Dean Tuttle's email (Sept. 2, Policy information: Student Responsibility)

After reading Dean Tuttle's most recent email (Sept. 2, Policy information: Student Responsibility) and rereading A Guide: Trinity University and Alcohol, I was struck by a glaring inconsistency between how the school claims to approach alcohol, and how things are actually done on our campus.

In A Guide: Trinity University and Alcohol, Trinity makes it seem that it prefers students to act not simply in accordance with various rules and policies, but instead as a result of sincere beliefs and convictions resulting from education.

Trinity goes on to claim its goals are to

The reality of the situation, however, is quite different. As we all know, Trinity does not permit those of legal drinking age to have any amount of hard alcohol. Trinity defends this policy by observing
While this is certainly true, Trinity's zero tolerance policy for hard alcohol is strikingly inconsistent with its "preferred method" of education, and completely nullifies the claim that Trinity "values the freedom of those who live and work here to make our own choices".

Moreover, this policy demonstrates that Trinity, in reality, prefers outright prohibition to education. If Trinity were in fact serious about teaching responsibility and coaching drinkers to follow safe drinking policies, they would allow those of age to have a reasonable amount of hard alcohol. Interestingly, such a policy would also be more inline with its motto "Work Hard, Play Responsibly".

Note: Because Dean Tuttle asked for any questions or comments to be sent to his email, I have directed him to this post

Fare thee well mytigertalk.com

let me see if I got it right: I can get shot at in Iraq at 18; have the jugment to vote for president at 18, but can't drink some wine at trinity when I'm 21. That's pure, unadulterated BS.

wine's not hard liquor.

beer and wine's fine.

Their point remains the same

But the problem with their argument is that 21 is a national law. While their might be a problem with that, this is about Tuttle's email which I have issues with because it shows Trinity doesn't trust it's students with handling their own lives.

Thanks for sharing this with me Mr. Donahue! You are generally right with your take on hard alcohol. It does go against the idea of freedom and choices. The institution had to make a judgment call on this one. There was lots of discussion about this several years ago. I don't know that the policy serves as a deterent to hard alcohol or shots, really. Sometimes values can be in conflict with one another. In this case the value is student health and safety versusstudent freedom. The University decided to err on the side of safety.

There are judgment calls to all of these types of things. Students who are 21 years old and who have underage roommates are allowed to have alcohol in their rooms. That is pretty rare. There is give and take in all of this.

I hadn't seen this forum before so I appreciate the chance to respond. Reading some of the posts you would think we are the only school in the country with policies. I think people should compare. Ours are pretty respectful of students. People could always just follow the policies.

To "err on the side of safety" presumes that you as the administration can make better decisions regarding alcohol than students who are of legal age can make for themselves. This argument is nothing but pure paternalism. Any student who is legally recognized as an adult (over 18) should bear full responsibility for their own actions. Obviously, if a student wished to drink shots, they could still do so, albeit against the rules. I think the argument here is not truly student safety, but school safety from lawsuits if a student drinks themselves to death. Call it what it is.


Actually, compared to most private universities that do not have strong religious affiliation, our university is rather strict when one considers the likelihood of getting caught. Two or three alcohol violations does not seem excessive at all to me, in fact it seems like it could be a fairly common thing to happen over 4 years for many people. However, the policy specifies that suspension can occur for getting caught 3 times with alcohol. Suspension? For an act that can hurt only yourself (generally speaking)??

I must concur with Donahue in that these policies exactly counter the "individual responsibility" goal and instead seem to exist for exactly the contrary purpose. Rather than leaving students to make choices for themselves, the University has decided instead to categorize these decisions as affecting the "community". Individual choices should be seen as just that... and not punished severely.

Interesting perspectives. If any of you wish to participate in the Trinity Alcohol Coalition, please e-mail me off of the list. I am unsubscribing now, but appreciate all the comments.

Hmmm.... An interesting way to respond to legitimate concerns. If only this was an acceptable way for students to respond to the Student Conduct Board....

Holy crap! Did I scare off the mighty Tuttle?

We got to get Tuttle back.

As someone who knows and routinely disagrees with Dean Tuttle I would recommend taking him up on the offer to talk to him either by making an appointment with his office or by joining the alcohol coalition. If drinkers don't join the alcohol coalition then the policies will be guided by faculty and staff along with non-drinkers whose only concern is the effects of drunks on campus. While those view should be heard as well it would serve the drinking population well to have a reasonable and eloquent representative on the coalition to represent the interests of people who will inevitable consume alcohol illegally. It's college it's here that you learn to make and defend positions on controversial issues. Why not make it something you're passionate about?

Sounds like a trap.

Our first meeting is 4:00 p.m. Thursday, October 2 in the Waxahachie Room of the Coates Center. All are welcome.