Explaining Opposing Views on, Should Drinking Age be lowered to 18/19 Years
Irresponsible behaviors following alcohol consumption have created a major problem in almost all parts of the world. Alcohol consumption by itself is not to blame but behaviors like binge drinking and careless driving that are caused by the habit. Although the problem of alcohol affects all people across the age brackets, young people are most affected by the same problem. Consequently, several stakeholders and organizations have been coming up with various strategies aimed at solving the problem. Even if all strategies are aimed at solving the problem, there exist different positions concerning major issues of concern. For instance, Engs, a professor in the School of Applied Sciences at Indiana University proposes that the current drinking age should be lowered to eighteen or nineteen years, to a give an opportunity for the youngsters to drink in accompany of adults so that they can be able to develop positive drinking behaviors (par.1). On the contrary, Hurley who is the Executive Director for Public Affairs of National Safety Council points out that it is not possible to solve the problem by expanding it, because lowering the drinking age ends up increasing the number of people taking alcohol (par. 1). With that background in mind, this paper shall explain the opposing views on whether drinking age should be lowered to either eighteen or nineteen years.
Engs focuses more on the importance of responsible drinking behaviors among the young people. Further studies illustrate that lowering the drinking age is very significant because studies have indicated that people below the age of twenty one are involved in heavy drinking as they take over five drinks in one sitting for at least one occasion in a week (Engs par. 2). Moreover, comparison studies indicate that young people below the age of twenty one consider themselves to be heavy drinkers compared to those above the twenty one years. Hurley focuses more on the advantages and disadvantages of lowering the drinking age. For example the author explains that when drinking age was lowered during the Vietnam War, more problems were realized (par. 3). In addition, after the drinking age was raised to twenty one years, positive outcome has been observed as there are lower death rates due to the alcohol related problems in there last two decades.
Studies of Engs (par. 4) explain that an intervention ought to be sought because the current solution is even causing more problems related to drinking of alcohol. For example, the same study do illustrate that even if a decline in negative consequences of heavy and irresponsible drinking among young have been noted, there are other problem caused by the same which have increased like fighting, scoring low grades, failure to attend classes and vomiting to mention just a few. The author argues out that in cultures and ethnic groups where alcohol drinking is not opposed, young people are able to learn more from their parents and therefore there are few problems of irresponsible drinking.
According to Hurley, increasing the drinking to twenty one years by the Congress in 1984 was very significant because even though it did not directly reduce the number of under age drinkers, it was every helpful in reducing other problems that emanate from the same (par. 4). For instance, the law leads to a reduction in risky behaviors like late night drinking which increased the death rate of the same age group. The author believes that it is only alcohol industry that can benefit from lowering the age of drinking.
Both Engs and Hurley raise a concern in relation to whether drinking age ought to be lowered to either eighteen or nineteen years. However, the reason for the concern is different and that is why the position of the two authors is different. For example Hurley illustrates that it is necessary to look for causes of binge drinking but contends on the issue of reducing the drinking age. “As far as lowering the drinking age, I do not believe you solve a problem by expanding it. Binge drinking did not start with the uniform drinking age of 21” (par. 2). The author is more focused on the advantages the society has reaped after the drinking age was raised. On the contrary, Engs argues for reducing the drinking age since he is more focused on the issue of responsible drinking among the young people which can only come about after they are allowed to drink, more so with the adults. “The legal drinking age should be lowered from 21 to about 18 or 19, and young people should be allowed to drink in the presence of adults in such settings as restaurants, taverns and pubs and at official school and university functions” (Engs par 1). Although the consequence of alcohol taking by the young people are exposed to everyone, the question on whether the drinking age should be lowered to eighteen or nineteen may remain consensus since every side views the issue differently.
Works Cited
Engs, Ruth C. Should the Legal Drinking Age be Lowered to 19 or 18? Indiana University, February 1998. Print.
Hurley, Charles A. Should the Legal Drinking Age be Lowered to 19 or 18? February 1998. Print.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]