When a person turns eighteen, he or she can get married, vote, pay taxes, purchase cigarettes, be tried as an adult for crimes, legally use their own credit card, purchase real estate, and even enter the military. When a United States citizen turns eighteen, that person is considered a legal adult. According to The United States Constitution, “The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen-years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age. In other words, being a legal adult entails so many new responsibilities and they are legally responsible for the consequences of their own actions. Adults should be entrusted with how they handle their alcohol, just like how adults are entrusted with how they spend their money and what they spend their money on. However, being a young adult has one inequitable setback from all the other adults who possess the same responsibility: They cannot legally purchase or consume alcohol. This concept is not only unfair but also unreasonable.
If the Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) was lowered, society could benefit because there would be less accidents and drinking under the influence, citizens are equal, and there would be less reasoning to for teenagers and young adults to go out and party in uncontrolled environments. The United States needs to lower the Minimum Legal Drinking Age to eighteen because it would benefit society as a whole to have younger people who have a better understanding of the effects of alcohol.
The controversy over buying and consuming alcohol started during the Prohibition Act in 1926 and continued from 1987, which still remains a social problem today. As a nation, the government in the 1920s started the National Prohibition that banned alcohol for all United States citizens. This is a reoccurrence of the prohibition laws that were embedded in the United States in the 1850s. Twice the ban of alcohol failed due to the major backlash the government received from United States citizens. Eventually, the laws were dropped and the legal drinking age was lowered to eighteen.
Between 1970 and 1975, twenty-nine other stated lowered the Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) to eighteen, nineteen, or twenty. By 1984, the increase in teenage car accidents resulted in Congress forming the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. According to the American Medical Association, this was due to the testing scientists did on studying the facts of lowering the drinking age, specifically on car and motor cycle crashes, which so happens to be the leading cause of death among teenagers (1). Surprisingly, this act did not require states to lower the drinking and buying alcohol age to twenty-one.
However, it did say that states that did not raise the MLDA would not get certain funds from the federal government. As a result, by 1988 all fifty states raised the drinking age to twenty-one. Although it is illegal to purchase and consume alcohol under twenty-one, there are some exceptions to alcohol consumption. According to ProCon. com, there are eight exceptions to this rule, which include religious purposes, work, education research, and on private, non-selling alcoholic environments with parental consent. Out of all fifty states, forty-two have exceptions to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act (1).
With all of these controversies, acts, and laws debated throughout the century, it is unsurprising that there is an increase in young adult’s drinking activities. National Prohibition failed in the 1920s and early 1930s (Digital History). During this ban of alcohol purchase and consumption, there was a lot of underground activities and backlash. The ban of alcohol proves that having a strict regulation of consuming alcohol is relentless and pointless because people will always find ways to go against authority. With the drinking age unreasonably high, drinking is counterproductive and meaningless.
Since this is the last legal right young get to enjoy, they will find other ways to purchase and consume alcohol. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), “Seventeen percent of teens who range from the ages of sixteen and seventeen are already starting to drink. ” The American Medical Association has said that over eleven million teens and young adults under the age of twenty-one are already drinking alcohol. Additionally, it explains how, “Nearly half of them drink to excess, consuming five or more drinks in a row, one or more times in a two-week period. In other words, because teenagers are not taught how to drink responsibly, they drink too much. Prohibiting eighteen year olds from being in controlled environments such as bars, restaurants, and public venues, such as music festivals, is forcing them to drink in places like fraternities, dorm rooms, and house parties—all places that are unsupervised. In restaurants, bars, and public venue, bartenders are not allowed to serve their customers if they are invisibly intoxicated so that the customer will not necessarily overdrink.
These unsupervised environments lead to higher probabilities that someone will get hurt in one form or another. Banning something in society that has been highly used, like abortion for example, creates more danger. Throughout the 1800s all the way to 1973, abortion was illegal (SocialistWorker. com) During that time period, there was an abundance of underground seedy activity, which as a result actually led to more injuries for women. This draws a parallel to the illegal drinking—people do not and will not stop doing something just because it is legal, which can result in harming their bodies.
As a college student, I have seen people get hurt and sent to the hospital from alcohol-related injuries. Since they know alcohol is illegal, they do not want to acknowledge the dangers of unsupervised alcohol because of the possible legal consequences that could happen. By lowering the drinking age, eighteen year olds can also drink in regulated areas with supervision to lower the possibilities of alcohol-related injuries. Part of the reason why teenagers and young adults drink illegally is because they believe alcohol represents maturity and as well as a form of rebellion.
Teenagers will rebel no matter what, and if drinking is not illegal, they will be less likely to view or think of drinking as another way of rebelling towards society. According to the Drug and Alohol Information and Support in Ireland website, teens and young adults have embedded into their mind that drinking will show maturity and experience. In addition, C. Norman Alexander, a researcher from Stanford University, conducted a study that showed why teenagers and young adults like to drink.
