Since 1984, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act has required every state to prohibit the possession or consumption of alcohol for people below the age of 21, in an effort to crack down on underage drinking by the Reagan Administration.
While the intentions of the act alone are well-meaning, its ratification has been fraught with controversy from the start, with discussion over its practicality and fairness never ceasing.
To properly examine this debate, three key points must be explored. (a) How harmful is underage drinking? (b) How does America’s alcoholism compare to nations with lower minimums? (c) Does the drinking age infringe on our Constitutional Rights as citizens?
Drugs take on varying forms, each with its own effects on the human mind and body. For example, stimulants like nicotine boost confidence and can provide oneself with a euphoric experience.
Alcohol is classified as a depressant, a form of drug known to inhibit neural activity. While a slower mind can be beneficial to one’s confidence and sociability, there also exist many undesirable effects. These can include aggressiveness, lack of judgment, choking and even a total blockage of memories.
On the scientific level, the effects of alcohol can be attributed to a vital neurotransmitter in the brain, known as GABA.
GABA is a natural inhibitor that helps calm the mind to a controllable degree. When alcohol is introduced into one’s system, however, GABA is substituted and overwhelmed by the foreign substance, leading to extreme mental inhibition. In long-term cases, the brain may cease to produce enough GABA, relying on alcohol to calm itself. Such scenarios are the cause of alcoholism.
Though these effects signify the dangers of alcohol, they aren’t exclusive to those under the age of 21. In fact, age groups above 21 are most heavily fraught with alcohol abuse. If such is the case, why is underage drinking particularly harmful?
The human brain naturally develops for years. Its final area of growth, the frontal lobe, is the center of decision making and general intelligence, and doesn’t stop maturing until the age of 20. During this developmental period, substances like alcohol can interfere with the mind’s growth and leave permanent damage.
Studies also indicate that adolescents handle alcohol in their system quite differently from adults. When identifying drunkenness, common symptoms typically include loss of motor control and sleepiness. In teenagers, however, these symptoms are minimal, allowing them to drink more in one sitting. The lack of symptoms also hinders others’ abilities to identify signs of impairment and offer support.
Summarily, alcohol can produce devastating consequences on the human brain at any age. Until the age of 20, however, the developing brain makes substance abuse an even greater threat to mental health, upholding the notion that the drinking age should remain 21 from a biological viewpoint.
When compared to foreign nations, America has an unusually high minimum drinking age. In fact, there are only about a dozen nations globally whose limit is 21, which dwarfs in comparison to the 100+ countries with a legal limit of 18. Given its comparatively abnormal minimum drinking age, it is easy to question the benefits America’s limit provides to its society.
Turning to statistics, the answer is rather ambiguous. Comparing global alcoholism rates by country, America stands below 2.5%, beating out most Western nations, whose drinking age limits are set at 18 or below. Simultaneously, America’s crime index of 49.2 surpasses most Western nations.
The conflicting numbers presented, in addition to a general lack of causal studies done worldwide, fail to suggest any real correlation between minimum drinking ages and related factors of societal wellbeing, which, in ways, manages to uphold the argument against America’s limit.
In American politics and policy, the freedoms of its citizens are at the forefront of every debate. In the debate over the legal drinking age, it’s justifiable to question the constitutional rights Americans may forfeit in compliance with the drinking age.
In short, there isn’t any. While Americans are guaranteed a plethora of freedoms (e.g., voting, speech), alcohol isn’t among them. To add, the age limit of 21 applies to all citizens, regardless of their ethnicity, status or background, therefore complying with the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equality.
Case in point, the battle over the drinking age must rely on science, data and morality over simple doctrine to achieve progress and conversation.
While the notion of being drafted before being allowed into a bar may seem jarring to many Americans, the reality is that alcohol can prove itself more of a burden than a luxury to the youth.
From its toxic impacts on development and health to the 4,000 deaths caused by alcohol abuse under the age of 21, it is clear that drinking is a persistent problem today, despite regulations already implemented against it.
Knowing the damage of lowering the age limit below 21 is admittedly impossible, and perhaps enticing in regard to the ongoing drinking crisis among Americans of all ages. What is known is the remarkable potential newer generations have in store for the future of society, and by withholding harmful drugs like alcohol, more people can pursue their passions and fates untouched by substance abuse.
