College Drinking Literature Review - Essay Example

College Drinking Literature Review 2008 In 1999 the US Department of Health and Human Service reported that despite the fact that laws making it illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to purchase or possess alcohol acted in every State, young people reported that it was very easy to obtain alcohol and that many high school and college students drank with a goal to get drunk (SAMHSA 1999). Harvard University’s School of Public Health College Alcohol Study surveyed students at 119 colleges and found that 44% of U.S. college students engaged in binge drinking during the two weeks before the survey. At that the percentage of binge drinkers was equal from freshman to senior year, and over a half the binge drinkers (almost one in four students) were frequent binge drinkers, while only one in five students reported abstaining from alcohol consumption (CSPI 2000). In 2007 NIAAA reported that the number of binge drinkers among students has increased from 2.3 million to 2.8 million. Moreover, it is reported that college students are more likely to participate in heavy episodic drinking that their peer non-college peers (NIAAA 2007). Alcohol consumption among college students is an essential issue. Binge drinking is ‘consuming of five or more drinks in a row for boys and four in a row for girls’ (SAMHSA 1999). Often beginning around the age of 13, it tends to increase during adolescence, achieve peak in young adulthood (age 18-22) and then gradually decrease (SAMHSA 1999). Binge drinkers reported several reasons for drinking: to get drunk (about 47%), acquiring status, culture of drinking on campus, peer pressure and academic stress. Besides, binge drinkers in high school were more likely to binge in college (CSPI 2000). Binge drinkers are mostly white, age 23 and younger, residents of a fraternity or sorority. They are followed by Hispanics, while African-Americans and Asians report the lowest levels of binge drinking (CSPI 2000, NIAAA 2005). There are a number of factors affecting college drinking. Living arrangements is one of them. As it has been mentioned, the highest rate of drinking is reported among students living in fraternities and sororities, followed by on-campus housing. Off-site living students report to drink less, while students living with their families drink the least. College culture of drinking contributes to the percentage of binge drinkers. First-year students living on campus represent the risk group. Other factors affecting alcohol consumption include: biological and genetic predisposition, belief system and personality, expectations about the effects of alcohol, the size of a student boy, geographic location, etc. (NIAAA 2002). Alcohol consumption has highly negative consequences. About 1,700 college students between ages of 18 and 24 die annually from alcohol-related injuries, including motor vehicle crashes, which is an increase of 6 percent since 1998. About 599,000 students get unintentional injuries, and more than 695,000 students report being assaulted by another student, who has been drinking. More than 97,000 students become victims of alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape. About 400,000 students have unprotected sex under alcohol, with 100,000 reporting to be too intoxicated to know if they consented to having sex. About 25 percent of college students have academic problems associated with alcohol consumption, including missing classes, memory deterioration, falling behind, doing poorly on exams and papers and achieving lower academic scores overall. More than 150,000 students obtain alcohol-related health problems and about 1, 5 percent try to commit suicide under alcohol. About 2 million students report driving drunk. About 11 percent of students damage property under alcohol, 50 percent of administrators from schools and colleges with high drinking levels reporting a ‘moderate’ or ‘major’ problem with alcohol-related property damage. About 110,000 students are arrested for an alcohol-related violation, with 5 percent of 4 year college students having permanent problems with police and campus security. About 6 percent of students have a diagnosis for alcohol dependence (NIAAA 2007, Snapshot). These are only some of the problems caused by alcohol consumption. However, even these figures are not precise, while most of the surveys are self-reported. In 2002 NIAAA released a report on college drinking providing recommendations for intervention and decreasing the rate of the problem. The report underlines the necessity to change the culture of drinking on campus and recommends the overarching approach to program development, proposing useful strategies to choose from. Numerous researches suggest the implementation of an integrated, 3-in-1 framework, which includes the three components to be targeted: 1) individuals, including at-risk or alcohol-dependent drinkers, 2) the student population as a whole, and 3) the college and the surrounding community. This approach provides a useful tool for encouraging administration, presidents, college prevention specialists, students and community member to look at the problem broadly and in a comprehensive fashion. To eliminate the rate of drinking it is necessary to target not only students who are binge drinker, but also those who drink heavily or misuse alcohol occasionally. Several researches have shown that nondependent drinkers contribute to the majority of alcohol-related problems. It is necessary to support screening and intervention strategies directed at both problem and at-risk drinkers. Intervention should be provided on campus and through referral to specialized community-based services. National Alcohol Screening Day held in April and providing free, anonymous testing and health information is one of the possible initiatives. However, it is better to prevent then intervene. That is