Whether or not the legal drinking age in the U.S. should be 21 or 18 is a divisive question. On one hand, there are people who think adding alcohol to an 18 year old’s developing brain is a bad idea. The opposition to the 21 drinking age references the fact that 18 year olds are going to drink regardless of whether or not it’s legal. Both arguments have validity but one side strikes me as half baked and slightly misguided.
While the statistics for alcohol-involved car accidents decreased when the minimum legal drinking age was moved from 18 to 21, I still can’t help but think that the wrong change was made.
The rates of drunk driving may have decreased in this country, but compared to others, the U.S. rates are still higher than most other countries. Let’s look at the U.K. as an example. While 18% of driving casualties in the UK involve drunk driving, the US rate is 32%. The MLDA is 18, but you also can’t drive until 17, so most young people have to find other ways to get around. The UK government spends sixty one billion pounds annually on public transportation, making it a common mode of transport.
Due to this, it is more of a cultural norm to get a taxi or bus while under the influence. The norm that you either walk or taxi home from the bar is what lowers the number of accidents, not the accessibility of alcohol.
It is also more normalized to drink around family while still living at home, as most 18 year olds live at home for a time. By beginning to drink in a safe environment where one does not need to hide their intoxication from the adults in their life, drinking becomes normalized and not something that is done in an act of rebellion, taking away the novelty of it. It also showcases how to safely drink in a safe environment much earlier in someone’s life.
In the U.S., one in ten parents reported that they have caught their children stealing alcohol from them, suggesting that teenagers are drinking despite the illegality. In fact, some are probably drinking because of it. Not to mention that one in five parents believe the legal drinking age should be lowered.
I put out a poll to see what college students felt about the drinking age being 21. The results overwhelmingly supported (70%)that 18 should be the legal drinking age. The voters mostly referenced how this is a country where 18 year olds can vote, buy guns, join the military and start a family yet they can’t buy a drink and how that seems illogical. The pro-21 MLDA side argued that lowering the age just makes the problem worse and that the brain needs more time to develop. I always end up with one question with this line of reasoning: why would we not wait until we’re 24 if brain development is the reason for having a higher drinking age?
There are nuances to this country that make the question difficult to answer. A lack of public transportation is a big one but also cultural issues like the normalization of binge drinking especially in college. I understand all of this, but my stance boils down to one key principle.
Eighteen is the year recognized as the year you become an adult. Typically it is the year people move out, it is the year people can vote, the year people can work full time and the year that you are viewed as an adult by the legal system. If all of that is true, if that is the year the world opens up, the year people view you as responsible enough to live your own life separate from parents and guardians, why are people not trustworthy enough to drink at 18?
