Robyn Baker

Professor Goodheart

LL 131

4 November 2016

Should the Drinking Age be Lowered?

The drinking age is a topic of debate and has been so for decades upon

decades. Most of the world has a drinking age lower than twenty-one. Most countries

in Europe have a drinking age of eighteen or lower. Some countries, such as Norway

do not have a set drinking age imposed in their country. The question in play is most

commonly if the drinking age is lower, will there be more alcohol-related problems in the

country? There are many cases that answer both sides of this question.

The minimum legal drinking age has been a point of controversy since the 21st

Amendment, which repealed the prohibition of alcohol, was first enforced on December

5th, 1933. This allowed states to determine their own consumption laws. Most states

set their drinking age to 21 at this time. In 1971, the 26th Amendment was passed,

which dropped the legal voting age from 21 to 18. Following the passing of this

Amendment, thirty of the states in the country lowered their drinking age. Only fourteen

states kept the drinking age of 21. In the 1970s reports showed that teenage car

accidents were happening more in the states with a lower drinking age. To combat

these numbers, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 was passed, which

withheld federal funding from states that did not return their drinking age to 21

(Background of the Issue 2).

 Although the drinking age is 21 across the country, forty-five of the fifty states

have exceptions that allow the underage consumption of alcohol under set

circumstances, such as on private property with parental consent or for religious

purposes. While the MLDA is 21 in all fifty states, in 47 of the 50 states age 18 is the

age of majority, which entails having the rights and responsibilities of

adulthood (Background of the Issue 2).

The reality of drinking is that it can potentially affect every person in the country

in some way. 18.2 million Americans meet the criteria to be diagnosed with alcoholism,

and more than 16,000 people die in vehicular accidents where alcohol is present. This

number does not account for people who drink responsibly or the people around them.

Any person who drinks affects the people directly around them when they are drinking,

their friends and family, and law enforcement if they are irresponsible. Alcohol abuse

costs $185 billion dollars a year. One out of every three violence-related crimes

involves alcohol. Liquor companies place advertisements through many forms of social

media, so exposure to the idea of drinking starts very early for most people (Alcohol:

Balancing Risks and Benefits 6-7).

Alcohol can be a positive or negative addition, depending on the responsibility of

the consumer. Alcohol is commonly associated with automobile accidents, fires, and

falls when people irresponsibly drink. It can also disrupt relationships, cause emotional

problems, impact physical health, trigger aggression and violence, and cause some

potential legal problems. These are all consequences of irresponsible drinking

(Underage Drinking Fact Sheet 1). Drinking responsibly and in moderation can be

beneficial to ones health. According to studies done, drinking lowered the risk of heart
attack, clot-induced stroke, peripheral vascular disease, and cardiovascular diseases by

25%-40%. Drinking prior to eating a meal aids in digestion, stress reduction, and better

social skills (Alcohol: Balancing Risks and Benefits 3-5).

In countries that have a lower drinking age, they report more binge drinking in

the under 13 age group, but more responsible behaviors in the critical 18 to 20 age

group. In the United States, the reverse is true: there are less young child issues with

alcohol, but more issues in the 18 to 20 group (Pros and Cons of Lowering 4). People

are still drinking underage. By age 15, 33% of teens have consumed alcohol, and by

age 18, 60% of teens has consumed alcohol. In 2015, it was reported that about 7.7

million people ages 12-20 had consumed liquor within the last month. Despite the

drinking age being 21, underage drinking is still happening. In 2011, almost 188,000

underage drinkers were brought to the emergency room for some injury related to

alcohol. Underage drinking is still occurring, and it is endangering the youth. They

have no guidance and are afraid of getting in trouble when something serious happens,

resulting in more injuries and deaths. If nothing is done, the youth will continue to

irresponsibly drink and continue to hurt themselves and others (Health Risks and

Benefits 1).

Binge drinking cost the United States $249 billion in 2010 from expenses

including lack of productivity, health treatment, and crime. More than half of the alcohol

consumed in the country is consumed in the form of binge drinking. Ages 18-34 are the

most likely to suffer the consequences (Fact Sheets - Binge Drinking 1). According to

the Annual Review of Public Health, as referenced on Choose Responsibility website,

alcohol annually contributes to some 1,700 deaths, 599,000 injuries, and 97,000 cases
of sexual assault among college students (Daniloff 2). There is a definite lack of

alcohol education present.

There are many reasons as to why lowering the drinking age could be dangerous

for the country. Epidemiologic evidence has shown that people who drink alcohol

heavily are at increased risk for a number of health problems (Health Risks and

Benefits 7). Excessive consumption of alcohol leads to a significant number of health

problems, including liver failure, kidney failure, and heart diseases. Prolonged exposure

also kills brain cells, inhibit judgement and brain functions, and leave the user physically

addicted and emotionally dependent on alcohol. Alcohol is also responsible for many

high risk and violent behaviors such as drinking and driving, assault, sexual assault, and

disobedience.

The body is still developing at this time and subjecting it to alcohol can

permanently damage the liver and brain if the user chooses to over-drink. People in this

age group are also prone to be irresponsible, so supplying them with the means

necessary for reckless behavior is irresponsible. By age 18, many adults have their

licenses, so adding the risky behavior with an already rebellious irresponsible age group

could be recipe for disaster. In many states, raising the MLDA decreased drunk driving

and drinking in those age groups. There are many biological and moral benefits to the

legal age staying at 21 (Health Risks and Benefits 7-8).

