Page 43 - CLT120720

CLOSING ARGUMENT DECEMBER 7, 2020 ¦ 43

EDITORIAL BOARD

go” only. Fairfield warned that a failure to abide Accepting some risk will occur, often through
by these mandates could result in expulsion from inadvertence or circumstances outside of one’s
the school. control, the harm reduction model aims to reduce
On October 15, more than 100 faculty members risk through community engagement, com-
from schools across the country who are experts in passionate messaging, behavioral support and
public health, infectious diseases, mental health, structural interventions, including facilitating
social sciences and clinical care weighed in on this lower risk ways to permit students to address their
dilemma, admonishing schools for “requiring stu- unmet needs of social and physical contact. This
dents to make radical and unsustainable changes approach helps students avoid the highest risk op-
in their behavior that go well beyond avoidance of tions that may result in greater harm.
large indoor parties, including long-term mainte- For example, experts suggest schools that offer
nance of six feet of distance from all other people, on-campus learning allow some non-distanced
at the threat of swift and unnecessarily punitive social activities but educate students about how
disciplinary action” calling the to keep the risk of transmis-
“abstinence only approach . . . sion low, such as providing
inhumane, radical and likely to guidance on creating social
backfire.” bubbles, providing enough so-
While experts acknowledge cial connection while avoiding
the risk that younger students, large gatherings that create a
who are at a much lower risk of Experts say a punitive, greater risk for transmission.
complications from the virus, can abstinence-only approach To increase effectiveness,

transmit the virus to others who to COVID-19 rules is schools should not link disci-

are more vulnerable, they stress “inhumane, radical and plinary action to contact- and

that these young students are at a likely to backfire.” symptom-tracing efforts. Col-

much greater risk of “psychologi- leges should also include the
cal distress that can be triggered students in public health ef-
or worsened by social and physi- forts, including conducting
cal isolation,” particularly for peer-led education about social
marginalized students for whom distancing strategies and seek
the loss of positive social connec- input and feedback about mes-
tions can have a significant effect on their mental saging and policies regarding the virus.
health. These experts say colleges should be held We agree with these experts’ assertion that stu-
accountable for their decisions to keep campus- dents “are human beings who are still maturing
es open during the pandemic and claim it is the and need social and physical contact to remain
schools’ obligation to consider competing risks healthy, and university policies should be designed
that could have dire consequences when deciding accordingly.” There may still be circumstances in
what methods to employ to contain the virus. They which punitive measures, including expulsion,
counsel that, rather than using punitive measures would be appropriate and perhaps necessary.
and shame-inducing messages as the remedy to However, we urge our colleges to consider alter-
these violations, a “harm reduction approach” is natives to total abstinence from social contact and
more effective, compassionate and sustainable than to punitive disciplinary methods as the immediate
aiming for total elimination of risk. and sole remedy.
¦

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune