Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Friday, March 30, 2018

Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz

Samantha Goldstein

Elena Hubbell
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram

Jeremy Kaplan

Sarah Khan

Lucas Maiman

Magdalena Mihaylova

Ellery Rosenzweig

Jason Rowland

Anu Roy-Chaudhury

Alex Satola
Ali Safawi

 Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger

DAYTON HARE

Managing Editor

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

ALEXA ST. JOHN

Editor in Chief
 ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND 

ASHLEY ZHANG
Editorial Page Editors

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board. 

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

The change comes following 

a 
two-month 
self-imposed 

ban on social activities by the 
Interfraternity Council after reports 
of hazing, drug and alcohol abuse, 
as well as allegations of sexual 
misconduct. The Zeta Beta Tau 
fraternity’s national organization 
also revoked its chapter at the 
University for violating multiple 
policies 
and 
endangering 
its 

members. We believe this policy 
change is a step in the right direction 
toward creating a Greek life system 
that exists to improve the university 
experience of students, especially 
freshmen, instead of detracting 
from it.

The decision by the University 

will be most beneficial to the 
new freshmen class and allow its 
members more opportunities to 
become better acclimated to their 
campus community. Being a new 
freshman can be daunting, and the 
question of whether or not to join 
social Greek life in the first semester 
adds to the pressure. When 
freshmen arrive at college, their 
first friends are often those who 
live in the same residence halls as 
them. As the semester continues, 
students 
find 
themselves 

branching out and making new 
friends through their classes and 
student organizations. This allows 
freshmen to try various activities 
and find what they like best.

Fraternities and sororities often 

sell the experience to freshmen 
by promising an immediate new 
group of friends and a great social 
life. Greek life, however, is an aspect 

of campus life that requires a large 
time commitment and could cause 
new students to insulate themselves 
within their fraternity or sorority. 
With this change, students will 
have more time and energy to put 
towards the equally important 
academic transition from high 
school to college. This will also allow 
freshmen more time to find out how 
they want to spend their time on 
campus without first requiring them 
to commit to a time-consuming rush 
and pledge process.

Additionally, the new winter 

rush process helps new students 
become acclimated to the drinking 
culture on campus. As most students 
are aware, the social atmosphere 
in college is usually vastly different 
from high school. The expectations, 
the amount of alcohol and other 
drugs available and the number of 
people with whom students can 
engage in these activities drastically 
increases during Welcome Week. 
Nowhere is this more pronounced 
than in fraternities, who host the 
majority of Welcome Week events 
and provide alcohol for thousands of 
students every weekend.

There are obvious dangers 

associated with this newfound 
easy access to alcohol and other 
substances, as evidenced by more 
than 30 hospital transports during 
the weekend of the Michigan 
State game and seven during 
Halloween weekend. With winter 
rush, students will still go out and 
experience college life, but will be 
able to make better decisions about 
the drinking culture that comes 

with it, as they would have had time 
to acclimate in the fall.

There 
are, 
however, 
some 

concerns about the new policy. 
Suspending fall rush for fraternities 
may also simply lead to an informal 
rushing process that may exclude 
some 
freshmen 
who 
do 
not 

have the right connections. This 
“underground rush” would also 
be completely unregulated by the 
University, though one could possibly 
argue that currently the University 
has very little oversight regardless.

Lastly, 
this 
decision 
also 

could unfairly affect multicultural 
fraternities who provide a unique 
space for the members of their 
respective 
communities. 
When 

minority students arrive at the 
University’s predominantly white 
campus, multicultural Greek life 
can offer a support system that 
the transition to winter rush could 
threaten to delay.

Overall, however, the change 

to a winter rush process is a strong 
step by the University to improve the 
first-year experience and limit the 
insularity of Greek life on campus. 
Freshmen will have an opportunity 
to explore their interests and make 
better-informed decisions about their 
social life and future involvement 
in student organizations. And, in 
the face of recent controversies 
surrounding Greek life both on 
campus and nationally, lifting some 
of the pressure to join the Greek 
community freshmen often face 
could have long-lasting benefits.

