Policy too restricting

By Editorial

The proposed policy restricting intimate relationships between student employees and their superiors is being debated by the student affairs committee.

The policy, which would prohibit students in positions such as community facilitator, orientation leader, or club advisor from dating students directly under their supervision, has caused a ripple of discussion among students about the repercussions.

Director of First Year Programs Tim Haskell, a member of the staff affairs committee, made an excellent point in the March 2 story: It is difficult, if not impossible, to tell two consenting adults that they cannot be in love. It makes sense to ban faculty-student relationships for obvious reasons: grade inflation, favoritism and an absence of the important teacher-student professional relationship.

But extending that policy to student employees seems extreme. After all, the students who occupy certain positions, like community facilitator and club advisor, are typically outgoing and excited to meet people. Positions like community facilitator involve employees living with fellow students of the same age, with similar majors and interests, as coordinated by Residential Living Community system. How can school officials expect students not to socialize and even date under these conditions?

Santa Clara officials would be wise to rethink the scope of the new "dating policy" and consider the students who might be affected before making any rash decisions.

College is a place to grow, learn and meet new people -- some of whom might turn out to be your lifelong friends, and one of whom might end up being your husband or wife. It should not be the university's obligation to stand in love's way.