Many groups are very vocal about their desire to see the legal drinking age reduced. Part of their argument stems from the fact that in most areas of life an individual is accepted as an adult at the age of 18. They can vote, enlist in military service and in most cases marry. With that amount of responsibility why shouldn't they be allowed to begin consuming alcohol legally at the same age?



Some groups assert that by lowering the drinking age a parent can help teach their child how to drink responsibly before the age of 21. Many states do allow teens to consume alcohol in the presence of their parents prior to the age of 21.

Proponents of lowering the drinking age cite 20th century prohibition as a reason to lower the age limit. The belief is that if prohibition failed because many citizens manufactured liquor in less than ideal ways to provide thirsty citizens a form of alcohol then it stands to reason that there will be those who will find ways to drink even if they have not yet reached their 21st birthday.

What many people do not understand is that the drinking age is actually set by individual states and no federal law exists for a minimum age limit for alcohol consumption. The reason many believe it is federally mandated is because in the 1980's congress pressured states into adopting a higher legal drinking age or risk losing highway funds. In the face of a potential infrastructure crisis all states eventually complied.

What research tends to suggest in relation to the staggered change in the drinking age laws is that many young people would cross state lines to consume alcohol if the adjoining state had a lower legal age limit. There is compelling research to indicate that alcohol related traffic accidents and fatalities involving those under 21 have dropped dramatically since the age limit was bumped.

Despite reports that indicate binge drinking is the norm for those under 21 there is research to support the claim that there are fewer people between 18-21 drinking in the 21st century than there was prior to the universal change.

Further study indicates vandalism rates have decreased in many states with a higher legal age limit. Studies also suggest that teen suicide rates also decline when alcohol is removed from the picture.

There are those that state what is a commonly held belief, ?Teens are going to drink anyway so why not lower the age limit so we can keep an eye on them.? This notion indicates that teens have no control over their decision-making; this same argument is used in relation to sex and drugs, yet it is clear that teens are capable of saying no to choices they conclude are unhealthy. Perhaps we are not giving them enough credit.

Where there is a strong commitment to enforcement of minor in possession laws there seems to be a corresponding reduction in problems that can be overlooked in some jurisdictions.

Lives are being saved because a law exists that seeks to help young people grow into responsible adults while attempting to keep those on the highway safe. Is the ultimate problem one where young people demand rights or parents that abdicate their role when it comes to alcohol consumption?

Someone once said people (children included) tend to rise or fall to your expectations. What do your children honestly believe you expect from them? Maybe it's time to tell them.