This is a shame. I hope to see a protest. The reason why the drinking age is 21 in this country - drunk driving. Does anyone drive at Harvard? No. Does Harvard have high rates of depression? Yes. Does Harvard have final clubs rich receive $300K in donations from alumni each year so that they can let the booze flow without being watched by heinous BAT teams? Yes.
I'm for burning Pilbeam in effigy.
 

Colleges and universities are under tremendous duress to demonstrate they are obeying the legal drinking age--or lose federal funding. Police and state authorities are taking an active role. Every school has an occasional freshman death (and scores of close calls yearly)---and in response to such tragic happenings families have become ever more litigious. While it would be wholly preferable to initiate students into drinking by serving them in the Harvard houses, and in Master's and Tutor's houses where they can learn HOW to drink, this is not currently the LAW. Schools that do not step up--and where students then fall in harm's way--are in serious trouble.
There is no question that we are driving students to drink in secret---in the Finals Clubs, in rooms etc. Centuries of people trying to affect student behavior show that that is extremely difficult to do, even with a plethora of education. But what is the choice here? The lobbies in this country--MADD chief amongst them--and others--allow no exceptions, and certainly not Harvard.
 

Beverage Authorization Team is supposed to be a cute acronym, I believe. The BAT Team! (Yes, redundant, like TCBY Yogurt.) You're right that it sounds lame. Also, it is lame.
 

I've often felt that this blog could use its own Beverage Authorization Team. But perhaps we could help the College here: what about a SITD competition, with winners announced Friday, to rename the BAT to something less chilling or strange?
I've always liked German acronyms for police units (Kripo, Gestapo etc.). What about BooPo, for booze police?
 

"Every school has an occasional freshman death"
True, and that's horrible, but this isn't about the no-booze-in-Harvard-Yard rule, which is a good one.
Is Harvard really going to lose research funding over undergraduates drinking? Can you back that up?
 

Yes. I'd like to see some evidence that the College was responding to an actual threat, rather than just an instinctive tendency to be authoritarian.
 

Also, I welcome a Beverage Authorization Team for this blog. Rather like stopping a friend from drunk-dialing, the BBAT (Blog Beverage Authorization Team) would stop me from blogging when I'm drunk. Or hungover. Or tired. Or cranky. Or inane.

Of course, this might make for a dwindling frequency of posts....
 

Rich, what if the noose (see your subsequent post) was the work of a drunken student?
 

DRUNK FRESHMAN DIES IN FALL FROM ADAMS HOUSE ROOF. DEAN'S FUND USED TO PROCURE ALCOHOL

My guess would be that some version of that hypothetical made it to the General Counsel's office, with the predictable result.
 

web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2000/settlement-0920.html
Admittedly, that incident happened ten years ago, but I also doubt the alcohol was purchased with University money.
 

In response to those who wish "proof" that Harvard or any other institution is not just being authoritarian,I will simply say this: Anyone at any school who has ever had to make a phone call to a parent whose freshman child has died after vomiting and suffocating from alcohol poisoning will have a different view of this from that moment on. My own view is that we should allow drinking and be allowed to teach young people to drink responsibly. Since the LAW makes that impossible, there are horrific consequences when these horrific tragedies occur. Many of the consequences are personal, some of them are legal. They lead institutions to distance themselves from events they cannot control, educate (even when education is very difficult), make stern rules and try to protect themselves in every way possible (from litigation), develop multiple alternatives (which rarely work), and and take a stern line on public drinking (even when actually controlling private drinking is next to impossible). Schools are trapped from doing what they think best. The entire thing is a nightmare.
 

5:10, I think that's a very wise post, and points all well made.

My point is simply this: Why doesn't Harvard just come out and say what you just said? Everyone would understand, and the dean's office could stop funding parties for the simple reason that it fears the headline you suggest. Eminently reasonable. So why hide behind twisted logic and Beverage Authorization Teams? Unless you're just afraid to say, you know what? We thought about this earlier decision and we now think it was a mistake, for x reason....
 

A ridiculous nightmare, I agree. Students will also commit suicide, or attempt to commit suicide, every single year on every single campus in the US. As terrible as that is, I'm not sure parents or others typically blame the school for it - or if so, seem reasonable in doing so. So why is a few students a year, out of thousands, with alcohol poisoning more of a tragedy (that the administration must remedy)? Why is it not simply the odds, a statistics that can't be totally controlled?
 

This moves me to ask a stupid question that I every-so-often encounter but have never remembered to answer. What exactly is the relationship between "Jr." and "II." Is "II" the nephew (ie not son) of "Sr."? Or are they sometimes interchangeable?
 

I believe II implies a break in the lineage. Jr is the son of Sr, but II is not (otherwise he'd be Jr). It could be the grandson, for instance.
 

EADW, that sounds right to me. But I'll bet that some people use "II" because it sounds fancier than "Jr."
 

Re Rich at 8:23,
Of course what you suggest Harvard say is exactly the truth. The previous dean implemented a foolish policy that the new dean has to undo. But does any organization, university or otherwise, ever have its administration say that the previous leader was wrong on something like this? I'll bet even George Steinbrenner won't say that if he fires Torre, and Mattingly or whoever succeeds Torre certainly won't say that about Torre either. (BAT teams, by the way, have been around since around 1990 at least.)
 

In answer to Mr. Bradley's question about why Harvard doesn't "just come out and say what you just said?" I can only say---I am not at Harvard and can't second guess them. But I am at another school and while I suspect they DO say this to students (which is why the students want to talk personally with the Hvd lawyers) it isn't just LEGAL issues they worry about or HEADLINES. Believe it or not, it is probably also the health and survival of their students. The amount of binge drinking, especially--most especially--among freshmen (but other students too) is probably unimaginable to most on this blog. The NUMBER of students getting stupendously, colossally drunk and even coming close to death's door every single weekend at many schools in this nation is, I truly believe, unimaginable to anyone who has not actually seen it. For a long time schools blinked at alcohol because not to blink drives students underground where they "front load" before going to events where drinking is disallowed. However, since binge drinking has seemed to be on the increase even so, and serious incidents have grown ever more frequent--and yes,society has become ever more litigious--there has been a shift back to enforcement and efforts at education and creation of an atmosphere where alternative non-alcohol events can thrive. International students who come to the U.S from European countries are often stupefied by the binge drinking here; to them alcohol is a normal part of life. They think American students are nuts. They know how to drink. But the rules in this country have made alcohol forbidden fruit--and binge drinking is the thing among American freshmen. I repeat: until you have experienced what this is like you cannot imagine the scale of it or the danger. Sorry to be so over the top, but this is a fraught societal issue and while it doesn't look to me as if any Hvd administrator has a particular knack for talking to these students, it is nevertheless true that the students are acting very entitled. since for years they seem to have been allowed to get away with things no one else has. I know of no school anymore that gives funds to students to throw unsupervised parties where alcohol is served. None.
 

re 10:30's reference to 'front-loading':

The term is 'pre-gaming.'

SE
 

Indeed, SE, but I sort of like "front loading" as well. Or how about "Front Loading II"? That would fit in nicely at Harvard, so much better than "Front Loading Jr."
 

Note how extremely counterproductive McLoughlin's quote is in this article. By 'they' does he mean Harvard kids in general? Could he sound any more petty and uninterested in educational principle?
 

Suggestions for the renaming of the BAT team:

ALPO - ALcohol POlice
ADDS - Against Drunk and Disorderly Students
HARDHAT - HARvard Doesn't Have Alcohol Team
HARNESS - HARvard NEeds a Sobriety Squad
R U T1 Club - Are you Twentyone Club