Teens and Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) Essay

Every year, thousands of minors die from the use of alcohol. Many young adults abuse the drinking age policy. It is put in effect for substantial reasons, which contribute in making the safest environment for all. Drinking underage is not only illegal, but also damages one’s health tremendously. Furthermore, drinking in large amounts is extremely dangerous and can cause detrimental things to occur. There have been numerous attempts to create a law to lower the drinking age, but none have gone through. In contrast to what some people may say, the drinking age should not be lowered because it would decrease maturity, promote poor behavior, and damage reputations.

According to Drew K. Saylor, he writes that studies from a meta-analytic review showed that "Raising the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) is associated with a 16% median decrease in alcohol-related crash outcomes while lowering the MLDA result in a 10% median increase in such crash outcomes" (332). The essence of this argument is that having the law of the drinking age to be 21 has a positive effect in the country because there is a decrease in car crashes. This is why the author Drew K. Saylor also agrees when he writes "A solution to this problem is not a simple as lowering the drinking age and asking young people to choose responsibility" (332). Saylor's point is to make the people understand that lowering the drinking age won't fix much because accidents will still happen, but with more frequency. Since in the past, the argument was deciding whether to raise or no to raise the drinking age to be 21 because of the danger youths had to live through if something happened to them. Drew K. Saylor argues that the drinking age has led to create a change in the people who are 18-20 years old because college students now a days tend to consume more alcohol than any others. When this happens among college students, it’s called binge drinking. According to Drew K. Saylor, a professor from the University of Virginia with a BA degree, he states that “Binge drinking is the consumption of an excessive amount of alcohol in a short period of time”

Although there are many pros to the drinking age being lowered there are also many cons too. A lot of people in the United States want to keep the drinking age the same.They say that if we lowered the drinking age more teens will want to drink and it could cause bad things to happen (“Odyssey”). In many other countries the legal age to drink is under eighteen and they have proved that there are more people who consume a big amount of alcohol and they think

Lowering the drinking age will result in life and death consequences. By keeping the drinking age at 21, the rate of fatalities for drinking and driving decrease drastically. During the short period during the late 1980’s when the drinking age was lowered to 18, the number of fatal car crashes involving young adults who were under the influence dropped from 61% to 31% (Wil Fulton). By bringing the age down to 18-years-old, alcohol would be more accessible to the lower age group. For example, an 18 year old, who is still in high school, is more likely to sell alcohol to a 16 year old than a 21 year old, who is away at college. In recent studies, researchers found that 77% of the population are opposed to lowering the drinking age to 18 (Brandon Griggs). MADD is supported by influential government companies such as the American Medical Association, National Transportation Safety Board, National Safety Council, International Association Chiefs of Police, Governor's Highway Safety Association, Surgeon General of the United States, and U.S. Transportation Secretary to name a few (John H. Barnhill, PHD). Overall, young teenagers lack the proper wisdom collected to make right judgments about alcohol. The 3 years between the age 18 and 21 are filled with change and responsibilities, making one more suitable to make appropriate

One side to this debate is that the legal drinking age should be lowered from 21 to around 18 or 19 years old, and that young adults should be allowed to drink in controlled environments. This idea is presented by Ruth Engs, a professor of Applied Sciences at Indiana University. She states that environments such as taverns, pubs, restaurants and official university functions can be considered to be controlled environments. “In these situations responsible drinking could be taught through role modeling and educational programs. Mature and sensible drinking behavior would be expected” (Engs). In her article, Engs uses phrases such as “forbidden fruit,” and “a badge of rebellion against authority” to describe how teens view drinking. In her opinion, if the drinking age were to be lowered, young adults would no longer feel the pressure to drink in order to “be cool.”

There always has been controversy as to should the united states lower the drinking age to 18. Eighteen year olds should have the right to drink. By lowering the drinking age to eighteen it will give people supervision, teach responsibilities, and eighteen years olds are already considered adults; however, it may cause binge drinking, it will lead to more deaths, and drinking damages brains cells and especially the body itself.

