Freshman View: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

Freshman View is a weekly column in which Freshmen at the College answer questions posed by Upperclassmen and Alumni. This week, 24s address the College’s new Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell approach to campus lockdown:

With students getting vaccinated and weather warming up, students are hoping for an easing of campus restrictions. The College has not yet announced any such easing, instead keeping old restrictions in place and simply choosing not to enforce them. Is this turn-a-blind-eye strategy a wise one or should the College take a different approach?

Have questions you want answered? Send them to dartrevieweditor@gmail.com

The administration has yet to announce an easing of restrictions and has turned a blind eye for less egregious violations of covid policy. This is another example within a pattern of nonsensical policy choices. The administrative decision makers, again, attempt to assert their authoritarian grasp. However, it is clear that campus security has a bit more compassion for student’s mental health. Right now, the disjointed relationship between administration and security represents an ever-present divide between students on adherence to covid policy. The College should absolutely ease the technical restrictions on campus. All they have done so far is pushed more and more students off campus due to the potential that gatherings in dorms still could result in removal from campus. This effect has been amplified by the College via the one policy change that was made:

“In accordance with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, Dartmouth students who are fully vaccinated may gather in private, off-campus spaces without using face coverings or maintaining 6-foot distancing. However, the group must be limited to no more than nine individuals and all must be fully vaccinated. When in doubt about whether all individuals at a gathering are vaccinated, please continue to wear a mask and employ physical distancing.”

I seriously question why this rule can only apply to off-campus gatherings. I am 100% positive that CDC guidance does not suggest that these gatherings are safer off of college campuses. Dorms may be the issue here, but there are other on-campus spaces that could safely allow for such gatherings (ex. common rooms, study rooms, etc.). The College’s current approach does nothing except drive students away from campus and foster more resentment towards the administration. The risk to students that covid possesses, especially nowadays with vaccinations and more people having antibodies, is most certainly lower than the risk that stagnant covid policy poses to student mental health.

— Lucas LaRoche

The strategy of loose enforcement in the status quo benefits students, the College, and public health. For students, looser enforcement of Covid protocols means they can responsibly navigate the pandemic while not feeling under constant threat or monitoring by SNS or College officials. This propagates a culture of personal responsibility rather than a culture of fear. For the College, the loose enforcement strategy is the best approach to satisfy public pressure. If the College tries to change the Covid rules now, there would inevitably be criticism, both from those who want even looser restrictions and from those who want to maintain the old restrictions. What’s more, the College would inevitably be blamed for any rise in cases if they loosen the rules. Therefore, it would only hurt the College’s standing to ease restrictions at this point. Lastly, the current strategy is actually the best from a public health standpoint. If Covid restrictions are loosened, students would just loosen up even more than they do now. It is like raising the speed limit on a freeway; drivers would just respond by further raising their speeds. Having the strict restrictions on the books at least puts some caution in students’ minds, even as they may skirt the rules sometimes. The result is a more Covid-safe campus, which is present in the status quo.

— Jeffrey Lam

As Dartmouth students get vaccinated and the weather begins to warm, the light at the end of the tunnel of COVID-19 brightens. Despite promising trends, the College has decided to maintain old restrictions even for fully vaccinated students living on campus. Albeit with less enforcement, these restrictions represent a break with the very CDC guidelines the College zealously followed for much of the past year. 

According to the CDC, a quarter of New Hampshire’s general population and a far greater proportion of the state’s vulnerable population are fully vaccinated. Considering the potential logistical difficulties of enforcing different rules for vaccinated and non-vaccinated students, as well as the winter outbreak in recent campus memory, the College’s inclination to err on the side of caution is understandable. Yet a policy whereby a student’s vaccination status can be confirmed on-site would be more than feasible and allow students to responsibly socialize. This outlet will certainly improve mental health and may increase students’ capacities for academic achievement. 

The recent policy change allowing fully-vaccinated students to gather off-campus without masks and distancing represents a step in the right direction. However, by extending these privileges to on-campus students and maintaining consistent rule enforcement, the College may consistently apply CDC guidelines. In the process, we may incentivize further student vaccination, protect the community-at-large, and begin the process towards normalcy. 

— George Eid

The College has exhibited an unacceptable level of despotism. Don’t get me wrong. I am not criticizing the restrictions the College has put in place in an effort to prevent an uncontrollable spread of Covid-19 on campus per se. The need for some of the current rules and regulations—especially in light of the administration’s open defiance of official CDC guidelines for fully vaccinated people—must be the topic of a more extensive analysis. This is however a cry for transparency. The caprice and disinterest with which the current administration has wielded its nearly absolute power so far has been nothing short of traumatic. It has ingrained a deep institutional distrust into the Class of 2024. Over the past three terms, the administration has only slightly adjusted its official community guidelines. Unofficially however, the College seems to be constantly changing its policies and the strictness of their enforcement. Anyone who has been on campus both in the fall and the spring knows that for a fact. Of course, I am not arguing for a return to the draconian measures of the fall. Quite the contrary, I call on the College to officially change its community guidelines to reflect the lived reality on campus. The current status allows the administration to arbitrarily choose between harsh enforcement and feigned ignorance. The resulting climate of constant anxiety and uncertainty is detrimental both to the students’ mental health and their confidence in due process and equal protection under the regulations the College has set up.

— Daniel Carstensen