In this study, 1,410 senior men from rural high schools were questioned and interviewed about their beliefs, behavior, and attitudes towards drinking (Alexander 543). Keep in mind that in these towns, the major denomination in religion promoted the absence of alcohol. After these surveys were conducted, over one third of these men said they drank to some extent. Over sixty-five percent of those surveyed believed drinking was wrong, yet forty percent of that sixty percent were drinkers themselves (Alexander 543).
Alexander explained that drinking was a social behavior in which peers fed off of each other (545). In this study, adolescents found that because drinking under the age limit is illegal, this was an act against mature rebellion (546). By drinking while underage, the seniors felt as if drinking were their small form of passive rebellion against the law. The drinking behaviors that were spreading through the high schools confirmed that this act of rebellion was due to the fact that society accepted underage drinking.
Alexander continued to say that, “Drinking may represent an expression of hostility towards the normative authority of the total society; and, similarly, it may provide a means for expressing aggression against an individual who symbolizes that authority,” (543). Therefore, lowering the drinking age would help get rid of this misconception in society. By doing this, drinking would become a social norm for not only just adults over twenty-one. Since it would not be as exciting to drink as a sign of rebellion and maturity, drinking would not be as big of a deal as it currently is.
By lowering the drinking age, alcohol will no longer be a social taboo. There will be less of a thrill in going against authority by getting fake IDs to purchase alcohol and drinking them illegally. Lastly, it will make consuming alcohol as an adult normal instead of waiting three years into adulthood to be fully attainable of United States rights. Although the Minimum Legal Drinking Age in the United States is now at twenty-one instead of eighteen, there are still accidents that occur that do not necessarily reduce automobile accidents.
During the 15th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs, and Traffic Safety in 2000 in Stockholm, Sweden, the conference confirmed that even though the United States has a higher Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA), “its rate of traffic fatalities in the 1980s decreased less than that of European countries whose legal ages are lower that twenty-one. According to Cognac. com, out of eighty-three countries, seventy-six of those countries have either no minimum drinking age or they have been lowered to ages ranging from fourteen to twenty (1).
This shows how there are so many countries that have considered lowering the drinking age and have acted upon it. Even though these countries do not have a population as big as the United States or have as many cars to get around with, they are still content with having a lower drinking age. In my Filipino family, it is normal to drink at a young age because of the social stigma and the rules the government put on drinking. In the Philippines, drinking is not a huge deal, but a social norm.
Whenever my family talks about their high school years in the Philippines, they always said what a fun time they had because they did not have to hide alcohol because it was part of everyday life. When they came to America, they taught me how to drink and hold in my liquor at the age of fourteen. Due to the fact that my family taught me how to drink, my parents never minded me drinking around them at family parties because I was aware of my limit and hot to hold in my alcohol. In Europe, people have beer and wine in pubs and restaurants all the time because in the majority of European countries, consuming alcohol is, again, a social norm.
Hence, the overall drinking age in Europe is at eighteen. Again, although the United States has the most cars in the world, establishing a high MLDA will not change anything when it comes to trying to reduce automobile accidents. No one can prevent every traffic accident from happening due to drunk driving, but having an enforced MLDA does nothing for society except for the fact that it is expensive and ineffective. Policemen are hunting down illegal house parties and fraternities in which teenagers and young adults from the ages of eighteen to twenty get arrested.
The money it takes to drive, arrest, process, and book these people takes too much time and money. Because underage drinking is such a prominent problem with the legal system, it would be more effective to spend money educating teens and/or young adults about alcohol. That way, there would be less time enforcing drinking laws. Not only will there be less time spent enforcing laws on teenagers who are not doing a large crime, but there will be more time spent catching people who steal, shootings, and assault.
Also, because there will be less money spent on arresting these young adults, there can be more money spent on educating teens on the effects of drinking. If more teens knew about the effects of alcohol, then they would know how to handle sticky situations and know their drinking limit because of the awareness that alcohol can be deadly. There are programs such as Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) that advocate the traumas that happens when teens drink and drive as well as giving advice to teens who do need to get treatment for alcohol abuse.
There are center such as The Choose Responsibly Center, which provide guidance and more information on the issues of alcoholism. Also, in colleges and universities across the country, incoming freshmen are required to take an online course called, AlcoholEdu, which interactively informs incoming student about the dangers of drinking. During this course, students learn what their limit should be and what to do in case a person is in danger because of the consumption of having too much alcohol. Right before I started college, I had to take this course.
I definitely was not excited to take these courses, but knowing the statistics and knowing of what to do when someone needs help has already proved helpful to me. Now, I know how to stay calm and take care of a situation if someone is in danger of hurting himself or herself. By spending more money now to educate teenagers and young adults with alcohol education, it is more likely that they will be aware of their actions knowing the possible detrimental effects of drinking irresponsibly. Now that young adults are discovering a newfound freedom as eighteen year olds, why not drink?