FROM THE DAILY

Winter rush, a step in the right direction
T

he University of Michigan recently announced that it would 
transition to winter rush for social Greek organizations, starting in 
the 2019-2020 academic year as a part of a plan to improve the first-

year experience. The new plan requires students to have completed at least 
12 resident credit-hours and to be in good behavioral and academic standing 
before they can participate in the rush process. The change will affect about 
2,000 students annually according to an email sent by E. Royster Harper, 
vice president for Student Life on March 21st.

T

he first time someone 
tried 
to 
sell 
me 

Adderall was in my 

high school library. 
At the time, I did not 
think anything of it.

I was inspired to 

write this column 
by the new Netflix 
documentary 
film, 

“Take Your Pills,” 
which 
offers 
an 

interesting 
look 

into 
the 
use 
of 

stimulant 
drugs, 

such 
as 
Adderall 

and Ritalin, both past and 
present. 
According 
to 
a 

study 
by 
Johns 
Hopkins 

University’s 
Bloomberg 

School 
of 
Public 
Health, 

Adderall abuse is booming 
among young people ages 18 to 
25. In fact, non-prescription 
Adderall use increased by 67 
percent between 2006 and 
2011 and Adderall-associated 
emergency room visits rose 
156 percent. At the University 
of 
Michigan, 
24 
percent 

of students use stimulants 
despite 
only 
8.95 
percent 

having had a prescription.

Adderall 
and 
related 

drugs are central nervous 
system stimulants. Adderall, 
in particular, works as a 
catecholamine 
agonist, 

meaning 
that 
it 
binds 

to 
the 
brain’s 
receptors 

for 
catecholamine, 
the 

neurotransmitters dopamine 
and norepinephrine. The drug 
also inhibits the reuptake of 
dopamine and norepinephrine 
by brain cells, similar to 
certain 
antidepressants. 

Catecholamine is associated 
with pleasure and motivation, 
so by taking a stimulant, a 
person is basically pumping 
their brain with chemicals 
that 
lead 
to 
feelings 
of 

euphoria, focus and alertness. 
However, 
those 
chemicals 

can also lead to insomnia, 
anxiety, increased heart rate, 
hypertension (elevated blood 
pressure) and even psychosis.

That same study out of 

Johns Hopkins also found that 
treating 
young 
adolescents 

with Adderall was on the 
decline and that the rate of 
nonprescription use in the 
same population was neither 
increasing 
nor 
decreasing. 

This is eye-opening for the 
many of us whose exposure 
to the discourse surrounding 
stimulant drugs has centered 
around 
the 
perceived 

overmedication of children 
diagnosed 
with 
attention 

deficit hyperactivity disorder 
or attention deficit disorder.

I want to address the idea 

of the “ADHD business,” a 
concept featured prominently 
in the one hour and 27-minute 
runtime of “Take Your Pills.” 
In fact, the very title of the 
documentary 
implies 
that 

drugs 
like 
Adderall 
and 

Ritalin are being forced onto 
people. 
Yes, 
prescription 

stimulants are projected to be 
a 17.5-billion-dollar industry 
by 2020. However, this boom 

is being fueled by a trifecta 
of 
factors: 
the 
increased 

recognition of ADHD as a 

disease in foreign 
countries 
such 

as 
Saudi 
Arabia 

and China, more 
Americans getting 
diagnosed 
and 

treated for ADHD 
because 
they 

now have health 
insurance 
under 

Obamacare and a 
rewriting 
of 
the 

guidelines 
for 

diagnosing adults with ADHD. 
Prescription stimulants have 
a valid medical purpose and 
should not be demonized. 
Instead, my concerns lie with 
people, 
especially 
college 

students, 
using 
stimulants 

without a prescription.

Another 
aspect 
I 

found unsettling in “Take 
Your 
Pills” 
is 
the 
scene 

where 
Lawrence 
Diller, 
a 

pediatrician interviewed for 
the documentary, equated the 
severity of Adderall abuse to 
that of the opioid epidemic, 
calling it “right below the 
threshold of the opiates.” It is 
not so much the claim he made 
that bothers me but how he, 
at least in my interpretation, 
insinuated 
that 
Adderall 

abuse was not getting enough 
attention because of opioids.

