By Rebecca Tolpin ’14, Staff Writer

For many years, families in the United States have faced the problem of underage drinking. According to a November report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, more than one quarter of young people aged 12-20 reported drinking alcohol in the month prior to being surveyed. Perhaps counter-intuitively, however, lowering the drinking age could be beneficial for two reasons. One is that students can be educated about the dangers of alcohol and excessive drinking if they try alcohol in a safe environment. Two is that lowering the drinking age would remove much of the temptation surrounding illegal alcohol consumption.

Many of the upperclassmen I interviewed agreed that the drinking age should be lowered. Zoe Rollenhagen ’14 said, “If you can fight the army, you should be allowed to drink.” Marisa Tomaino `13 agreed that drinking is less of a responsibility than military service. Greta Skagerlind ’14 also said that “everything should be allowed at eighteen years old.” In other words, both Zoe and Greta think that the legal consumption of alcohol should accompany the ability to join the army, vote, and register as an independent adult.

Current alcohol policy is irresponsible because it ultimately does not accord with reality. As Coleman Hughes ’14 stated, “People drink anyway [whether it is legal or not.]” Coleman expressed the danger of underage drinking, observing that “a lot of college kids quietly drink themselves to death with large amounts of alcohol.” If they are not educated about the dangers of alcohol, such as alcohol poisoning, then students put themselves at risk of damaging or even fatal health effects.

By lowering the drinking age, alcohol can be introduced in the home by parents. Many cultures outside of America, such as in Europe, already do this. Mr. Gertler, a former health teacher at Newark Academy who now works in the Advancement Office, said that when young kids in other cultures drink with their parents during dinner, “it is not a big deal because it is a cultural tradition.” Drinking alcohol with your parents at home–perhaps, for instance, having a glass of wine or beer with dinner–is a safer way for teenagers to be introduced to alcohol. “If you drink with your parents then you won’t be as irresponsible about it,” said Alena Farber `13. It discourages teenagers from drinking in a harmful and excessive way: if allowed to drink reasonably at home, young people would be less likely to binge drink in college. As Flannery James ’14 stated, “If you drink small amounts of alcohol at sixteen with your parents, then you will better know how to handle it when you’re older.” The more a young person knows about his or her tolerance level, the less likely it is that he or she will overdose.

There is a major caveat to lowering the drinking age–the risk of drunk driving. Mr. Gertler said, “Yes, we should lower the drinking age, but it’s not that simple, because it doesn’t address the fact that students have the propensity to drink and drive.” Although Mr. Gertler acknowledged that driving is convenient and useful, it is also very dangerous if alcohol is involved. Mr. Gertler said that “students should know the effects of alcohol before doing unsupervised activities such as driving or going to college.” Mr. Gertler has the same view as Flannery, Zoe, and Coleman that alcohol exposure and education must be given to young people before they are twenty-one years old.

Lowering the drinking age from twenty-one years would enable young people to test their own limits under the relatively safe guise of their parents rather than at a party or in a college dorm room. If a young person can try alcohol for the first time in a familiar environment, then he or she is less likely to drink irresponsibly in the future. Besides, changing the drinking policy will remove the excitement  surrounding a currently illegal act. A lower drinking age normalizes alcohol consumption, which removes the seduction of thrill.