Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Why the Drinking Age should be Lowered to 18
Introduction
According to Carpenter and Dobkin (133-56), the United States National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 states that the minimum drinking age is 21. However, this law is not consistent in all the American states, whereby some states allow controlled alcohol consumption for minors. Recent research indicates that alcohol furnishing for minors is only acceptable in 31 states, although the total ban has been established countrywide (Carpenter and Dobkin 133-56). Due to the high case of pre-gaming among young adults, especially those in high school and colleges, some parents allow kids to drink under their supervision. However, the government has tried enacting social host ordinances in every state to control such parents, but these efforts have proved to be utterly futile (Callaghan et al., 2284-2291). Critics have risen to interject these policies involving the youths and alcohol as ineffective and discriminatory. According to the US National Youth Rights Association, young adults from the age of 18 should be allowed to consume alcohol freely. After all, they are adults; therefore, they can make their own decisions and are responsible for their actions as well.
Establishing the Problem
Wechsler and Nelson (986-992) noted that in a study carried out by the US Public Health; there are many cases associated with under-age drinking. Also, the study established that accidents acquired during drinking are not reported due to the naivety of the subjects on legal actions that would be taken against them (Wechsler and Nelson (986-992). In light of this, there is a need to examine the reasons why the government should consider revising such policies. Firstly, the US National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (NCASA) has established that lowering the age to 18 will ensure safe consumption of alcohol in regulated environments (Callaghan et al., 2284-2291). Previous researches indicate that minors in colleges and high schools drink in unsupervised areas such as house parties where binging occurs in most cases (Wechsler and Nelson 986-992). In such environments, health and life-endangering situations may arise; therefore, lowering the age ensures safe and healthy consumption. Researchers also suggest that it is more preferable to monitor drinking rather than exercising a total ban (Callaghan et al., 2284-2291). After all, underage still and will always occur despite policies available; hence the only safe alternative is to reduce the age ban.
Secondly, proponents of this argument note that 18 is the age that marks adulthood in the United States. Hence, these individuals are granted rights to vote, to participate in juries, and they can be tried in courts as adults. They are perceived to make sound decisions and be responsible for their actions (McCartt et al., 173-181). So the big question they put across is, why should these same individuals not be allowed to drink? According to the constitution, the state already perceives them as people who can differentiate right and wrong and thus can stand up to their actions; therefore, the age ban should be done away with or be reduced to 18 (Callaghan et al., 2284-2291).
Additionally, lowering the age would lessen the implication of alcohol on young adults. Studies indicate that due to the ban, minors view drinking as a taboo; therefore, decreasing the age would ensure that alcohol consumption is integrated into society and would ultimately reduce excessive use. Likewise, it would assist in cubing teenage rebellion towards these enacted policies. A study carried out on Addiction counselors implicates that breaking the law is part of adolescent culture, and most of these consumptions are as a result of the same (Callaghan et al., 2284-2291). Therefore, easing this ban would assist curtail their chances of delinquency.
Solutions and Justification
According to the National Youth Rights Association, American society needs to adopt smarter policies that would help create awareness to the whole public and not on the youths alone on the implications of alcohol. These solutions aim at curbing and correcting the current laws and also enhance the establishment of new ones (Boes and Stillman). Implementation of these strategies may be done at local levels; however, some extremes may require state intervention. First, Boes and Stillman suggest that fostering a comprehensive national extensive education on alcohol would help address various issues on the same. For instance, enacting a public policy that would encourage people to abstain from drinking by clearly pointing out the effects associated with drinking would raise at least a sentimental notion. According to McCartt et al. (173-181), research in Europe affirmed that awareness creation assisted in mitigating 10% of alcohol cases that consequently reduced problems associated with it like accidents. Likewise, the government should adopt medical amnesty policies or rather lifeline policies that would insure minors from penalties accorded to them when they request for assistance in case of an alcohol-related emergency (McCartt et al., 173-181). A recent study indicates that since 2017, 37 states have commissioned and implemented these laws. Also, researchers have revealed that most higher institutions of learning like colleges have enacted these policies as well (Boes and Stillman). According to these institutions, this method has proved to be active and has increased the confidence of young adults to seek medical assistance without fear.
Alternatively, the government may opt for a pilot program that would lower the drinking age in each state. Ideally, it is difficult to repeal the National Minimum Drinking Age Act; however, each state may try an alternative method, a pilot plant, to evaluate the effects (Boes and Stillman). For instance, most states have developed plans for licensing young adults to drink, which would help control the level of drinking alongside the fatalities associated with it. Likewise, the government may legalize alcohol consumption in instances where it can be monitored. In this light, the government should allow parents and guardians to monitor alcohol use. With such responsibilities at hand, parents demonstrate healthy-drinking practices which are observed by these youngsters. According to Wechsler and Nelson (986-992), researchers argue that in cultures where drinking has been integrated, there exists controlled consumption compared to restricted environments where it is perceived as a taboo upon use at a certain age. It is empirical for parents to be granted a chance to gradually introduce minors to drinking and educate them on responsible drinking habits (Wechsler and Nelson (986-992). As addiction professionals indicate, there can never be a better learning environment than home, and from people around one.
Conclusion
Underage drinking is inevitable whatsoever the policies put across to curb it; therefore, adopting more lenient strategies like lowering the alcohol consumption age would help mitigate excessive and unsafe drinking. The ban on drinking has established more problems than advantages. Thus, the government should take the chance of revising such laws before the matter becomes more inimical. Lowering the drinking age would ensure safe and monitored alcohol usage; there would be fewer rebellions on the set policies, and young adults would be more responsible for the decisions they make. Measures such as policies on alcohol education, adopting medical amnesty plans, coming up with pilot plans and legalizing the 18 as the minimum drinking age would help reduce excessive teenage drinking.
Work Cited
Boes, Stefan, and Steven Stillman. “You Drink, You Drive, You Die? The Dynamics of Youth Risk Taking in Response to a Change in the Legal Drinking Age.” (2017).
Callaghan, Russell C., et al. “Effects of the minimum legal drinking age on alcohol-related health service use in hospital settings in Ontario: a regression–discontinuity approach.” American journal of public health 103.12 (2013): 2284-2291
Carpenter, Christopher, and Carlos Dobkin. “The minimum legal drinking age and public health.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 25.2 (2011): 133-56.
McCartt, Anne T., Laurie A. Hellinga, and Bevan B. Kirley. “The effects of minimum legal drinking age 21 laws on alcohol-related driving in the United States.” Journal of Safety Research 41.2 (2010): 173-181.
Wechsler, Henry, and Toben F. Nelson. “Will increasing alcohol availability by lowering the minimum legal drinking age decrease drinking and related consequences among youths?.” American journal of public health 100.6 (2010): 986-992.