Opening Up Debate on Scripps’ Closed Door Policy

Posted on 20 November 2009. Tags: alcohol policy, community, dorm life

Going to college, I had certain visions of what college parties would entail. I remember chanting, “Toga! Toga!” with my friends as we watched the Delta Tau Chi fraternity boys throw a party in Animal House. What struck me most about Animal House’s portrayal of college was the sense of community. Alcohol may have been the main event, but the sense of community grew around the parties.

However, at Scripps, dorm community suffers due to the reinforcement of the closed door policy. For those who are not familiar with the alcohol policy, the Scripps Handbook states: “Possession and/or consumption of alcoholic beverages by those persons 21 years of age or older is permitted in individual student rooms as long as a) the door is closed b) there are eight or less people in the room c) the individual serving the alcohol does not consume alcohol.”

The first question I asked myself after reading this policy was: why would Scripps provide alcohol for SARLO-approved events while restricting consumption in the dorms to such an extent? The school is obviously not trying to eliminate the drinking scene from student life.

Then, I considered the liability issue. Would Scripps want alcohol to be readily accessible in dorms when there are underage first-years, sophomores and juniors also living there? Wouldn’t that encourage underage drinking? After considering the closed door policy, I began to think about how having one’s door closed not only encourages underage drinking, but provides an unsettling atmosphere for binge drinking.

If students of age were allowed to drink in the halls and common rooms—which Scripps currently prohibits in its alcohol policy—then other students, those who were underage, could at least partake in the festivities and would not be alienated from their peers by closed doors. Those who are underage do not necessarily have to partake in the drinking to participate in get-togethers.

As long as the closed door policy is enforced, a less social and more destructive habit of quick drinks before leaving the dorms will continue to be the predominant drinking culture for all students—underage or not. This only leads to more binge drinking. During the weekend, one will walk through halls that look completely dark and deserted while hearing a faint noise through the walls, indicating some human presence.

Why not replace this policy with one that encourages, not stifles, social interaction between students of different ages and social groups? I would like to advocate for an open door policy, one that no longer restricts drinking to single rooms with eight or less people, one that allows parties—if not in the hallways, then at least in the common living spaces. Scripps students need to stop hiding behind closed doors and meet the people with whom they live.

In the words of Dean Vernon Wormer from Animal House, “The time has come for someone to put his foot down. And that foot is me.”