The Amethyst Initiative: Should the drinking age be lowered?
Oct 1DEAR STRAIGHT TALK: I am the daughter and granddaughter of alcoholics. As a recovering alcoholic, I haven’t had a drink in 21 years. So far, two of my children have the disease of alcoholism. My 16-year-old daughter spent time in a locked-down psych ward for attempted suicide, followed by drug and alcohol treatment. Today she’s clean and sober. My 26-year-old son is also sober after a near-deadly battle with alcoholism. The earlier kids start drinking, the greater their chance of becoming alcoholic. Those who don’t drink until 21, have almost zero incidence of alcoholism.
There is an initiative afoot to lower the drinking age to 18. Kids genetically predisposed to alcoholism (like mine) will be especially at-risk. Teens already make mistakes — their front brains aren’t fully developed until around age 25. Add alcohol, and chaos ensues. For teenagers, the thrill and taboo of alcohol is all too dangerous. Girls get pregnant, boys get violent. How do you and the panel feel about a lower drinking age?
Been there, done that
Farren, 21
For some countries, drinking at 15 seems to work, but I honestly don’t think it could work in the US. Our lifestyle is completely different and most teens don’t have adequate self-control. The Amethyst Initiative wants to help colleges save money and avoid lawsuits. I worry about 18-year-olds driving around drunk. Heck, I worry about 18-year-olds voting! My sister says half her senior class is voting for McCain just because Palin — and her pregnant daughter — are sexy!
Peter, 22
The Amethyst Initiative isn’t about colleges washing their hands of responsibility for underage drinking — or lowering the drinking age. It is about opening discussion on the topic, which I think is important. If the drinking age was18, colleges and high schools would have GOOD alcohol programs. As it is now, colleges can’t help someone who is abusing alcohol because they have to ‘kick out’ students who drink underage. Many college alcohol programs are anonymous, but students worry about getting in trouble and don’t seek help.
Kendal, 21
As legal adults, 18-year-olds can vote, go to war, drive, smoke, gamble. If Australia and Europe can trust young adults to drink responsibly at 18, shouldn’t we? Not necessarily. These countries have long histories of starting kids very young on watered-down wines and such. American kids go from the occasional bitter sip of wine at Thanksgiving to full-blown binge parties. There are as many 18-year-olds in high school as in college. High school partying will only get easier.
Rachel, 17
Lowering the drinking age will only lower the age of exploration. Right now, kids try alcohol in high school and use regularly in college. With a lower drinking age, kids will use regularly in high school and experiment in middle school.
Bird, 18:
If 18-year-olds can go to war, they should be able to drink. Teenagers have always gotten their hands on alcohol. If the drinking age is lowered it won’t be such a forbidden fruit.
Graham, 15:
You’ve got a point that “the thrill and taboo of alcohol is all too dangerous.” But breaking the law only adds to the thrill. If you can fight and die for your country, you should be able to drink in it.
Dear Been there: I’m glad the Amethyst Initiative is bringing attention to the problem of alcohol. The Marin Institute recently estimated that alcohol problems in California, alone, cost $38 billion a year. I do not support a lower drinking age. The “if-you-can-fight,-vote,-smoke,-gamble,-you-should-be-able-to-drink” argument doesn’t hold water because alcohol is a powerfully addictive, intoxicating drug. Lowering the drinking age will only cause alcohol-related problems to start younger. A better solution, guaranteed to lessen alcohol’s allure, is for Congress to ban on-air advertising of alcohol products as ‘we, the people’ did for tobacco products in 1971. It’s time.
To read more panel comments, and to share your own, please click the “comment on this column” tab below.
Jack, 16
It would be very different reality for me personally if the drinking age was lowered. 21 seems so far away for me, yet 18 is basically just a year away (I’m almost 17).
Most teens under 18 will say, yeah, how cool could that be to have a lowered drinking age. And honestly, in some ways I think it is a good idea. Then it would be up to the family to say whether you drink or not, because you’d still be with them when you came of legal drinking age. You wouldn’t be on your own with no family presence around you like when you go off to college and are “stunned by the big world” right when you are able to freely use alcohol.
On the other hand, I think the reason the drinking age is 21 is because that is closer to the age when the brain is fully developed. Drinking before that age will stunt the growth of the mind. My mom’s a nurse and she says that to lower the age would just be giving in to the colleges so that they don’t have to enforce their rules. It would definitely push alcohol use into the high school level with all the seniors who are 18.
In my social circles, I find that because alcohol is illegal for us, many of my peers turn to pot because, in truth, pot is so much easier to obtain in high school than it is to obtain alcohol. And I think pot is worse for the developing brain than alcohol. So, in that sense, if the age was lowered to 18, I think there would be less use of pot, because kids would drink instead.
As you can see, there are pros and cons and I’m not sure which choice is best. It’s hard to pick the lesser of the evils. Is it better for kids in high school to be drinking, or to learn about it in college away from their family? I think being more experienced with alcohol when you are younger would make you less prone to go crazy once on your own. Yet statistics show that the younger you are when you start drinking, the more prone you are to becoming alcoholic. If you are genetically predisposed, it’s even worse.
Mariah, 16
The Amethyst Initiative might be great for colleges, but more high school students would have access to alcohol, causing MORE underage drinking, alcoholism, and drunk driving.
laura
Please. It is not at all difficult for teenagers to get their hands on alcohol. Yes, alcohol is potentially dangerous, especially for developing minds, but the idea that just because it is illegal for anyone under 21 to drink is keeping people under that age (many of which are legal adults) from drinking, is ridiculous. Plus, smoking is highly addictive and unhealthy, but no one is proposing that we raise the smoking age to 21. What about compromising and lowering the drinking age to 19 like Canada? Since there are very few 19 year olds in high school, the argument that drinking in high schools would increase is less valid, colleges would have less of an underage drinking problem, and the lure of alcohol as a forbidden substance (at least for anyone 19 and over) would likely decrease.