Annabelle de St. MauriceIn the latest edition of “The Facts of Reslife,” the Office of Residential Life indicated that Residential College Directors (RCDs) will be conducting searches of all the dorm rooms on campus over winter break. Following these searches, as it states in this letter, “there will be charges for damages due to individual negligence, missing furniture, and judicial referral for any public area furniture or any other University property found in a room or suite.”
Though students sign an agreement with Residential Life before moving into the dorms at the beginning of the year that gives permission for these searches, they are not carried out in an ethical manner and infringe on residents’ privacy.
When conducting its inspections of students’ rooms, Residential Life is looking for things such as heaters left off, windows left open, lights left on, and food left out. If the RA and RCD notice any violations of rules, such as possessing stolen furniture or drugs, then disciplinary actions may follow. Residential Life does not search closets or drawers, but they inspect all places in plain view.
Despite the primarily benevolent intentions of the room inspections, there is no need to carry out these searches without the resident being there. Residential Life could accomplish most of its goals by performing the searches while residents are still present. From this situation stems a very troubling ethical issue regarding these searches: privacy.
While Residential Life is mainly concerned with maintenance and housekeeping issues during its inspections, most residents are not aware of this. Residential Life’s insistence on entering residents’ rooms in their absence may understandably cause students to question the motives of the searches. If Residential Life conducted its inspections while students were present, then students could rest assured that their privacy was not being violated for other, less sincere reasons.
All students understand the right of privacy as a basic one that must be protected. Carrying out its searches of dorm rooms while the occupants are not present is a violation of privacy, even if students agreed to such searches at the beginning of the year. In essence, students must allow a stranger to come into their bedroom, their home, while they are not present to see what that stranger does.
A better way for Residential Life to carry out these searches would be to have the resident present at these searches during some time before the end of the semester. By doing so, the student can feel more secure in knowing that his or her privacy has not in some way been violated.
Even for students with off-campus housing, when the landlord wishes to perform monthly inspections, he or she calls in advance and then makes the rounds of the residence with the resident present. By doing so, the landlords and their residents build a level of trust. In the way searches are carried out at WU, not only are there questions regarding violations of privacy but also Residential Life and its residents do not create a trust between them. Rather than the two being on the same page, students look at Residential Life as a police force in opposition to them.
Therefore, although students do sign a contract agreeing to such searches, there is no option as to how these searches are done. Either you sign and agree, or you refuse and are left without housing on campus. What is even more troubling is that freshmen students have no option as to whether they would like some stranger inspecting their homes because freshmen students must live on campus.
The solution to the problem is to change the way Residential Life conducts its searches. If they were carried out while students are present, not only will the concerns with privacy become a moot point, but Residential Life would also build a better relationship with those it serves.