Schuttler 1
Ryckur Schuttler
Professor Boz
English 2000
22 June 2011
Teen Drinking: An International Problem
Arriving in a new land meant new food, new sights, and new laws. None of which were
more impactful than the lowered drinking age, which is prevalent throughout Europe. For me,
the feeling of sitting down in a biergarten, listening to the band dressed in lederhosen play
traditional German music, smelling the pretzels in the air, and ordering a large German beer was
a little of an unnerving experience. As the thought that this was legal to do here sank in, I began
to relax and absorb the sights. Other than the traditional German garments, and boisterous
singing, I saw a child around 8. He was drinking a half-liter beer with his parents. This got me
thinking, would the lowered drinking age be a good model for the United States? Although
many Americans, especially college students, believe that the drinking age should be lowered,
the fact of the matter is that the drinking age needs to stay at twenty-one because teen drinking is
detrimental towards brain development, an increase in driving fatalities, and the fact that the
countries with a lower drinking age, are experiencing worse problems related to alcohol.
One of the main fuels for lowering the drinking age is a petition called the
Amethyst Initiative. Here is a statement from their website:
The statement [Amethyst Initiative] as finally drafted does not, by design, prescribe
a particular policy change. It does, however, state clearly the signatories' belief that
Schuttler 2
21 is not working as well as the public may think, that its unintended consequences
are posing increasing risks to young people, and that it is time for a serious debate
among our elected representatives about whether current public policies are in line
with current realities (Amethyst Initiative).
The Amethyst Initiative is a document that a group of over a hundred college chancellors or
presidents have signed, encouraging a public debate on lowering the drinking age. On their
website they state reasons that a lowered drinking age would be better for society.
A typical argument made for lowering the drinking age is, “Adults under 21 are deemed
capable of voting, signing contracts, serving on juries and enlisting in the military, but are told
they are not mature enough to have a beer” (Amethyst Initiative). This sounds like it would
make a lot of sense; teens willing to risk their life for our country should be allowed to drink.
Unfortunately, studies have shown this to be a bad idea. “Recent research has pointed to the
significant problem of binge drinking among active duty military personnel, particularly among
personnel who are underage, and prompted concern over the negative impact drinking has on job
performance and preparedness” (Wechsler and Toben). Negative impacts in the military are
ultimately something that could endanger lives. Soldiers need to be in peak mental and physical
condition, but if under the influence, these attributes would be impaired.
The Amethyst Initiative also claims, “By choosing to use fake IDs, students make ethical
compromises that erode respect for the law” (Amethyst Initiative). This seems logical, if we
lower the drinking age, the eighteen year-olds that buy fake ID’s will stop. Yet, if the drinking
age is lowered, what is stopping 16 year-olds from obtaining a fake ID? It is unethical to use a
Schuttler 3
fake form of identification, but to say that this practice will stop if the age is lowered is highly
unlikely.
An argument that is also presented is, “A culture of dangerous, clandestine ‘bingedrinking’—often conducted off-campus—has developed” (Amethyst Initiative). This is targeted
at the parties and underground drinking that has resulted since teenagers cannot legally drink in
public. Once again, allowing youths to drink in public seems like it would promote responsible
drinking and in turn, teach better habits. The problem with this is bars are not responsible places
to drink. Many establishments serve alcohol to minors and allow many of its customers to binge
drink and get out of hand. In addition, drinking at private residences allows guests to avoid
driving under the influence and have a safe place to sleep. After a night of drinking, it is an
easier choice for someone to only worry about what room in a house to sleep in, then to figure
out how to get home from a bar.
Studies have shown that there are many good points for keeping the drinking age at 21.
Drinking alcohol in teenage years is detrimental towards brain development and leads to
problems in later years. Dr. Fulton Crews, a neuropharmacologist at the University of North
Carolina, was quoted in The New York Times’ article “The Grim Neurology of Teenage
Drinking”,
Alcohol creates disruption in parts of the brain essential for self-control, motivation and
goal setting…and can compound pre-existing genetic and psychological vulnerabilities.
Early drinking is affecting a sensitive brain in a way that promotes the progression to
addiction (Butler).
Schuttler 4
Roughly the first twenty years of a person’s life is the most important for brain development.
During these years, the body experiences rapid growth and changes, which are controlled by the
brain. Unnatural interference with these processes, like alcohol consumption, can cause harmful
effects that can last a lifetime. Allowing such a low drinking age would set kids up to deal with
problems, like an addiction, that wouldn’t occur if the drinking age remained 21.
