YALE'S POLICY MAKES STAND ON DRUG LAW

Yale University has approved a new policy to reimburse students who have
lost their federal financial aid because of a conviction for drug possession.

Since no Yale student has lost eligibility for federal aid under the
four-year-old drug-free provision of the Higher Education Act, the new
policy is largely a public statement by Yale, acknowledged Thomas Conroy, a
university spokesman.

The law withholds federal grants and loans for any student convicted of
drug possession until after completion of a rehabilitation program. Such
programs can be costly, if privately run, and public programs often have
waiting lists. But Yale's new policy would allow students to continue
taking classes and receive reimbursement for the lost federal aid so long
as they agree to undergo rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation at the university health center is covered by student health
insurance. The university is not extending the offer to students convicted
of selling or intending to sell drugs.

Yale is the fourth college in the nation, and the most influential, to take
a position contrary to the federal antidrug provision, which was passed by
Congress in 1998. The others are Western Washington University, Hampshire
College in Massachusetts and Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania.

Student advocates at Yale have pressed the administration to move in this
direction since the law was enacted.

The law affects about 50,000 students a year nationwide, with the majority
attending community colleges or public universities, according to the
American Civil Liberties Union.

"It's a tremendously important step that Yale took," said Graham Boyd, the
national director of the A.C.L.U.'s drug policy litigation project. "I hope
Yale's action will lead to changes in the Congress."

Mr. Boyd noted that Yale was one of the first universities to reimburse
students who lost their aid for resisting the military draft during the
Vietnam War. But in recent years, Yale has rarely made policy changes that
would stir up controversy.

Kathryn Banakis, a junior at Yale whose organization, Student Legal Action
Movement, pushed for this policy change, said she had met the school's
decision "with amazement and astonishment." Other student advocates
expressed similar sentiments.

"I am not used to seeing ourselves on the same positions as the
university's," said Andrew Allison, a sophomore at Yale who has met with
administration members to discuss the drug law. "The federal provision is
unjust because it only targets those who need financial aid to afford
college. I don't think education should be manipulated as a weapon in the
drug war."

Although the A.C.L.U. reports that the drug provision has created
difficulties for recovering drug addicts who are turning their lives
around, the Partnership for Drug-Free America, a New York-based nonprofit
organization, said the law could serve as a useful deterrent to young
people considering drug use.

It makes it easier for parents to talk to their children about not using
drugs, said Howard Simon, the spokesman for the organization. He added:
"This is one more risk to drug use. If you use drugs, there will be
consequences."