why it is vital to modulate the behavior and perceptions of the general student population. For this, colleges should address the factors that encourage high-risk drinking, including: aggressive social and commercial promotion of alcohol, widespread availability of alcoholic beverages to underage and intoxicated students, inconsistent publicity and enforcement of laws and campus policies, large amounts of unstructured student time and student perceptions of heavy alcohol use as the norm. Long-term prevention is impossible without community-based work. The collaboration of community and college leaders is the only way to reducing the problem and changing the perceptions of young people. Only joint activities can bring an effective solution, producing policies and enforcement reforms affecting the total drinking environment, improving the relationships between the key groups and enabling residence life directors, student affairs offices, retail alcohol outlets, police and the court system to resolve the issue in cooperation. Further, the report offers a number of strategies that can be used in the work at the three levels. Most of strategies are verified by the scientific research and proved to be effective. In individual work with college students the report offers to use three major strategies. A combination of cognitive-behavioral skills and norms clarification and motivational enhancement intervention is effective with both at-risk and dependent drinkers. Brief motivational enhancement interventions in student health centers and emergency rooms can also help in both cases. Finally, it is necessary to challenge alcohol expectancies of students. In the work with general population, the report proposes to use the following strategies. Increase enforcement of minimum drinking age laws accompanied by implementation, increased publicity and enforcement of other laws to reduce alcohol-impaired driving, which is effective at the levels of college and community. At the level of community it is necessary to introduce more restrictions on alcohol retail density and increase prices and taxes on alcoholic beverages. Responsible beverage service policies in social and commercial settings and the formation of a campus-community coalition should be effective at both community and college levels of operation. Other promising strategies to be implemented at college level of operation include: increasing enforcement at campus-based events that promote excessive drinking, consistently enforcing campus disciplinary actions associated with policy violations, adopting campus-based policies to reduce high-risk use (e.g., reinstating Friday classes, eliminating keg parties, establishing alcohol-free activities and dorms), increasing publicity about enforcement of underage drinking laws/eliminating “mixed” messages, conducting marketing campaigns to correct student misperceptions about alcohol use on campus, consistently enforcing campus disciplinary actions associated with policy violations, provision of “safe rides” programs, enhancing awareness of personal liability, regulation of happy hours and sales, informing new students and parents about alcohol policies and penalties. The report underlines that the strategies can be effective only in case they are implemented in combination. When used alone and targeted at individual intervention, the measures will produce no affect. Besides, the report emphasizes the importance of students’ involvement into the program, stating that students aren’t only the primary targets but also major contributors to the successful implementation of the strategies (NIAAA 2002). The issue of college drinking remains vital. The statistical figures frighten, demonstrating that a great number of students risk their lives and health consuming alcohol. Only one out of five students abstains from drinking, which means that most of college students are at-risk. The most important is that the major group at-risk consists of occasional drinkers. This means that the next victim of alcohol can be any of your friends or acquaintances. Nobody is protected. Notwithstanding initiative undertaken by federal agencies, the number of student drinkers grows. It is necessary to change the culture of college drinking, to challenge the perception of alcohol consumption, which demands everybody’s participation. References: Center for Science in the Public Interests. Alcohol Policies Project. Advocacy for the Prevention of Alcohol Problem. Fact Sheet: Binge Drinking on College Campuses. Updated March 2000. April 20, 2008. URL: www.cspinet.org/booze/collfact1.htm - 16k National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Task Force of the National Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. A Call to Action: Changing the Culture of Drinking at U.S. Colleges. April, 2002. April 20, 2008. URL: www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/NIAAACollegeMaterials/TaskForce/TaskForce_TOC.aspx - 17k National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. High-Risk Drinking in College: What We Know and What We Need To Learn. Last reviewed September 23, 2005. April 20, 2008. URL: http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/NIAAACollegeMaterials/Panel01/HighRisk_04.aspx National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. What Colleges Need to Know Now: An Update on College Drinking Research. Printed November 2007. April 20, 2008. URL: www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/1College_Bulletin-508_361C4E.pdf National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. A Snapshot of Annual High-Risk College Drinking Consequences. Last reviewed July 11, 2007. April 20, 2008. URL: http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/StatsSummaries/snapshot.aspx SAMHSA. Binge Drinking in Adolescents and College Students. 1999. April 20, 2008. URL: http://ncadi.samhsa.gov/govpubs/rpo995/ Read More