Beecher reckons that actual requests for deferments for conscientious objection are less common at Harvard than those for psychological problems.

All in all, according to Beecher, a student must realize that his local board has complete, autonomous control over his status, and he must act accordingly. For example, he must notify his board any time he leaves the country, not just on extended fellowships but for summer trips too.

Beecher is careful to point out that his report is not a draft dodger's guide to escaping 1-A. As the report says, "The officials of the selective service have decided that education is important and that the pursuit of education constitutes an excellent use and development of the human resources of the nation."

He explains that he expressed it this way because he is not personally convinced that the present draft setup is the most equitable, or that the pursuit of education is important enough to merit deferment.

"I just don't know. The more you think about it, the more difficult it becomes to decide," Beecher says. "Universal military training after high school seems to be, at least theoretically, an excellent alternative. But there are so many complications on the practical level, in terms of using that many troops at a given time."

"All the national test is going to do," Beecher added, "is basically, rate students on their ability, and take the least able students. The assumption is that the more able students will be more productive in school. I'm not sure the assumption is correct."

"You operate under a system in which you have rights as well as responsibilities,' Beecher says of his report. "It isn't very fair to you, or the system, if you exercise only one half of this combination."