Approximately 5000 underage people die annually in the United States of America because of alcohol use, and more than 1900 of the cases involve car accidents (Bier, 2010). The issue does not only involve drinking and driving, but it also extends to the high consumption rate of alcohol in the US, especially between the ages of 18 and 20 (Bier, 2010). There are over 11 million underage drinkers in the US (Bier, 2010). About a third of high school seniors engage in binge drinking (Bier, 2010). Binge drinking describes the consumption of five or more drinks consecutively. 11% of eighth graders and 22% of high school sophomores also engage in binge drinking (Bier, 2010). Alcohol use among youth in the US is a serious issue. Factors causing excessive drinking are unclear because the minimum legal drinking age in all states is 21 (Bier, 2010). The Uniform Drinking Age Act increased the legal drinking age to 21 due to alcohol use issues in the 1970s and 1980s (Bier, 2010). It is essential to evaluate whether lowering the drinking age will be beneficial.
Analysis of the Issue
Alea Bier argues that the minimum drinking age of 21 has not benefited the society in the article, Does the Drinking Age of 21 Really Benefit the Society? The article critically evaluates the topic and shows that policies have been ineffective on college drinking patterns. Upon turning 18, all Americans become 18 (Bier, 2010). It means that after a person turns 18, they can enlist in the military. However, the most important fact is that a person becomes legally responsible for their actions. At 18, an individual can smoke cigarettes, vote, purchase property, adopt a child, strike legal binding contracts, serve on a jury, take a loan, and hold office. However, it is quite strange that at 18, a person cannot buy beer. In most countries, people are regarded as adults after they turn 18 years and postponing the legal age to 21 is simply postponing legal culpability (Bier, 2010).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The author explains that there are two groups of individuals on campus (Bier, 2010). There are initial abstainers who had little or no experience regarding alcohol use, and initial binge drinkers who arrived on campus after being exposed to binge drinking. The social atmosphere on campus makes it normal to engage in binge drinking. Moreover, the campus atmosphere creates a semi-adult environment where students live in a transitional environment with minimal supervision (Bier, 2010). Such an environment creates a rash decision making an atmosphere that makes them have minimal fear of drinking consequences. Ultimately, students are less likely to make rational decisions regarding their drinking behavior, and they engage in binge drinking with the objective of ‘fitting in' (Bier, 2010). Irrational drinking choices appear acceptable in most campuses because of the social atmosphere and when students enter the "world of drinking" it becomes difficult to control their drinking behavior (Bier, 2010).
Critics argue that there should be graduated legal adulthood because one cannot run for president until 35, drink until 21, run for Senate until 30, and rent cars until 25. However, it appears that the legal age for running for public offices is an exception regarding full adulthood but not the benchmark for adulthood (Bier, 2010). Moreover, the 26 th Amendment mentions that the legal age of the majority is 18 and their right to vote should not be denied (Bier, 2010). Moreover, despite the legal drinking age, many young people continue drinking. Additionally, young people in other countries have a lower drinking age but have lower alcohol issues in comparison to the US. It is essential for the country to reevaluate its alcohol policy regardless of the statistics based in the 1970s and 1980s.
Underage drinking has been a serious issue in the US regardless of prohibition for over three decades. The policy appears to have caused a polarizing effect. Although fewer 12 to 20 year olds are drinking, the underage ‘drinkers’ are consuming more alcohol (Bier, 2010). Although the number of underage drinking reduced to 29.3% from 33.4% between 1993 and 2001, the number of binge drinkers increased to 18.9% from 15.2% (Bier, 2010). Studies show that after increasing the minimum legal drinking age, more 18-24-year-olds are drinking excessively (Bier, 2010). Additionally, some studies argue that the legal drinking age of 21 caused a significant decline in alcohol consumption in the 1980s and 1990s (Bier, 2010). However, the change was not caused by the policy but a growing societal trend against excessive alcohol consumption. Furthermore, a survey carried out from the 1970s to date shows that increasing the minimum age had minimal effect on youth drinking (Bier, 2010).
It is essential to note that European drinking age is lower than that of the US. Additionally, cross-cultural research reveals that cultural attitudes regarding alcohol consumption play a bigger role in alcohol consumption in comparison to minimum age legislation (Throm, 2017). Additionally, many 15 and 16-year-olds in European states have more drinking occasions monthly, but they experience fewer dangerous or fatal occasions in comparison to their American counterparts. Only 10% of drinking occasions in southern European countries cause intoxication patterns while more than 50% of drinking occasions in the US involving underage drinking cause intoxication (Bier, 2010). Although the US has the highest drinking age in the survey, it also had a higher occurrence of dangerous intoxication in comparison to other countries. Hence, the 21 minimum legal drinking age has been ineffective in controlling the alcohol issue in the US.
As mentioned earlier, culture plays a big role in alcohol consumption. The rate of teenage drinking problems and alcoholism is quite high in the US in comparison to their European counterparts. However, most European countries’ drinking age is lower than 21. Some countries, such as Italy, have no drinking age. The main reason causing the disparity is the way through which European teens are introduced to alcohol in comparison to their American counterparts (Throm, 2017). While Italian or French children perceive alcohol as part of their meal, most American teens are introduced to alcohol in some unmonitored environment or room in the woods or basement with their close friends ( Gruenewald, 2011) . Introduction to alcohol played a key role in their future alcohol consumption. European teens are less likely to engage in binge drinking because they can easily access alcohol as part of their meal. On the other hand, more than 72% of graduating seniors in the US consume alcohol, and a significant number will experience alcohol issues in the future (Bier, 2010).