The minimum legal drinking age staying at 21 does not make sense for the

country. The arguments and studies for the drinking age staying at 21 all represent the

effects of irresponsible drinking and a lack of alcohol education. Many of the studies do

not talk about the positive effects of drinking in moderation. The majority of the country
has some exceptions that allow for private underage consumption of alcohol already,

which shows that many states are in favor of lowering the drinking age (Pros and Cons

of Lowering 2-3).

The main issue with a drinking age of 21 is the conflict between the drinking age

and the age of majority, or the age when majority of the rights of adulthood are given.

There is a disconnect between what is considered to be an adult and when the

privileges of adulthood are granted. At the age of eighteen, all physically capable male

citizens of the United States must sign up for the draft. Turning 18 entails receiving the

rights and responsibilities of adulthood to vote, smoke cigarettes, serve on juries, get

married, sign contracts, be prosecuted as adults, and join the military - which includes

risking one's life (Drinking Age ProCon.org 2).

The age group 18-20 is potentially the most dangerous without supervision. In

the US, a person gains the majority of their legal rights at 18, such as the marriage and

voting. Eighteen-year-olds have a desire to rebel against authority and assert their new

found independence at this age. With a drinking age of 21, they are more likely to drink

and more likely to be irresponsible when doing so. At 18, they will be able to have more

supervision, limiting the dangerous behaviors that come with irresponsible drinking.

Proponents of lowering the MLDA from 21 argue that it has not stopped teen drinking,

and has instead pushed underage binge drinking into private and less controlled

environments, leading to more health and life-endangering behavior by teens (Drinking

Age ProCon.org 3-4). Studies also show that countries with a drinking age of 18 have a

significant reduction in drunk driving accidents, compared to the US (Pros and Cons of

Lowering 4).
 Having a set minimum legal drinking age has been proven to be ineffective

because underage drinking is still occurring regularly. According to the National Center

on Addiction and Substance Abuse, underage drinking accounts for 17.5% ($22.5

billion) of consumer spending for alcohol in the United States. In 2006, 72.2% of twelfth

graders reported drinking alcohol at some point in their lives (Drinking Age ProCon.org

4). If people drink underage, it will encourage them to continue to violate other laws and

promote other illegal behaviors. MLDA 21 encourages young adults to acquire and use

false identification documents to procure alcohol. In this era of national security

concerns, including terrorism, illegal immigration, and other threat (Drinking Age

ProCon.org 4).

Lowering the drinking age would be beneficial for both the individual and society.

Drinking in moderation has many positive effects, both physically and mentally. Many

studies have shown reduction in stroke, cardiovascular disease, CHD, and sometimes

blood pressure. Studies show that those who abstain from alcohol are at a greater risk

for heart diseases. Stress reduction, mood elevation, increased sociability, and

relaxation are the most commonly reported psychosocial benefits of drinking

alcohol (Health Risks and Benefits 8). More people would legally be able to drink in

bars, restaurants, and other licensed establishments. Revenue would increase for

private business owners, and greater amounts of tax revenue would be collected by the

government (Drinking Age ProCon.org 6).

Lowering the drinking age has more benefits than hindrances for the country.

Starting people out earlier with alcohol education would create a more responsible and

knowledgeable generation. Having consistency with the age of majority and the MLDA
would also encourage people to take the law more seriously. Authority figures, such as

parents and educators would be a much larger part of the conversation when their

children or students begin to think about drinking. Parental supervision during the

beginning of a persons alcoholic consumption would teach them a much safer and

healthier way to drink without fear of getting in trouble. Lowering MLDA from 21 to 18

would diminish the thrill of breaking the law to get a drink. Normalizing alcohol

consumption as something done responsibly in moderation will make drinking alcohol

less of a taboo for young adults entering college and the workforce (Drinking Age

ProCon.org 3). Knowing that the largest binge-drinking group is from 18-34 indicates

that irresponsible drinking starts young and continues because there is no guidance at

an early age (Fact Sheets - Binge Drinking 1). Alcohol, if consumed responsibly has

many health benefits. Heart diseases, blood pressure, stroke, stress, and overall

tension can be relieved by consuming alcohol in moderation.

Setting the drinking age back to 18 in other countries in the world has proven to

be very successful, and the drunk driving and binge in those countries has decreased

(Drinking Age ProCon.org 3). Removing the thrill of drinking would encourage civil

obedience and respect for the law. Arguments for the drinking age remaining at 21 do

not take into account statistics done on drinking in moderation, they use numbers for

binge drinking. If education was presented early, there would be significantly less

danger when alcohol is involved in a situation. Lowering the MLDA to 18 and starting

the conversation about responsible drinking sooner will shape the country into a safer

place.
 Works Cited

Alcohol: Balancing Risks and Benefits. (2016). Retrieved November 03, 2016, from
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/alcohol-full-story/

Background of the Issue - Minimum Legal Drinking Age - ProCon.org. (n.d.). Retrieved
November 03, 2016, from http://drinkingage.procon.org/view.resource.php?
resourceID=006448

Daniloff, C. (n.d.). Drinking: 18 vs. 21. Retrieved from https://www.bu.edu/today/2010/

drinking-18-vs-21/

Drinking Age ProCon.org. (n.d.). Retrieved November 03, 2016, from http://
drinkingage.procon.org/

Fact Sheets - Binge Drinking. (2015). Retrieved November 03, 2016, from http://
www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/binge-drinking.htm

Health Risks and Benefits of Alcohol Consumption. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3, 2016,
from http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh24-1/05-11.pdf

Pros and Cons of Lowering the Drinking Age - HRFnd. Retrieved November 03, 2016,
from http://healthresearchfunding.org/pros-cons-lowering-drinking-age/

Underage Drinking Fact Sheet - pubs.niaaa.nih.gov. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3,

2016, from http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/UnderageDrinking/Underage_Fact.pdf