelines there makes it easier to make a decision in a situation where student is already irrational,” Student Senate representative Claire Sokas said. “You are not able to weigh the pros and cons unless you know what is going to happen.”
Schmidt said Student Senate has already passed a resolution recommending the University adopt a formal medical amnesty policy.
Student representative John DeLacio said many freshmen specifically do not know or understand the University’s position on medical amnesty, and a policy supported by the ORLH would send a “strong message” on this subject.
This discussion was not resolved and remains on the table for future CLC meetings.
CLC members also recommended a serious consideration of the language used when ORLH discusses sanctions in du Lac. The Council will ask that the du Lac revisions include changing the word “shall” to the word “may” to clarify various texts.
“It seems like a small change,” Schmidt said. “But it is important.”
The recommendation states the change should be made to “broaden the options of the Office of Residence Life and Housing.”
Changing the words would allow a more “case-by-case” judgment, Brellenthin said.
This recommendation was previously discussed when Associate Vice President for Residence Life Bill Kirk said part of the du Lac revisions would clarify the language to match up with the actions of ORLH.
CLC members also wanted to distinguish between the jurisdictions of Indiana state law and the laws of other nations and states where students may reside. They specifically suggested du Lac should clarify this distinction.
“The spirit of this recommendation is to clarify that students are not subject to Indiana state law at all times but to the law of the nation or state where they are residing,” Brellenthin said.
The Council members also unanimously supported a recommendation for continuing service hours as a sanction, an issue that Kirk specifically asked CLC to consider.
Other recommendations for future meetings address first-time incidents of intoxication within a student’s residence hall, discipline at lower administrative levels, undergraduate tailgating policy and the issue of drinking games in dorms.