Is Lowering the Drinking Age a Good Idea?

 The drinking age is something that gets a lot of people emotional, for good reason too. This article in the LA Times does a good job of summarizing both sides, and it even has specific arguments from two experts. Some people think that lowering the age to 18 would be a good idea, because we could start educating future drinkers, and then there would be fewer alcohol-related problems. They say that what we are doing now isn’t working. Others say, however, that drinking has gone down since the age has been 21, and we shouldn’t fix what isn’t broken. Lowering the age to 18 might be a good idea, but only for those individuals who are willing to take classes and get a permit.

As an educator, I have a soft spot for any plan that involves teaching people something useful. You're 18 and you want to drink? Fine. Take a class. Get educated. Get a permit. If you are willing to take the time to learn, I have no problem with a conditional "learner's permit." I am willing to bet that plenty of 18 year-olds would line up for a chance to drink, and most of them would deal with the inconvenience of a class. That means we would have that many more students who are educated on the use an misuse of alcohol, and that can't be a bad thing.

In the Times article, sociologist David J. Hanson argues that prohibiting alcohol has the effect of pushing teens to drink in dangerous, uncontrolled environments like fraternity houses and wild college parties. While I don't agree that lowering the drinking age would solve this problem, any plan that involves educating large numbers of students is better than simply making a rule and hoping the problem goes away.

The fact remains that large numbers of young people are uneducated and out of control when it comes to alcohol consumption. Whether they are 18, 19, 20, or 21, the problem still remains. Lowering the drinking age and connecting it to permits and education offers a potential solution.

James C. Fell, senior program director at the Alcohol, Policy and Safety Research Center of the Pacific Institute for Research & Evaluation in Calverton, Md. says he doesn't have a problem with education, but that it shouldn't be tied to lowering the age. That's fine, but if you remove the lower age, you've taken away a huge incentive to actually get young adults interested in alcohol education. Without the incentive, you have less people becoming educated, and unfortunately the problems with alcohol abuse will probably remain the same.

At the end of the day, I really could care less if 18 year-olds have to wait until they are 21 to drink. Most of the arguments I've heard in favor of lowering the age are ridiculous anyway. However, if we really believe that education is the key to reducing problems with alcohol abuse, it would be a good idea to explore any option that gives us that opportunity.

Photo Credit