If there are so many things young adults can do that older adults can, should they not have assumed the same amount of responsibility? According to the Los Angeles Times, over 130 presidents and chancellors from colleges and universities from all over the United States have signed a petition, which started in 2008, to lower the drinking age in the United States. Due to the controversy over the MLDA, two sides to the drinking age controversy have been examined. James C. Fell, senior program director at the Alcohol, Policy, and Safety Research Center of The Pacific Institute for Research & Evaluation in Calverton, Md. says that having the MLDA at twenty-one has saved thousands of lives, hence nothing should be changed because the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, “estimates that raising the drinking age to twenty-one saves about eight hundred lives a year. Due to this, authorities see no point in lowering the MLDA. By raising the MLDA to twenty-one, it has been statistically that, “Raising the MLDA back to twenty-one has decreased the percentage of fatal traffic accidents for those between eighteen to twenty by thirteen percent and has saved approximately 21, 887 lives from 1975-2002,” (National Center for Statistics and Analysis).
In addition, other skeptics and those who oppose the lowering of the drinking age might regard the fact that the drinking ages in other countries around the world are lower because teenagers start driving early at the age of sixteen in the United States, whereas teens in other countries, such as France and England, teenagers take public transportation or learn to drive later in life because these countries have excellent transportation systems. Therefore, skeptics might say that teenagers are more likely to drive under the influence.
Lastly, there are arguments that say that the earlier a person starts the drink, the more likely they will become more addicted to alcohol due to early use and binge drink. When teenagers drink, they are affecting their brain development. A lot of parents would agree with this, yet having a high MLDA does not do anything to the brain. According to news website CBC Canada, the brain stops developing at twenty five years old, not twenty one, their can still be potential damages being created at twenty-one.
These twenty-one year olds might also drink excessively because they are still experiencing the newfound freedom of legally drinking. That is why it is commonly known to celebrate twenty-first birthdays in clubs, going to Vegas, and having a fun time by partying a lot. Not to say that all twenty-one year olds do this, but there are still parts of the brain that are developing during this time frame. Although these arguments claim valid points, having a high MLDA does not benefit society. There are still traffic accidents occurring, there are still house parties and fraternities who still continue to hold parties.
The only way to benefit society would be to lower the drinking age so that people learn how to drink and how to handle different possible situations regarding alcohol. Contrary to what Fell said, there are other researchers who think otherwise. Dr. David J. Hanson is a sociologist at the State University of New York at Potsdam and for over 40 years has studied the effects of alcohol and drinking. Dr. Hanson says, “When you prohibit drinking legally, it pushes it into places that are uncontrolled, like fraternity houses. There are places that promote drinking games and excessive, rapid, consumption of alcohol, hich puts people in danger of getting alcohol poisoning, and that can be fatal. ” In other words, college students are still experimenting and enjoying their new freedom, and because drinking is not one of their legal freedoms, college students are rebelling against authority yet again. Whether it is done consciously or subconsciously by going with the crowd, drinking in college has become a part of the social life. It is not secret that students drink, so why shouldn’t they be allowed to legally drink? As a college student myself, I have been to fraternity parties to drink and have drank before the actual party itself.
I know people who have been sent to the hospital due to excessive drinking. I know plenty of people who drink every weekend or on “Thirsty Thursdays. ” Yes there are people getting drunk, and yes, there are people who are not wise about their drinking actions, but there are a lot of people who know their limits. Although alcohol is an antidepressant, in my experiences I have seen more positive effects of alcohol in not only college but in my family as well. In my family, my parents started letting my brothers and me drink quite early in our teen years because they wanted to get used to alcohol and know our limits in a controlled environment.
In addition, they knew that college would be fast approaching and they wanted us to know our limits and learn how to tolerate alcohol. Hence, I agree with Hanson’s logic because lowering the MLDA has many benefits to society. Hanson’s argument also makes a valid and logical point in which he states, “Some also argue that the drinking age should be kept at 21 because the brain doesn’t finish maturing until around age 25, but in that case we should also raise the voting age and the military age. We have to be consistent. ”
Lowering the Minimum Legal Drinking Age serves as a benefit to society as a whole because it will educate teenagers and young adults about the effects of drinking. When people start to drink at a younger age, they will know their alcohol limits as well as being knowledgeable about how to handle certain situations when it comes to the possible dangers of drinking. In addition, they will be able to drink in a controlled environment where their limits are being monitored instead of drinking in illegal and in unsupervised places. When people are in controlled environments, it is less likely that they will drive under the influence.
By moving the MLDA from twenty-one to eighteen, young adults not only get their fair share of rights and privileges, but social stigmas would start to disappear, and there would be less motivation to drink because regular drinking would be the social norm. When people start to drink at a younger age, they will be able to drink in a controlled environment instead of drinking in illegal places. By drinking in controlled environments, being educated about the effects of drinking, and by having the drinking age lowered to eighteen, society as a whole will only greatly benefit from these changes.
