|
For discussion purposes . . .
Which policy is more likely to be embraced by those who do not follow the letter of the law:
Policy A
Those who do not follow the letter of local, national, and fraternal law will be subject to the harshest possible punishment. This may include any or all punishments the governing body chooses to implement; you will be expected to change current ways and comply immediately.
Policy B
Certainly one problem every chapter has had to deal with is "That Guy", the person who chooses to drink irresponsibly (if not illegally), gets out of control, and leads to problems for everyone involved. Here's an education program about the effects of alcohol, the liability involved, past history of alcohol violations for chapters nationwide and the results, some suggestions for having good events even sans alcohol, and help for when a brother becomes "That Guy" and how to prevent this whenever possible.
-----
I feel it's easy to see that chapters that are heavy into 'partying' as an organization are going to, for the most part, ignore policy A across the board. Studies have shown that penalties do not influence the decision-making process of whether or not to perform an action - just like in death penalty debates.
Policy B has a more realistic chance to make change - you'll never eliminate underage drinking, but in reality the fact that the law is being broken is NOT the portion of the issue that causes trouble. The heart of the problem is acting irresponsibly, specifically with regard to drinking.
If we can teach our brothers how to be more responsible with regard to alcohol use, then the war has been won - we'll never get people to follow a law which is largely ignored and only enforced in a spotty fashion.
I liken it to when hazing policies first went into effect for fraternities - by saying "NO MORE HAZING! OR ELSE!" fraternities made many chapters turn a deaf ear, and as such hazing is still an issue nationally. Rather than forming a sample pledge program, which would accomplish all of the goals that hazing achieves but in a safer, legal, more intelligent manner, organizations left that to the chapters - national offices only provided the enforcement. Better alternatives, intelligent rationale, follow-up and support must be the cornerstones of any fraternal policy matters, in my opinion.
|