The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1 - 76

Erika L. Beseler Thompson • Thomas E. Hall • Myron A. Eighmy

Some institutions chose to notify parents in
all cases where underage students violate institutional alcohol or other drug policies, while
other institutions notified only at the discretion
of a senior administrator. While survey results
indicated that 75% of policies allowed for notification following a first violation, in practice,
notifications were divided between first and
second offenses and took place in only 40% of
allowable instances (Palmer et al., 2003).
Regarding institutional decisions related
to adoption of parental notification policies,
Palmer et al. (2003) and Watts (2003) administered surveys to judicial officers and chief
student affairs administrators to determine
why institutions decided whether or not to implement a policy. The results of both surveys
indicated that the passage of the Higher Education Reauthorization Act of 1998, which
allowed institutions to notify parents of underage student alcohol and other drug violations,
combined with increasing concern about
college student alcohol use, were the primary
catalysts in instituting the policy. Administrators at institutions that had chosen not to
implement a policy reported the following
reasons for their decision:
• The institution had a student population
composed primarily of older or
commuter students (Palmer et al., 2003;
Watts, 2003).
• The policy was not congruent with the
institution’s desire to treat students as
adults (Palmer et al., 2003; Watts, 2003).
• State laws prohibited implementing a
policy (Palmer et al., 2003; Watts, 2003).
• Administrators believed that other
campus programs were more effective in
the fight against alcohol use (Watts, 2003).

Multiple researchers sought feedback from
administrators regarding parents’ reactions
to notifications and the perceived effects of
notification on reducing alcohol violations
and recidivism and regarding the reactions of
parents. Palmer et al. (2001) reported that 13%
of responding institutions indicated that the
notification policy had significantly reduced
alcohol violations, and 72% of parents were
very supportive of the policy. The results of a
follow-up survey by Lowery et al. (2005) indicate that 11% of institutions reported that the
policy had significantly reduced the number of
alcohol-related violations on campus, and 26%
reported a significant reduction in recidivism
rates. Lowery et al. found that 75% of parents
were supportive or somewhat supportive of the
notification policy. In a qualitative study of judicial hearing officers at 14 institutions in the
state of Georgia, Harrington (2002) found that
all the institutions then employing parental
notification reported that parents were supportive of the policy.
In order to directly ascertain the opinions of
parents regarding notification, Clouse (2003)
administered a survey to the parents of first-year
students during new student orientation. Of the
parents who completed the survey, 85% believed
they should be contacted following their student’s first alcohol offense, 94% believed they
should be contacted following a second offense,
and 97% believed they should be contacted if
their student was arrested for an alcohol-related
offense. Overall, the results of the study support
the idea that parents want to be informed of
their underage students’ alcohol use.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to assess the

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENT HOUSING

The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1