Underage Drinking

To get ideas for what to write on this blog, I set up Google News alerts for the words "underage", "youth" and "juvenile". It's interesting to see which terms bring up what stories.

By far the most common news story involving the word "underage" centers on drinking by under-21 year olds, their parties, and the consequences, both legal and life-altering, that sometimes ensues.

Now having been an under-21 year old drinker for most of my life, from the moment the mohle put a few drops of wine on my lips, just before the unkindest of cuts, until I reached the age of maturity on June 27, 2000, (That's not actually true, I'm pretty sure I was legal to drink the semester I studied abroad in Ghana. I'm not sure what the drinking age is there, but no one ever asked me for ID, just money.) I know a little bit about underage drinking.

I'm not saying this isn't a phenomenon worthy of news coverage and discussion by those concerned with youth. Afterall, there are real adverse consequences for the teens themselves, to say nothing of society, especially around the issues of driving drunk. But there seems to be an increase in the media hype and hysteria around the issue of underage drinking that it begs a few questions.

First, what makes this news? There has always been illicit alcohol consumption, as long as alcohol has been illegal for certain groups, usually -- but not always -- distinguished by age.

Second, given that there will always be some underage drinking, what should our society's response be? Should we go after the driver's license of anyone caught with alcohol before they turn 21, as has been recently proposed in Oregon?

Should we target the parties where underage drinkers congregate? What if the parties are under control? What if our societal response was to create incentives young people to drink responsibly and then reward them when they do so, at least with some official benign neglect of their legal trangression?

I'd prefer some sort of broad social acknowledgement that most people who consume alcohol have done so before they reached 21, to the increasing legal consequences and penalties that we, as a society, have fallen in love with over the last 2 decades, to the almost complete exclusion of other solutions.

I'm thrilled that drunk driving has gone down since the drinking age became 21 nationwide. Is it possible that this is a result of increased education and awareness among teens, and not increased criminal penalties? That certainly seems to be the case for the late-'90s decline in youth tobacco smoking.

But it vexes me that an 18 year old is old enough to vote and die in the military, but can't buy a beer when he or she is home on leave. Perhaps the answer lies in licensing the drinking behavior of young people, and while we're at it, why not all people? Make them take a test that shows knowledge of alcohol absorption rates, alcohol by volume amounts of different drinks, etc. Rather than revoke their driver's license if they're caught drinking irresponsibly-- but not driving -- take away their license to drink.

Would this approach increase the number of underage drinkers? Probably, at least in the short-term. But at least we could be confident that all the licensed drinkers demonstrated sufficent knowledge to pass the test.

And would that then mean an increase in the collateral consequences associated with drinking? Perhaps. But that is why it is necessary to stress to impressionable young people especially, that our problem as a society, isn't with what or how much you drink, but how you behave when you've been drinking and that you're aware of the risks versus rewards when you drink.

If you're not a problem drinker, and don't cause problems for anyone else, then I think we should stop punishing people for what they put into their bodies, even if we don't like the age at which they're doing it. With my background in drug policy reform -- from a youth's perspective -- I've watched the larger national groups (NORML, DPA, MPP, etc.) bend over backwards to figure out a way to make drugs legal for adults, while maintaining its illegal status for young people, either under 18 or 21.

I don't think there is a way. But I'd be interested in hearing from others with different ideas.

It strikes me that the best way to get young people to not do something is to educate them on the reasons why that something is a bad idea. Criminal penalties can be a part of that, but we will never succeed if that's the only strategy. After all, it's not the size of the penalty that deters people, but their evalution of the likelihood that such a penalty would be imposed upon them.

So should we go after every underage drinker to increase that likelihood? Or would it be better to teach people to exercise responsible behavior and then hold them to that expectation?