Prescription 
stimulants 

and 
prescription 
synthetic 

opioids, such as oxycodone 
and 
fentanyl, 
have 
some 

commonalities. 
They 
are 

both classified as Schedule 
II/IIN controlled substances 
by 
federal 
regulations, 

meaning that they have a 
high potential for addiction 
and 
psychological/physical 

dependence. Both are also 
commonly sold and taken 
without 
a 
prescription. 

However, not all Schedule II 
substances are created equal. 
While Adderall and other 
stimulants 
can 
have 
life-

threatening effects, especially 
when mixed with alcohol, the 
fact of the matter remains that 
opioids are responsible for the 
vast majority of drug-related 
deaths in America. In fact, 
per the Center for Disease 
Control and Prevention, half 
of the top 10 drugs involved in 
overdose deaths in 2014 were 
prescription opioids. Adderall 
and 
other 
prescription 

stimulants did not even make 
the list. Opioids are just more 
dangerous than prescription 
stimulants and implying that 
one gets more attention over 

the other masks the potential 
merits behind that reality.

However, 
the 
strongest 

critique I would level against 
“Take Your Pills” is that the 
filmmakers make stimulants 
seem amazing. They even 
included a snippet of an 
interview with the late Keith 
Connors, 
the 
psychologist 

who 
established 
the 
first 

standards 
for 
diagnosing 

ADHD, where he recounted 
a time that he tried a Ritalin 
pill from a barrel of them 
supplied to his team by the 
manufacturer for their study. 
Connors then went on to 
say with nostalgia that his 
experience with Ritalin was 
“great.” After watching the 
documentary, I had an urge 
to get my hands on some 
Adderall despite never being 
diagnosed 
with 
ADHD. 
I 

wanted it because I wanted to 
do better.

Prescription 
stimulants 

are good for people with 
ADHD, but what about the 
rest of us? Should everyone 
be taking Adderall? Despite 
the obvious legal implications 
of a potential felony, let us 
turn to the ethical aspect of 
taking stimulants without a 
prescription. Everyone wants 
to get ahead, and the truth 
of the matter is that grades 
have the potential to make 
or break an application to 
an internship or graduate 
school. However, stimulants 
can further enhance social 
disparities 
that 
advantage 

some and hold back others. 
Not every University student 
can afford to buy pills from 
their peers and for certain 
students, the consequences 
of being caught selling or 
using a Schedule II substance 
illegally can be more severe 
than for others.

At the heart of my ethical 

concerns regarding the use 
of Adderall and Ritalin as 
performance 
enhancers 
is 

a question of privilege. In 
classes with grading curves, 
students 
using 
Adderall 

to help them score better 
on the exams are directly 
disadvantaging their fellow 
students 
not 
taking 
a 

stimulant. How? By shifting 
the curve in a way where the 
students not on stimulants 
will get a lower grade than if 
everyone had taken the class 
without enhancement.

I 
doubt 
that 
anyone 

taking 
stimulants 
without 

a 
prescription 
will 
give 

much concern to thoughts 
of privilege, after all, we 
live in a dog-eat-dog world 
where success is the only 
objective. 
Nevertheless, 

the nonprescription use of 
stimulants to improve one’s 
academic 
performance 
is 

inherently 
unethical. 
So, 

you can count me out of the 
Adderall craze.

Adderall, enhancement vs. epidemic

ALI SAFAWI | COLUMN

Ali Safawi can be reached at 

asafawi@umich.edu.

The elephant in the (situation) room

MARGOT LIBERTINI | COLUMN

W

e are heading toward 
six months since the 
ubiquitous 
hashtag 

#MeToo was re-popularized by 
Alyssa Milano. It’s been six months 
since the Harvey Weinstein scandal; 
six months that have been marked 
by triumph over abusers in positions 
of power such as politician John 
Conyers and news anchor Matt Lauer 
and by inspiring activism across the 
nation. The past six months have also 
included a confusing rollercoaster on 
a plethora of crucial issues such as 
immigration, healthcare, Russia, the 
Iran nuclear deal and so on. So while 
some powerful abusers have been 
justly defeated, another has reaped 
the benefits of a 24-hour news cycle 
that cannot seem to remember what 
atrocities occurred the week before.

