OPINION: USC must rework Greek life disciplinary policy

Following four fraternity hazing deaths at various schools across the country in 2017 and an alleged on-campus sexual assault by a former UCLA Theta Delta Chi fraternity president, UCLA’s Interfraternity Council has imposed a ban on alcohol at all fraternity events. This ban began on Jan. 16 and will continue indefinitely. The accused UCLA student will appear in court on Feb. 5.

Meanwhile, USC has seen its fair share of alcohol-fueled sexual misconduct scandals similar to the one that prompted UCLA’s recent decision, and these scandals occur both inside and outside of Greek life. In 2013, USC’s Sigma Pi Epsilon chapter was banned for five years for a case of sexual misconduct. But USC has not gone so far as to forbid the possession and consumption of alcohol entirely, despite how the substance impairs judgment and too often leads to assaults, misconduct and situations that threaten student safety. USC’s Greek life suffers from a lack of  regulations on alcohol that adversely affect its members, most obviously those who are rushing or pledging.

In addressing alcohol consumption in fraternities, USC’s Fraternity and Sorority Leadership Development code bans “forcing, coercing or permitting students to drink excessive amounts of liquids including alcohol, salt water, water, etc.” among 10 other forms of hazing. Though alcohol is included in this list, it is only unauthorized when in an excess. The only other mention of alcohol in the FSLD Membership Intake Guidelines is the prohibition of alcohol during the presentation of new members to the community. Alcohol is banned from University public spaces (without approval), locker rooms and from the mini-fridges of underage students in University housing, to name a few places. Fraternity houses are not included in the SCampus list of locations where alcohol is prohibited. But in a house with both overage and underage members, alcohol should not be present as well.

One of the biggest fears in joining a fraternity is hazing, which the USC Hazing Policy explicitly bans. Despite this policy, traditions and practices endure — just under the cover of secrecy. Regulations on hazing are difficult to enforce because hazing is an activity, not a substance — its definition is significantly less clear than the definition of what constitutes alcohol. Regulating a physical substance like alcohol is simpler and more enforceable than a list of somewhat subjective practices that fall under USC’s definition of hazing.

Dealing with alcohol may help alleviate the brunt of hazing. UCLA has called it “a step in the right direction” for the long term, and they may be right. Sororities are a long-standing example of a relationship between a lack of alcohol and lower rates of member deaths and arrests. The National Panhellenic Conference maintains an alcohol-free guideline with the consequence of fines or sorority probation.

USC is implementing some restrictions regarding Greek life, but they offload the responsibility of protecting students by instead depriving them of the fraternity experience. In a 2017 letter, Vice President for Student Affairs Ainsley Carry stated that freshmen are banned from rushing for  fraternities or sororities until they have 12 completed units, beginning this coming fall. While this is a protective measure for freshmen to ensure that they have time to adapt to college life before being overwhelmed by involvement, it does not address the deeper issue — fraternities are not regulated in several areas that negatively affect their members. Rather than banning freshmen from rushing for  fraternities, the University should create safeguards so that freshmen are not so consumed by Greek life that their academic and personal lives suffer.

In addition to the four colleges that have experienced a member death from hazing, several other universities have taken to banning alcohol, including the University of Michigan and the University of Idaho. Some are even outright banning Greek life — a severe step that USC does not need. Instead, USC should consider controls in a variety of areas, and restrictions on alcohol may be the first step.