Changing
the US Nations Drinking Age
The
enactment of strict laws on alcohol consumption in America began centuries ago.
In the early 1900’s the government saw alcohol consumption as a social problem,
it followed that in 1919 the 18th amendment was passed barring alcoholism
throughout the United States. This amendment forced all alcohol related
activities be it buying or selling underground as a result causing the crime
rate to rise radically throughout the nation. Due to the rise in of all the
problems caused by the 1919 act changes were needed, later in 1923 the 23rd
amendment reversed the 18th amendment ending the prohibition of alcohol from
the US. Nonetheless, on July the 17th 1984, the United States
Congress passed another law on alcohol consumption ‘The National Minimum
Drinking Age Act’.
The
law forcefully urged all States to raise their Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA)
to 21 within twenty-four months or lose a percentage of their Federal-aid
highway reserves. The law additionally encouraged States, through motivation
grants packages, to pass obligatory criminal laws to fight drunk driving. Currently,
the US is one of only a few nations globally with a MLDA as high as 21 years
sharing this similarity with Indonesia, Palau, as well as Mongolia. However, a research
by Prof. Ruth C. Engs has shown that College campuses and young Americans
across the nation continue to have a problem with issues of underage drinking. Due
to the special interest in the matter as shown by the National Institute on Alcohol
Abuse and Alcoholism, this paper highlights on the issues of lowering the legal
drinking age from 21 to 18 years.
A
majority of young Americans still struggle to accept the reason as to why the
country has a high MLDA. Mike Males (1996) through his article suggests that
“the political failure of general Prohibition meant that American adults
would increasingly focus justifications for alcohol policy less on the perils
of drunkenness and more on the tenuous concept that adults can drink properly
but youths cannot or should not” (p. 190). The above statement stands true
to reason, as recent the research by Prof. Ruth revealed that many collage
scholars and teenagers believe that individuals 18 years and older are legally
referred to as adults. Therefore, they should be treated similarly by being permitted
to legally purchase as well as consume alcohol. The research moreover
highlighted that instead of them concentrating on alcohol related issues for
instance Driving Under The influence (DUIs) and binge drinking hazards such as,
alcohol poisoning as well as alcohol related fatalities in teenagers, many
young Americans are fighting the law. “I support the idea of lowering the
drinking age for several reasons, but it all boils down to respect. When a
person turns 18, he or she can enter into contracts, pay taxes, do business,
get married, bear arms, and fight overseas to protect our national interests.
It is simply disrespectful to tell that same person that they can’t handle a
cold beer when they come home” (Dirk Johnson, 2008, A16)
Supporters of a
high MLDA believe that teens are not mature enough to consume or purchase
alcoholic beverages. Many Americans who feel that the drinking age should not
be lowered suggest that young teenagers right out of high school are not fully
mature even though most of them think they are prepared to face the ‘real
world’ hence they can make their own choices in life(Stefan, 2013, p. 23). They
further state that at such a young age there is so much around these teens’ environment
that influences their everyday judgements, considering that some decisions last
a lifetime (p. 24). Their basis is founded on the factor that with all the
influences, pre-mature students make thoughtless decisions and are not
responsible enough to be allowed to drink as adults. On the other hand, these
same individuals believe that at this age of many influences the same high school
graduates should and are able to make all kinds of major decisions such
assigning up in the military or earning employment, voting, acquiring homes,
cars plus other major items, as well as having their own bank accounts. It is unfounded
and ironical to reason in such a way, allowing these same immature individuals
to make major decisions such as fight in wars and vote in political elections
at the age of eighteen but not drink. In other words, government believes that teens
are responsible and able to make such serious choices but considers them
children when it comes to drinking alcohol.
Lowering
the MLDA will reduce teen curiosity. The current society, views teenage
drinking as a taboo believing that alcohol can only damage a young mind. Therefore,
a number of teenagers cultivate a curiosity about alcohol when they are on
their own, as they would wish to drink with their peers. The forbidden fast
becomes the desired, instigating teenagers under the MLDA to sneak around to acquire
alcohol. Lowering the MLDA to eighteen similar to the age when teens have the
right to make other major choices should reduce or reduce the occurrences of
curious teenagers trying alcohol when they are first on their own. By lowering
the drinking age, “the law simply allows for parents to educate and supervise
the youthful drinking. If they’re going to drink anyhow, it’s better to do it
with the parents than to sneak around” (Stefan, 2013 p.35).
In most other cultures and countries,
the drinking age is lower than twenty-one, and the young people in these nations
drink alcoholic beverages with their families at an early age. In several
European states, teens are involved in wine tasting and learn how to deal with
the consequences of alcohol as well as how to conclude when they are under the effect
in a safe environment with their families. As drinking alcohol is socially okay
in these states, fewer children cultivate an unhealthy curiosity of drinking
and consequently make wise choices concerning drinking as well as driving or
drinking beyond what one can handle. In this open setting, persistent
communication improves between parent and child. Teenage drinking in college is
unavoidable as most teens experience a parent free existence. A decrease in MLDA
would afford teenagers with the capability to talk to their parents about
drinking devoid of a feeling of shame. More significantly, teenagers would
learn the consequences of alcohol in an intimate setting where they would be overseen
by their parents hence preparing them for collage settings where they would be
self-supervised.
Health
disorders have always been used as a supporter of a high MLDA. The biggest
challenge in lowering the US drinking age is that lobbyers of the prohibition
suggest that the biggest health hazard of drinking under MLDA is that the
prefrontal cortex is not fully developed. If someone begins to drink before it
is fully developed at age 21, the cortex can be damaged, thus leaving the
person’s decision reasoning at that of a teenager for the rest of his or her
life. However, this is illogical since even past the age of 21 health issues in
relation to uncontrolled alcoholism exist. For instance, individuals who drink
heavily go through depression symptoms (Elizabeth, & Carter, 2011 p. 235). Additionally,
drinking large quantities of alcohol frequently could cause cancer of the
alimentary canal as well as of the liver, damage to heart muscles, cardiac
arrest, and high blood pressure. In other words, excessive drinking is the
problem, not age when it comes to health issues (p. 236).
In
conclusion, the government through history has placed stringent laws on the
legal purchase and consumption of alcohol. However, these laws have in away
failed to explain their existence while standing ironic to logic. Maturity has
been the main point that explains the laws, however it does not make sense to
stop young Americans from drinking since they are not ready for such
responsibilities yet allow them to vote, fight in wars own cars and credit
account in addition to making career choices that are more accountable. Furthermore, research has shown
that lowering the drinking age reduces many risks faced by young Americans in
regards to alcohol drinking perils.
Works
cited
Johnson,
Dirk “Some See Big Problem in Wisconsin Drinking.” New York Times 15 November
2008: A16
Kiesbye, Stefan. Should
the Legal Drinking Age Be Lowered? Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Print.
Males, Mike A. The Scapegoat
Generation: America’s War on Adolescents. Monroe, Main: Common
Courage Press, 1996
Prof. Ruth C. Engs. “Why the drinking
age should be lowered: An opinion based on research.” Drinking
on Campus. 8 March 1998. Web. 13
April 2011
Williams,
Elizabeth M, and Stephanie J. Carter. The A-Z Encyclopedia of Food
Controversies and the
Law. Santa Barbara, Calif:
Greenwood/ABC-CLIO, 2011. Print.
What Students Are Saying About Us
.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but splendidwritings.com proved they are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"
.......... Customer ID: 14***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"The company has some nice prices and good content. I ordered a term paper here and got a very good one. I'll keep ordering from this website."