President Donald Trump has 

been accused of sexual assault by 
21 women. His response has largely 
been to dismiss and disregard their 
allegations, once calling them all 
“horrible liars.” For those who found 
the testimony of more than a dozen 
women to be unconvincing, a video 
of Trump himself bragging about 
groping women surfaced on Oct. 7, 
2016. On Oct. 13 (less than a month 
before being elected President), he 
said “Look at her . . . I don’t think so” 
about an accuser, implying that there 
is a correlation between a woman’s 
appearance and her likelihood of 
being assaulted. And yet, the stories 
and his reprehensible responses to 
them managed to get lost in the chaos 
that has been the past 14 months.

There are many reasons to 

dislike Trump. There are many 
reasons to call for his impeachment. 

I feel that this particular aspect of 
his existence should be covered 
with the frequency and deference 
that it deserves. Our president is a 
serial sexual predator. We cannot 
claim to be the beacon of democracy 
and human rights as long as this is 
true. It is a grotesque reflection of 
a society that looks past criminal 
behavior if the criminal is a wealthy 
white heterosexual male who will 
work to maintain the hierarchical 
system that has privileged him. 
Members of Trump’s team left 
because of steel tariffs, but did not 
bat an eye at these accusations.

The allegations were also largely 

ignored at the height of #MeToo 
movement. Whether it was because 
our collective memory could not 
stand to hold any more Trump 
scandals than we already had or if 
in our hearts we knew that he was 
one predator we weren’t going to 
topple, I don’t know. I know that as I 
watched in awe at the brave women 
coming forward to speak their truth 
and be heard, there were at least 21 
women who were watching while 
their abuser sat in the Oval Office. 
While I rejoiced as large, powerful 
institutions 
finally 
held 
their 

leadership accountable, the Free 
World couldn’t do the same.

That 
image 
disturbs 
me: 

millions of survivors feeling hope 
for the first time in so long, while 
simultaneously being governed by 
an accused rapist. It also makes 
me feel a little hopeless. When 
21 women’s stories aren’t worth 
any formal investigation, when 
evangelical Republicans can back a 
candidate who said, “I just grab ‘em 

by the pussy,” when even the anti-
Trump feminists seem to forget 
that in addition to being a racist, 
sexist, homophobic bigot, he is also 
a violent criminal, the state of justice 
in this country feels quite bleak.

But recently, there has been a 

glimmer of hope on the topic. One 
of the “horrible liars” is fighting 
back against our “Predator in Chief.” 
Summer Zervos is filing a defamation 
suit against Trump for calling her 
a liar about the accusations. The 
Trump team responded by claiming 
that a sitting president cannot be 
sued. A New York Supreme Court 
Judge rejected that notion, saying, 
“No one is above the law.” In one 
of the most ironic plot twists of the 
Trump era yet, this precedent was 
set after Paula Jones sued former 
President Bill Clinton in 1998.

This could end in Trump being 

forced to speak under oath about the 
allegations as Clinton did 20 years 
ago when he famously said: “I did 
not have sexual relations with that 
woman (Monica Lewinsky).” First of 
all, poor Hillary Clinton. When will 
this nightmare end for her? Second of 
all, I sincerely hope that #MeToo has 
evoked something strong enough in 
this nation’s conscience to lead us to 
justice for Zervos and the 20 other 
women who have been brave enough 
to come forward with their stories. 
I am not quite optimistic about the 
prospects of that, but these recent 
developments have certainly made 
me less hopeless.

Margot Libertini can be reached at 

mliberti@umich.edu.

ALI 

SAFAWI

Stimulants can 
further enhance 
social disparities 
that advantage 
some and hold 
back others.

JOIN OUR EDITORIAL BOARD

Our Editorial Board meets Mondays and Wednesdays 7:15-8:45 PM at 
our newsroom at 420 Maynard Street. All are welcome to come discuss 

national, state and campus affairs.

