All colleges need a medical amnesty policy - Commentary orignally appearing in The Blue Banner

Although medical amnesty policies remain a controversial topic in society, it’s something every university should consider to maintain student safety.

Medical amnesty policies, also known as good samaritan policies, let students call medical services without campus repercussions for a person overdosing on alcohol or drugs, according to the Higher Education Center, a group sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education.

Amnesty does not, however, prevent legal consequences. Nonetheless, every university should consider an amnesty policy.

Opponents of amnesty policies say such policies encourage alcohol and drug abuse on campus, according to the HEC. How much encouragement students need to take drugs and alcohol, especially with permission from a policy, remains subjective.

But this means, of course, that opponents perhaps envision dorm rooms turning into heroin dens and students turning empty soda cans into homemade pipes. It’s the same paranoia showcased in Reefer Madness.

If students simply wait for a policy to come into place as their “Get Out of Jail Free” card, then they probably didn’t need much encouragement to take drugs or drink alcohol in the first place. But, we’re talking about when moderation turns into extremes.

It’s well-known and championed in American culture that college is a time of experimentation. Drugs, sex, alcohol – anything’s game. Expecting a policy to solidify this message seems redundant.

Students visiting the emergency room hopefully only need to go once to understand what constitutes too much.

Really, somebody over the limit on, say, painkillers, most likely only needs their stomach pumped once to realize drugs aren’t a game.

Maybe the student with brain damage after a massive alcohol binge can serve as a reminder of what students should consider moderation.

Although drastic, such examples show that the emergency room should be the last resort.

The HEC recommends preventative programs be in place to discourage alcohol and drug abuse on campus. Sure, some exist, but a medical amnesty policy offers an excellent time to re-focus on prevention.

Also, students who don’t receive direct repercussions from campus administration for calling when a fellow student overdoses should be required to attend an abuse class to dissuade the behavior.

Ideally, the students only attend the class once and learn their lesson. This shuts out the revolving- door types who don’t know when to quit and probably shouldn’t be in college anyway.

The same idea applies for the legal aspect, too. If the campus allows amnesty, then the law should, as well. Not doing so might hold some students back from calling the E.R.

Rather than allow students to simply leave the hospital after the ordeal, the law could require students to take a class to reduce abuse.

It’s important to note here that medical amnesty should only be reserved for emergencies.

Students who get caught with drugs can’t be allowed to claim amnesty. The same goes for underage drinkers.

To do so negates the purpose of the amnesty policy.

Treating medical amnesty policies as some kind of gate-opening encouragement for students to engage in drug and drink alcohol abuse makes about as much sense as throwing an occasional, unearned A grade to a consistently D student. It won’t change behavior.

Acting as though college students, who are adults, need administrators’ permission to begin drug and alcohol use is comical at best.

Here’s the skinny: If students wish to do drugs and alcohol, they will. If they don’t, they won’t. If a policy pushes someone into drinking and drugging, the student probably would have given in to peer pressure anyway.

Medical amnesty offers more than protection for students. It offers, above all else, guaranteed medical services because no student will have an excuse for not calling.