Notably, the minimum legal drinking age has caused a culture of underground drinking that is worse in colleges. It appears that there is an unspoken understanding between parents, students, local law enforcement, and administrators that ensures that drinking age restrictions are considered moot when students are in their dorm rooms or house parties ( Gruenewald, 2011) . The underground drinking has caused secret and dangerous binge drinking in the US. The unspoken agreement and its adverse effects caused a group of college presidents and chancellors from around the country to create the Amethyst Initiative, which proposes a reevaluation of the country’s minimum legal drinking age. The group explains that the prohibitionist policies have not controlled the alcohol problem in the US but have instead driven it underground and behind doors (Throm, 2017). Furthermore, the group insists that colleges should be given the opportunity to educate students about responsible drinking inside the campus or out in the open.
One of the most emotional and powerful arguments supporting the drinking age of 21 is that it has prevented significant alcohol-related accidents and fatalities ( Gruenewald, 2011) . Alcohol-related accidents and fatalities in the US reduced by more than a third between 1988 and 1998 (Bier, 2010). However, the decrease in alcohol-related accidents and fatalities was not restricted to the US alone. Germany's drinking age is 16 but alcohol-related fatalities reduced by over 57% from 1975 to 1990 (Bier, 2010). The significant decrease was caused by a combination of education, law enforcement, and improved automobile safety technologies such as roll cages and airbags. Moreover, additional research showed that banning alcohol consumption for adults between 18 and 21 years did not reduce alcohol-related fatalities but instead increased the fatalities by about 3% (Bier, 2010). Additionally, the research came up with the ‘experienced drinker’ hypothesis that explains that when a person starts driving at 16 and has to wait until 21 to drink alcohol, they become overconfident in their driving abilities and have less understanding about the negative impact of alcohol on their driving (Bier, 2010).
As mentioned earlier, alcohol consumption problem among young people in the US is attributed to the American policies that are regressive in comparison to other developed countries. Rather than criminalizing drinking between 18 and 21, the US should have focused on alcohol education courses. Although the effectiveness of alcohol education courses is widely debated, Australia has had a successful implementation of the program (Bier, 2010). There are programs that support abstinence while there are others that believe that abstinence is impossible and unrealistic. Therefore, it is essential to equip young adults with effective decision-making skills about responsible alcohol use ( Gruenewald, 2011) . Informal alcohol education programs take place among peers and families while formal alcohol education programs take place in institutions and schools (Heath, 2012) . It is essential to note that educational programs supporting abstinence have proved unsuccessful while education programs supporting responsible alcohol use had more success in educating drinkers and changing their drinking habits ( Gruenewald, 2011).
Recently in the US, an interactive online alcohol education program known as AlcoholEDU was introduced and used by approximately 450 universities and colleges in the country (Bier, 2010). The program motivated students to change their drinking behaviors, enhanced their practical knowledge, and reduced students’ adverse effects on their academic and personal lives. In 2004, students who had completed the program were 20% less likely to become heavy drinkers and 30% less likely to cause problems after drinking (Bier, 2010). The statistics could play a crucial role in solving the alcohol problem in the US. On the other hand, Australia's alcohol education program had interactive teaching, role-playing, and build skills among students regarding how they can safely handle risky situations.
Conclusion
As mentioned earlier, the 21 drinking age has been ineffective in controlling underage drinking. Although fewer underage individuals are drinking, the few that decide to drink are drinking excessively in ways that are harmful to their personal health and indulge in activities that have adverse impacts on society. Lowering the drinking age to 18 will be more beneficial because it will support alcohol education programs that will benefit the youth. Alcohol education programs have proved successful in minimizing underage alcohol use. Abstinence-based alcohol programs have proved ineffective while alcohol education programs supporting responsible use of alcohol have been effective in reducing incidents and rates of alcohol abuse. Regardless of the higher drinking age in the US in comparison to European countries, the US has had a higher rate of alcohol-related accidents and fatalities. Moreover, the statistics that showed that increasing the minimum legal drinking age to 21 reduced alcohol-related accidents requires additional research because similar trends were experienced in other countries that had a lower drinking age. It is important for the country to reevaluate the laws regarding the drinking age.
References
Bier, A. (2010). Does the Drinking Age of 21 Really Benefit Society? Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Uniform Drinking Age Act.
Gruenewald, P. J. (2011). Regulating availability: how access to alcohol affects drinking and problems in youth and adults. Alcohol Research & Health , 34 (2), 248.
Heath, D. B. (2012). Drinking occasions: Comparative perspectives on alcohol and culture . Routledge.
Throm, A. (2017). Lowering the drinking age to 18 is better than keeping it at 21. Retrieved from http://www.dailynebraskan.com/opinion/throm-lowering-the-drinking-age-to-is-better-than-keeping/article_a28eef04-983b-11e7-9da0-8fbea1f03e90.html
