Creighton’s new Good Samaritan policy may not be what many students might think.
The new Good Samaritan policy was enacted in November, and Creighton will be evaluating the effectiveness over the course of the next couple semesters. The new measure aims for students in dire medical situations from alcohol use to be instantly reported and receive prompt medical attention.
The policy expects any harmful activity to be reported immediately with the caveat, “students should not hesitate to seek help because of the fear of disciplinary action.”
There the policy sounds pretty much like any other Good Samaritan policy: someone takes care of a person in need of help without worry of being punished (or prosecuted) for
his actions.
However, the next line changes this perception. The policy goes on to say “in most cases, the help seeker will not be held responsible with a policy violation under Creighton’s Code of Conduct.” The key phrase there is “most cases.” The potential of being written up and going through CARE is still a very real possibility. The student who reported will get the term “help seeker” next to his name in the report, and most likely won’t be held responsible, but without a full guarantee.
The policy is certainly in a tough position, as it either protects students from punishment allowing necessary cases to receive medical attention, or allowing the freedom of punishment to easily be abused as people might seek to preserve themselves by reporting someone who is worse off to avoid trouble.
According to College of Nursing junior and Resident Advisor Mary Beth Schroeder, the policy would “create a culture of safety if perceived in the right way.”
The issue then becomes in the perception. The same drive of self-preservation that would drive someone to CARE someone to avoid trouble would more than likely drive that person to still watch out for himself and not report an incident, even if necessary. The fear of being written up as well still acts as a strong deterrent.
When asked if she would report someone if potentially getting CARE’d Arts & Sciences freshman Sarah Birnbaum was hesitant, saying that she “probably would not since they always talk about how bad that is on the record and how hard it is to get it off.”
The policy seems to be sending a very strong mixed message to students. On one hand they understandably don’t want to see their friend in danger from alcohol use, but on other hand still feel the need to protect themselves because of the fear of possible punishment.
Despite the fear of punishment though, CSU President John McCoy still believes the Good Samaritan will work.
“As students, the safety of ourselves and our friends should be a top priority,” McCoy said.
However, helping others at personal expense could end up problematic. Personal defense and the instinct to protect oneself above all others is a trait that is not going to be betrayed easily. People in that situation will often protect themselves at all costs, and do what they can to help the other person so long as they aren’t jeopardizing themselves.
The policy aims to ease that concern by being more lenient, but being lenient is not going to be enough. If the students truly are intelligent in alcohol use situations, the Good Samaritan wouldn’t be an issue since there would always be someone designated to be sober to be of help if need be.Unfortunately, stupid is as stupid does and that isn’t always the case.
Even though the university is trying to implement a positive change with the Good Samaritan policy, by neglecting to grant full pardon to anyone who reports misconduct the measure will only be a half-hearted and never fully effective.