The serious nature of alcoholism and the complications resulting from the disease, though important, are not the primary issues raised by the literary piece about law student drinking.
Addressing the high correlation of alcohol to practicing attorneys is important, and as a means of calling that to public attention I applaud the author. However, I think a more applicable study to “evidence” this national correlation reflected specifically by the USD Law community would be the rate of alcoholism in practicing South Dakota attorneys.
Inserting national statistics on the small state of South Dakota, and our law school, is likely misleading as national statistics often do not accurately mirror South Dakota reality.
It is my shared contention with many that the problem was incorrectly placed on unsuspecting students. The law school has maintained a focus on providing students with various outlets to address problems in-house. This issue has exploded unnecessarily. Instead of addressing the problem within the law school, the author blew the whistle and by doing so has drawn negative attention to my friends, colleagues, peers, family, and most importantly future lawyers, judges and influential individuals.
Is the law school too inept to properly communicate, analyze, and facilitate resolution of this issue? Are the efforts by faculty and staff to address alcoholism too minimal to even mention? Seeing that within our “hungover studies” many of us focus on negotiations, arbitration and resolution it is probable that some sort of compromise could have been made. In an already tight market why would the author, a law student mind you, choose to put a bad taste in potential employer’s mouths about USD law students?
I agree that alcoholism is prevalent among legal professionals, and the national statistics remain alarming. However, the conclusions made about USD law students were unwarranted. Make no mistake I do not mean to degrade either the author or commentators sharing his opinions regarding USD law students’ “lack of professionalism.” My commentary is solely related to the issues raised by the article.
Robbie Rohl
USD Law Student
29 comments
Shouldn't we all just live the way in which we want to be remembered or have we risen above that logic?
If he was space limited, then he needs to do what every attorney does in the limited pages they are allotted for arguments- include the most relevant information. To blame it on the editors is nothing more than refusing to take responsibility for his own editing choices. That would be akin to telling the supreme court that you didn't make a relevant and pivotal legal argument because they didn't give you enough pages for your brief. Dear Law School Alum: Why do you think this needs to be kept under wraps? I'm disappointed that you think this is something that cannot be openly discussed within the university community and I'm wondering why you think this is something that needs to be hidden. It plays right into all the stereotypes of the SD bar as an old boys network that is only concerned about protecting its own. How sad.
Mr. Rohl would have been able to provide those statistics but the Editor said that due to a lack of space the articles needed to fall within certain bounds. So he had to make the most out of the space he was provided. Nice work Robbie, I feel that this could have been easily addressed in house!