Since 1984, the national minimumlegal age for drinking alcohol has been 21. In2009, a group of 135 college and universitypresidents endorsed the Amethyst Initiative—anadvocacy proposal that comments on the failureof current policies to socialize young peopleto handle alcohol responsibly and encouragesstudy and public debate about finding betterideas. Included among the ideas for debate waslowering the drinking age to 18. Estimates arethat each year about 5,000 people under the ageof 21 die as a result of underage drinking (frommotor vehicle crashes, homicides, suicides, etc.).Proponents argue that the current drinkingage has not stopped excessive alcohol consumption, but it has pushed it out of the open to whereit cannot be monitored. Rather than reducingdrinking after driving, it may actually be leading to an increase as parties move from oncampus to off-campus. Opponents of loweringthe drinking age argue that such a move wouldsimply push the dangers of excessive alcoholconsumption—to personal health and safety andto that of others—to a younger age, and that itmight lead to an increase in driving after drinking among this age group. Meanwhile, socialscientists and public health experts have begunto try to document the likely effects of maintaining the current policy or revising it (Wechslerand Nelson, 2010).What would you identify as being the likelyconsequences—positive and/or negative—of lowering the drinking age to 18? As a socialscientist, how could you study this issue? Whatare the key arguments on both sides of theissue?
Since 1984, the national minimum
legal age for drinking alcohol has been 21. In
2009, a group of 135 college and university
presidents endorsed the Amethyst Initiative—an
advocacy proposal that comments on the failure
of current policies to socialize young people
to handle alcohol responsibly and encourages
study and public debate about finding better
ideas. Included among the ideas for debate was
lowering the drinking age to 18. Estimates are
that each year about 5,000 people under the age
of 21 die as a result of underage drinking (from
motor vehicle crashes, homicides, suicides, etc.).
Proponents argue that the current drinking
age has not stopped excessive alcohol consumption, but it has pushed it out of the open to where
it cannot be monitored. Rather than reducing
drinking after driving, it may actually be leading to an increase as parties move from oncampus to off-campus. Opponents of lowering
the drinking age argue that such a move would
simply push the dangers of excessive alcohol
consumption—to personal health and safety and
to that of others—to a younger age, and that it
might lead to an increase in driving after drinking among this age group. Meanwhile, social
scientists and public health experts have begun
to try to document the likely effects of maintaining the current policy or revising it (Wechsler
and Nelson, 2010).
What would you identify as being the likely
consequences—positive and/or negative—of lowering the drinking age to 18? As a social
scientist, how could you study this issue? What
are the key arguments on both sides of the
issue?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
