“BITS has announced plans to implement psychometric testing and well-being assessments. While this is a step forward, it is reactive and insufficient on its own. What happens once a student is identified as at-risk? Are there resources, professionals, and interventions in place? Are parents informed? Are recovery programs available? Without clear follow-through, assessments become little more than bureaucratic formalities.
It is important to acknowledge the fear that stricter policies may drive the problem underground. But the opposite is more dangerous — when institutions avoid addressing drug use openly, they enable a culture of secrecy, denial, and silence.”
The recent revelation that a deceased BITS Goa student tested positive for narcotics is not just a tragic postscript to a young life lost — it is a damning indictment of institutional apathy. For a premier educational institution to witness multiple student deaths within a year and still speak in vague generalities about “zero tolerance” is unacceptable. It is time for BITS to confront a difficult truth: without a clear, enforceable, and accountable no-drugs policy, it is failing in its duty to protect the students under its care.
When a student dies and a narcotics test comes back positive, the consequences go far beyond individual behaviour. It raises critical questions about whether warning signs were missed, whether support systems were insufficient, and whether the institution has prioritised reputation over responsibility. BITS Goa has now seen at least five student deaths in the past ten months — a number too alarming to dismiss as coincidence or individual tragedy. Something deeper is broken, and drug use appears to be part of a wider crisis of mental health, stress, and neglect.
The current response from BITS — reaffirming a general stance of “zero tolerance” — is inadequate and evasive. What does “zero tolerance” mean in practice? Are there clear guidelines, specific enforcement mechanisms, and designated officials responsible for implementation? Is there a campus-wide awareness of what is permissible, what the consequences are, and where to seek help? If the answers are murky, then the policy is effectively non-existent.
A real no-drugs policy cannot be reduced to a line in a rulebook or a stern message during orientation. It must be institutionally embedded and widely understood. It must include clear definitions of prohibited substances — including illicit drugs, misuse of prescription medication, and recreational drugs — and clearly state the legal and academic consequences of possession or use. It must be backed by regular monitoring, active education campaigns, and — most importantly — access to counseling, rehabilitation, and safe reporting mechanisms for students at risk.
There must also be a cultural shift within institutions like BITS. A college campus is not immune from the pressures and coping mechanisms that drive substance use — and elite institutions often intensify those pressures. Students face crushing academic expectations, fear of failure, career anxiety, and often personal isolation. For some, drugs appear to offer temporary relief. Punishment alone will never solve this problem; compassion and prevention are equally necessary.
That means giving students safe, confidential avenues to seek help without fear of academic destruction or social stigma. It means investing in mental health infrastructure and training faculty, hostel wardens, and peers to recognise early signs of distress and addiction.
BITS has announced plans to implement psychometric testing and well-being assessments. While this is a step forward, it is reactive and insufficient on its own. What happens once a student is identified as at-risk? Are there resources, professionals, and interventions in place? Are parents informed? Are recovery programs available? Without clear follow-through, assessments become little more than bureaucratic formalities.
It is important to acknowledge the fear that stricter policies may drive the problem underground. But the opposite is more dangerous — when institutions avoid addressing drug use openly, they enable a culture of secrecy, denial, and silence. That silence is fatal. What is needed is not a moral crusade, but a transparent, humane, and robust policy — one that balances accountability with empathy.
The stakes could not be higher. Each young life lost is not just a personal tragedy but a systemic failure. BITS must no longer hide behind vague declarations or internal inquiries. It must show leadership, not just in engineering and innovation, but in student welfare. A clearly articulated, rigorously implemented no-drugs policy is the bare minimum that any modern educational institution must uphold.
Anything less is negligence.
