My Helium | Join | Log in Where Knowledge Rules

Should the national drinking age be lowered to 18?

Title endorsed in part by:

Results so far:

Yes		53%	394 votes	Total: 739 votes
No		47%	345 votes	Total: 739 votes

Yes

5 of 17

by Zach F

There are several arguments as to why the drinking age should be lowered to 18. Three in particular hold traction.

First, the issue of consistency and fairness to our youth; second, the issue of adolescent instincts; and finally the comparative success of U.S. policies on drugs and alcohol.

To start with, there is the personal liberty issue. If our youth are considered legally adults at 18, why do they need to be 21 to drink? In fact, at 16 we view our children as responsible enough to drive a car. At 18, they can vote, and fight in our wars. Yet the need to be 21 to legally drink. This is obviously very contradictory and somewhat unfair to our nation's young adults.

Next is the issue of whether or not this actually works. First, it is a reality that many, many Americans have had their first drink well before they reach their 21st birthday. American teens seem to have two desires. One is to rebel. Drinking is an easy way to rebel without causing any serious, immediate damage. The other desire most adolescents seem to share is the desire to be treated as, and viewed as, an adult. During the many years during which we tend to think of our youth as "becoming" adults, they are trying to speed that process up. When drinking is the last privilege withheld from them, they will seek to drink to show that they are adults.

Finally, it is important to look at the facts, and compare them with other countries.

The United States has the highest legal drinking age, and some of the most restrictive laws about drugs and alcohol, anywhere in the world. Yet, when we look at statistics on addiction, alcoholism and drug and alcohol related deaths, the U.S. does not fare well. When children are allowed to drive before they have seen first hand the effects alcohol can have on the body and judgment, they are less likely to buy into the dangers of driving drunk. When teenagers are forced to drink in alleys or friends' basements, rather than with their parents at restaurants and bars, responsible drinking is not something they learn. Moreover, when having a single beer is already forbidden, getting overly intoxicated, or drinking and driving, is less of a leap. After all, if they are breaking one law, why not break more?

In the end, education and experience are what teach our youth how to become responsible adults. Turning a blind eye and passing laws against teen drinking is not the way to teach youth. Rather than supervised, social drinking in bars and restaurants (which is what happens in Europe), our children's first exposure to alcohol is illicit and irresponsible over consumption, and our laws are to blame.

Learn more about this author, Zach F.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

No

5 of 17

by Divya Parmar

Despite the possible merits, the drinking age should not be lowered to 18. This is because there is so much to lose, and not as much to gain.

The first and most important reason is the slippery slope that would be created if this age were to be lowered. Just like 21 years provide alcohol for 18 year olds now, 18 year olds would provide alcohol for 15 year olds. Alcohol in more abundance would have a negative affect on the community. On a high school campus, some seniors would be able to drink, while everyone else would not. This line could be easily crossed if alcohol is distributed, hurting younger teenagers.

If 18 year olds get to drink, who's next? Who's to say 16 year olds won't ask for the right to drink or feel a sort of entitlement?

At these young ages, the body is still developing, so legalizing alcohol isn't the right way to help teens. Also, addiction is more likely at an earlier age. The last thing anyone wants is a nation of young Americans who are alcoholics. A somewhat similar parallel can be seen with smokers, where 80% of lifetime smokers started in their teens. Studies have shown that people who start drinking early do worse in school and suffer in all areas.

A core question in this debate is: can we condone this behavior? The answer is, of course, no. Young drinking isn't something we should consider acceptable. We need to have a moral compass in society. Sure, millions of teens will drink anyway, and those individuals are a lost cause. But we must maintain a societal expectation that this is not what one should do with his or her life. If the age is lowered, it may cause people, who may not otherwise drink, to start drinking because it is legal. This opens up more hazards to society.

Potentially the most grave reason to keep the drinking age at 21 is drunk driving. When there was a lowered drinking age, there was a rise in drunk driving incidents. Young members of society who drink and drive pose a great risk to society. Everyone on the roads is at risk. One driver in one car driving drunk puts hundreds of people on that road at risk. Everyone and anyone could be hurt by one person's mistake.

Society has to protect its best interests as a whole, and that means the drinking age should stay at 21.

Learn more about this author, Divya Parmar.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.