Pro & Con Quotes: Should the Drinking Age Be Lowered from 21 to a Younger Age?

“Alcohol is zealously marketed, easily obtained, inexpensive and existing laws are not consistently enforced. Combine these factors with a widespread belief that alcohol is a benign drug, creates fun, is sexy and positively defines one’s social status, and it becomes a pervasive force in culture; one that is very seductive to youth. High-risk drinking and alcohol abuse are complex problems that no one strategy can remedy, but the higher MLDA is one effective approach.

A small number of vocal individuals are proposing that the drinking age be lowered from 21 to 18 based on a belief that abusive and high-risk drinking by youth in our society would be dramatically curtailed by simply adopting the lower drinking age and providing alcohol education.

The facts do not support their argument…. At least 50 peer-reviewed MLDA studies concur that a higher minimum legal drinking age is effective in preventing alcohol-related deaths and injuries among youth. When the MLDA has been lowered, injury and death rates increase, and when the MLDA is increased, death and injury rates decline. Additionally, evidence shows that while many youths under 21-years-old still consume alcohol, they drink less and experience fewer alcohol-related injuries and deaths when the legal age is 21.”

The age 21 MLDA saves lives and improves health…. States that increased the legal drinking age to 21 saw a 16% median decline in motor vehicle crashes…. After all states adopted an age 21 MLDA, drinking during the previous month among persons aged 18 to 20 years declined from 59% in 1985 to 40% in 1991. Drinking among people aged 21 to 25 also declined significantly when states adopted the age 21 MLDA, from 70% in 1985 to 56% in 1991….

There is also evidence that the age 21 MLDA protects drinkers from alcohol and other drug dependence, adverse birth outcomes, and suicide and homicide…. Excessive drinking contributes to more than 3,900 deaths among people below the age of 21 in the U.S. each year. Underage drinking cost the U.S. economy $24 billion in 2010. More than 90% of the alcohol consumed by those under age 21 is consumed by binge drinkers (defined as 5 or more drinks per occasion for boys; 4 or more drinks per occasion for girls).”

“The important relationship of alcohol use and motor vehicle crashes involving youth is also highlighted by the fact that after the legal drinking age was changed uniformly to 21 years across the United States, the number of motor vehicle fatalities in individuals younger than 21 years decreased significantly.²⁵ Since 1998, every state has enacted laws establishing a lower BAC for drivers younger than 21 years, referred to as “zero tolerance laws.” These laws are important because young people who drive after consuming any amount of alcohol pose risk to themselves and others. These laws are also estimated to have reduced alcohol-involved fatal crashes among inexperienced drivers by 9% to 24%….

Of note, higher minimum legal drinking ages in the United States have been associated with lower youth suicide rates.”

“Adolescents and young adults are particularly vulnerable to the harmful effects of alcohol. Alcohol affects the development of the brain, which continues to form and mature throughout adolescence. Young people also have a propensity to combine high-risk drinking with other high-risk activities, increasing the potential for accidental injury both to themselves and to others. The harmful effects of alcohol on young people raises questions about the adequacy of current policies in appropriately curbing access to and use of alcohol by youth…

A review of the empirical research from 1960 to 2000 shows that almost 60 per cent of high-quality studies undertaken concluded that a higher minimum purchase age for alcohol was associated with reduced road traffic accidents. None found the opposite. This well-documented relationship strongly implies that increasing the minimum purchase age for alcohol can potentially save lives by reducing the incidence of road traffic accidents among young drivers, not to mention the long-term impact of serious injury.”

“The problem with the arguments for lowering the legal drinking age is it is simply not in the best interest of the public’s safety to do so. Underage drinkers are a danger to themselves and others, especially on the highways.

The drinking age was first lowered to 18 in many states back in the Vietnam War era. The country was asking thousands of its young men to fight and die for their country on foreign soil, so the popular thinking was, ‘How can we ask them to die for their country and not let them have a drink if they want one?’ But the lower drinking age begins to take a toll on the nation’s highways.

The number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities began to rise at alarming rates and a high percentage of those involved young drivers. Congress again put pressure on the states to raise the drinking age because of this startling increase in highway deaths, and the age-21 Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) was universally adopted nationwide as of July 1, 1988.

“[L]owering the drinking age would be harmful in two ways. First, young people, those most likely to be harmed from drinking, will have greater access to alcohol. Second, lowering the drinking age may lead to lowered perception of risk. When perception of risk from a particular substance decreases, prevalence rates tend to increase.

If the perception of risk is increased, then drinking quantity and frequency may decrease. For example, my colleagues and I found that compared to Caucasians, African-Americans tend to report later initiation to alcohol, lower rates of use, engage in less heavy drinking and show slower increases in rates of drinking across adolescence and young adulthood. These racial differences may be in part because perception of risk is stronger among African-American parents and peers, and they consider alcohol more harmful than their white counterparts.”

“[M]inimum legal drinking age of 21 is working. Alcohol consumption jumps sharply exactly at age 21 and remains elevated (i.e., more than a one-time birthday-related drinking celebration). Deaths jump sharply exactly at age 21 by about 9 percent and remain elevated. Arrests jump sharply exactly at age 21 and remain elevated. And hospitalizations jump sharply exactly at age 21 and remain elevated… Numerous policies and proposals have been put forth to address the troubling profile of excessive alcohol use by young people. Many of these need more research to demonstrate their effectiveness on a broad population-wide scale, but a minimum legal drinking age of 21 is not one of them.”

“Many activities have ages of initiation… The age limit for alcohol is based on research which shows that young people react differently to alcohol. Teens get drunk twice as fast as adults, but have more trouble knowing when to stop. Teens naturally overdo it and binge more often than adults. Enforcing the legal drinking age of 21 reduces traffic crashes, protects young people’s maturing brains, and keeps young people safer overall….

European countries have worse problems than America does, as far as binge drinking and drinking to intoxication. Studies show that Europe has more underage drunkenness, injury, rape, and school problems due to alcohol. Since alcohol is more available there, it actually increases the proportion of kids who drink in Europe…. In fact, the earlier someone begins drinking, the more likely they are to be alcohol dependent in later life. More than 40 percent of individuals who start drinking before the age of 13 will develop alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence at some point in their lives. Ninety-five percent of the 14 million people who are alcohol dependent began drinking before the legal age of 21.”