However, their argument is weak, and when taken into consideration, I still firmly believe that the drinking age should not be lowered. Underage drinking can prompt an extensive assortment of issues including health problems, addiction, sexual assault, drunk-driving accidents, and death. Granting all this, the legal drinking age has been lowered and raised again. Underage drinking should not be allowed in this country. The risks are far too great and the pros are way too few.

Every year, thousands of deaths occur as a result of drunk driving, and every day people are facing the consequences of irresponsible drinking. Because of the issues caused by irresponsible drinking, the US government passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984 which raised the minimum drinking age to twenty-one to prevent drinking-related accidents and violence. Despite the intent of its passing, it was a counterproductive decision. Because of the higher age restriction, high school upperclassmen and college underclassmen see drinking as an exciting, rebellious act. Consequentially, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act resulted in an increase in dangerous and irresponsible drinking which continues to this day. Not only does the

The MLDA21 movement cited statistics from some reports that showed a disproportionate number of crashes related to drinking and driving among young adults aged 17-21 as the reason why the MLDA should be raised. The lobbying groups were partially successful in having the MLDA lowered in some states; however they realized that they would only be truly successful if they were able to push for change at the federal level. Seeing as the MLDA could only be set at the state level under the 21st amendment, the federal government used provisions from the Federal Highway Safety Act of 1966 to hold back a percentage of the highway funds to states not in compliance with MLDA21. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02742.x/pdf)  Add to works cited

Once the allure of alcohol is no longer a social trend, parents would be stripped of their worries of their “rebellious teenagers sneaking off to basements and backwoods to binge drink far from adult supervision” (Griggs). Parents cannot protect their children from every hazard in the world, but they can educate their kids and desensitize their kids to the thrill of drinking out of adult supervision. Opposers claim that the current law “...[diminishes] the number of traffic deaths caused by young drunk drivers...” but they fail to realize that “...tougher seat belt and D.U.I. rules have contributed to the decrease, too” (Glaser). “Raising the drinking age hasn't reduced drinking -- it’s merely driven it underground..” (Glaser). With the legal drinking age at 18 and the incorporation of alcohol awareness classes, citizens would develop safer habits when consuming

Supporters of lowering the MLDA compared America to other countries that have a minimum drinking age of 18. Supporters of lowering the MLDA say that in countries where the drinking age 18 young people drink smarter. John McCardell points out some interesting statistic he states” in southern European countries ratios of all drinking occasions to intoxication occasions were quite low roughly one in ten while in the United States, almost half of all

Several states like Michigan, Massachusetts, and Maine in the United States of America lowered their drinking ages to 18. As a direct result there was increase in alcohol related clashes. This clearly shows that the teenagers are not ready to be left to drink freely. This situation can be attributed to the fact that the

A study on teen drinking by the Joseph Raintree Foundation described underage drinking as, “a social activity usually undertaken by small groups of close friends, well away from the oversight of parents or other significant adults.” This kind of unsupervised drinking takes place because Americans place such a heavy emphasis on young people not drinking, catalyzed by zero-tolerance policies schools place on alcohol and a high MLDA. American youth are frequently told that with age, comes more freedom of choice and more responsibility, yet having a MLDA of 21 betrays that notion, almost encouraging young adults to reach for the so-called

Today, people are aware that the law does not stop underage drinking, as illustrated by the thousands of deaths resulting from excessive alcohol consumption by people below the age of 21. A group called the Amethyst Initiative is now pushing for the lowering of the drinking age to 18. Should the drinking age be lowered from 21 to 18, or would this have the same catastrophic results as in the 1970s?

Without a doubt, the United States has been facing serious national problems with underage drinking. Depending on personal ideologies, some people might not agree that the current minimum drinking age of twenty-one is based on scientific facts rather then ideology of prohibitionism. For example, since 1975 over seventeen thousand lives have been saved since the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) was changed to age twenty-one (Balkin 167). This shows that even over a short amount of time, a higher MLDA helps decrease the risk of teen suicides, accidents and overdose deaths. However, this widely debated topic has inevitably brought attention to the plethora of supporting and opposing viewpoints. The minimum legal drinking age of twenty-one