There are a large number of drivers under the age of 19, which, if a lower drinking age
were to be implemented, would now be new candidates for drinking and driving. In the United
States, there is a heavy reliance on personal transportation. Unlike Europe, where public
transportation is primary, most students in the United States possess their own cars. The United
States Department of Transportation states that there is roughly “9.7 million drivers ages 19 and
under in the United states” (“Licensed Drivers by Age and Sex (In Thousands).”). William
Dumouchel, Allan F. Williams, and Paul Zador wrote in their article, “Raising the Alcohol
Purchase Age: Its Effects On Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes in Twenty-Six States” published in
the Journal of Legal Studies 16.1,“Based on the 87,153 nighttime driver fatal crash involvements
that occurred during 1975-84, raising the minimum legal alcohol purchase age was estimated to
produce a 13 percent reduction in nighttime driver fatal involvements.” They further discuss the
effectiveness of the law years after it is instated. “Raising the purchase age was estimated to
reduce fatalities 13 percent during the first two years of a new law's taking effect and 12 percent
during subsequent years” (254-256). If law allowed drinking under the age of 21, more
adolescents would go out to bars to drink. Due to the lack of public transportation, personal cars
would be used to get there. After a night of drinking, the way to get home would be to drive.
This would potentially create an increased amount of intoxicated drivers. With drivers not only
intoxicated, but with only two to three years of driving experience, serious problems could result.
Schuttler 5
Clearly, if the drinking age were lowered, more adolescents would find themselves in potentially
life threating situations. The data has shown that due to the increased age, 13 percent of fatalities
were reduced. This number could easily switch, if a lower drinking age was instated, from a
positive statistic to a tragic one.
Countries, like Germany, with a lowered legal drinking age are experiencing worse
problems with even younger illegal drinkers. Some believe that the drinking situation in
Germany is fault-free and could be a good model for the United States. However, Problems are
arising from having such a low drinking age, primarily that even younger kids are drinking
illegally.
Countries with lower minimum legal drinking ages do not fare better. Contrary to the
assertion of the Amethyst Initiative, heavy alcohol use among adolescents is a common
problem across Europe. Frequent binge drinking among adolescents aged 15 to 16 years
in many countries occurs at more than double the rate as in the United States. The
European region has the highest overall consumption of alcohol among adults and the
highest proportion of alcohol-attributable deaths in the world. Further, the experience
with lowering the minimum legal drinking age in other countries is consistent with what
occurred in the United States in the 1970s. In 1999 New Zealand lowered its national
drinking age from 20 years to 18 years, resulting in significant increases in the
occurrence of alcohol-involved emergency room admissions and traffic crashes among
youths aged 15 to 19 years (Wechsler and Toben).
It is easy to see the negative effects of lowering the drinking age. Though they lowered the
drinking age to eighteen, kids as young as fifteen were feeling the effects of it. This is when
Schuttler 6
most kids are entering high school. This shouldn’t be added into the stress of transitioning from
middle to high school.
The facts show that the drinking age needs to remain at twenty-one since teen drinking is
detrimental towards brain development, an increase in driving fatalities, and the fact that the
countries with a lower age are experiencing worse problems related to alcohol. There are many
studies that found that the amount of lives saved from the increased age of drinking. Something
that needs to happen as a result of this law is a stricter enforcement of the drinking age. Though
many people do not like to hear it, it really in everyone’s best interests. Alexander C. Wagenaar
and Mark Wolfson, in an article for the Journal of Public Health Policy, entitled “Enforcement
of the Legal Minimum Drinking Age in the United States” states,
A promising avenue for enforcement of the drinking age is administrative suspension of
licenses to sell alcoholic beverages. An increase in Alcohol Beverage Control
enforcement actions can also easily be self supporting, with fines generating revenues to
cover the increased cost of policing (47).
Education programs about the dangers of teen drinking have some positive effects, but to really
stop this problem, sale to minors at public bars needs to be enforced. As the studies show, the
fines could pay for the enforcement costs. As the Amethyst Initiative insists, this debate does
need to be brought to the public. This debate would discuss the facts and show the fallacies in
their argument. The drinking age is currently at a safe age, and to change would cost many lives.
Only time will tell the effects of the eight-year-old boy’s drinking habits. Unfortunately the data
is not in favor of a positive outcome.
Schuttler 7
Works Cited
Amethyst Initiative. Web. 20 June 2011. <http://www.amethystinitiative.org/>
Butler, Katy. “The Grim Neurology of Teenage Drinking.” The Wall Street Journal 4 July 2006.
Web. 20 June 2011.
DuMouchel, William, Allan F. Williams, and Paul Zador. "Raising the Alcohol Purchase Age:
Its Effects On Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes in Twenty-Six States.” Journal of Legal
Studies 16.1 (1987): 249. Business Source Complete. EBSCO. Web. 21 June 2011.
“Licensed Drivers by Age and Sex (In Thousands).” U.S. Department of Transportation. 4 April
2011. Federal Highway Administration. Web. 20 June 2011.
<http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar7.htm>
Wechsler, Henry, and Toben F., Nelson. "Will Increasing Alcohol Availability By Lowering the
Minimum Legal Drinking Age Decrease Drinking and Related Consequences Among
Youths?." American Journal of Public Health 100.6 (2010): 986-992. Business Source
Complete. EBSCO. Web. 20 June 2011.
Wagenaar C, Alexander and Wolfson, Mark. “Enforcement of the Legal Minimum Drinking Age
in the United States.” Journal of Public Health Policy Vol. 15, No. 1 (Spring, 1994), pp.
37-53. JSTOR. Web. 20 June 2011.