You are here: Home » Editorials

Editorial: Drinking age should be reevaluated

By Gaveliers, The Gavel Media Team, on March 17, 2010 2:15 AM

For much of the United States’ history, the government has struggled with how to legislate the use of alcohol. From Prohibition to the call to lower the drinking age during the Vietnam War as part of “redefining adulthood” to the current controversy over the drinking age, the United States, unlike other Western countries, is unsure of how to view alcohol.

We cannot deny that the drinking age does affect a significant portion of the Boston College community as it forces many freshmen, sophomores, and even upperclassmen to “binge” drink or “pregame” behind closed doors because they cannot drink in controlled, socially healthy environments such as restaurants and sporting events.

According to Ruth Engs, professor of the applied health sciences department at Indiana University, 22 percent of all students under 21 compared to 18 percent over 21 years of age are heavy drinkers. Among drinkers only, 32 percent of under age, compared to 24 percent of legal age, are heavy drinkers. The drinking age also encourages intoxicated underage students to not seek medical attention for themselves or others on many college campuses – including our own.

Unhealthy drinking habits such as binge drinking will always occur on and off college campuses.  With a drinking age of 18, however, young adults would drink in a much healthier environment. At every bar, restaurant, sporting event, and concert, social norms exist that generally help restrict the alcohol consumed to a more moderate amount. And with availability of alcohol at those events, there will be less of a pressure to pregame.

Opponents of lowering the drinking age argue that the current drinking age has decreased alcohol-related accidents. However, research has shown that alcohol-related vehicular incidents were decreasing before the drinking age was raised and were related to advancements in the field of vehicle safety such as increased air bag and safety belt usage and lower speed limits. And after the raising of the drinking age, these trends showed little change.

After the 1987 law tying the 21-year old drinking age to road improvement funds for states, there has been an increase in the overuse of alcohol by teenagers according to surveys reported by Engs, especially among college students. For example, from 1982 until 1987 about 46 percent of students reported “vomiting after drinking.” This jumped to over 50 percent after the law change. The increase in vomiting after drinking is significant because it demonstrates that a law that was supposed to increase the safe use of alcohol by young adults is actually doing the opposite. Clearly, the law is not achieving its objectives. Although the margin is only 4 percent  and could be considered negligible, the figures indicate that the effects of the law actually move against the law’s very objectives.

The lowering of the drinking age from 21 to 18 would, in general, allow young adults to drink in safer environments and promote healthier drinking habits. However, no law – state or federal – will eliminate the abuse of alcohol as demonstrated by the failure of every attempt to control alcohol consumption. Illegal drinking will always occur.

But it is our responsibility as a society to promote healthier habits. Culturally, we must set boundaries on alcohol consumption by distinguishing between moderation and abuse. If alcohol consumption is seen as a natural part of life, instead of as something illicit and negative, then future generations will not see its abuse as a rite of passage. Rather, it would be a more seamless transition – not one necessitating the consumption of a life-threatening amount of alcohol.