RSS
Teens Drinking.
The most commented story on www.saratogian.com for the past two days has been Ann Marie French's story on a police bust that resulted in 22 area teens being arrested for underage drinking.
While it's pretty clear that underage drinking is not news, 22 kids getting arrested -- and they were arrested, although arrests may not have been custodial -- is newsworthy. Personally, I can't fault the kids for drinking, or the cops for enforcing the law. And I certainly wouldn't fault us for publishing the names of those arrested, as we do anytime someone is arrested.
And yet, the story has generated a large number of comments -- 251 at this moment. Comments are generally all over the place, with people falling on both sides of the debate. I don't profess to be the authority on underage drinking, but I do think that it's wrong for kids to face criminal charges for essentially imitating adults -- how many grownups get arrested each weekend for various acts of disorderliness down on Caroline Street?
If that's the example they have to follow, of course they are going to break the law.
I have always been a proponent of lowering the drinking age. In my perfect world, kids would be allowed to drink at home with their family at 16, and allowed to buy alcohol and drink in public at 18. This way they can start to learn --hopefully -- moderate drinking habits at home before, or at least at the same time, as they are likely to start drinking with friends at parties.
Personally, I believe that this graded introduction will lead to fewer incidents of drinking-related deaths, and gives families the opportunity to talk about America's most popular drug without some of the taboos currently surrounding liquor. Also -- it is an absolute waste of time and money to have college officials worrying about who is drinking and who isn't. There are much more important issues in higher education.
Kids are going to drink one way or another, and just as we strive to teach them how to eat by relating lessons about nutrition, we should teach kids how to drink in moderation, with parental guidance.
While it's pretty clear that underage drinking is not news, 22 kids getting arrested -- and they were arrested, although arrests may not have been custodial -- is newsworthy. Personally, I can't fault the kids for drinking, or the cops for enforcing the law. And I certainly wouldn't fault us for publishing the names of those arrested, as we do anytime someone is arrested.
And yet, the story has generated a large number of comments -- 251 at this moment. Comments are generally all over the place, with people falling on both sides of the debate. I don't profess to be the authority on underage drinking, but I do think that it's wrong for kids to face criminal charges for essentially imitating adults -- how many grownups get arrested each weekend for various acts of disorderliness down on Caroline Street?
If that's the example they have to follow, of course they are going to break the law.
I have always been a proponent of lowering the drinking age. In my perfect world, kids would be allowed to drink at home with their family at 16, and allowed to buy alcohol and drink in public at 18. This way they can start to learn --hopefully -- moderate drinking habits at home before, or at least at the same time, as they are likely to start drinking with friends at parties.
Personally, I believe that this graded introduction will lead to fewer incidents of drinking-related deaths, and gives families the opportunity to talk about America's most popular drug without some of the taboos currently surrounding liquor. Also -- it is an absolute waste of time and money to have college officials worrying about who is drinking and who isn't. There are much more important issues in higher education.
Kids are going to drink one way or another, and just as we strive to teach them how to eat by relating lessons about nutrition, we should teach kids how to drink in moderation, with parental guidance.
posted by The Saratogian City Desk at
4:25 PM
6 Comments:
Underage alcohol use is more likely to kill young people than all other illegal drugs combined. Kids are also beginning to abuse alcohol ealier than you might think: Nearly 20% of eighth graders have reported being drunk, according to a survey conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
These young people are not only putting themselves in danger now, they are also affecting their futures. Underage drinking has long term consequences, both to physical and mental health.
Despite the prevalence of underage drinking, and the potential consequences, research shows that parents generally underestimate the extent to which their teen children use alcohol and even consider it inevitable.
The Centers for Disease Control report that alcohol is often involved in each of the top four leading causes of death for those under age 20: car crashes, homicide, suicide, and drowning. Because young people are inexperienced drivers, the addition of alcohol to the equation can be deadly; alcohol-related car crashes alone claim the lives of 10, 000 16-to-24-year-olds each year. In addition, alcohol use is reported in 67% of all homicides. Suicide is connected to alcohol as well; when drinking is combined with depression, it can act to push a young person “over the edge.” 68% of drowning deaths are also alcohol-related. Other injuries that teen drinkers face include falls and burns: drinkers are 16 times more likely than non-drinkers to die in a fall and ten times more likely to be burn victims than non-drinkers.
The dangers of underage drinking go beyond the increased risk of injury or death; recent research suggests that drinking alcohol during the teen years can result in irreparable brain damage and an increased likelihood for alcoholism. Because the teen brain is still developing, alcohol has a much greater effect on it than it does on the mature brain.
This damage is physically detectable; a study at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center found that the hippocampus of an underage drinker is, on average, ten percent smaller than that of a non-drinker. This information is especially troubling in light of the fact that it takes half as much alcohol to damage the brain of a teen than it does to damage the brain of an adult.
The hippocampus and the prefrontal cortex are the areas most at risk for an underage drinker. The hippocampus is involved in learning and memory, and the prefrontal cortex is involved in decision-making; excessive alcohol consumption could cause young people to lose motor skills, lower their ability to perform on tests, and increase the difficulty of learning new things.
Jim Murphy has summarized very well the adverse consequences of teenage drinking. The brain research delineating the adverse effects of teen drinking is very compelling. Remember that research on living brains is something new, and the evidence of harm grows with every study. These health and development issues alone are sufficient to support a 21 minimum drinking age law.
Andrew Bernstein shares the opinion of many about lowering the drinking age. The assumption behind his viewpoint is that young people drink excessively because it is forbidden, and they don’t learn how to drink in moderation. People often point to Europe when they make this case. The fact is that the United States has less teen binge drinking than any European country except Turkey. Ireland and Australia are among the countries in the process of raising their drinking ages because the consequences of teen drinking have become so severe.
As to the United States, drinking rates and the rates of “getting drunk” among 12 graders were at their highest point in 1979. They declined steadily in the last years of the ‘80s, (coincidentally, the national 21 drinking law was passed in 1985) and began to decline again in late 1990’s. Rates in the past two years are the lowest they have been since the national Monitoring the Future began in 1975. It is perhaps useful to note that many of today’s parents came of age in the late 70’s and early 80’s, and may believe the argument that “everyone drinks,” because their teen years occurred at the height of alcohol and drug use among high school students.
The data make it clear that the “forbidden fruit” argument doesn’t hold water. It is particularly appropriate, however, that we are discussing this matter during Super Bowl week. If you want an eye-opening experience, try to count the alcohol advertising events during the game. Include commercials, display of company names and logos on the field, every time you see alcohol messages. This experience will illustrate how overwhelmingly pro-alcohol are the social norms that influence our young people every day.
It is the family and community’s responsibility to stand up for their health, to protect them from harm and do everything we can to deliver them safely through adolescence. Young people deserve the respect that gives them recognition for their good decisions and holds them accountable for breaking the law, school codes or family rules. They deserve open conversation, clear expectations, and restorative consequences when they fail.
Mr. Murphy,
Then what can you do in our communities to provide our youth a place to be together without condemnation?
No, I don't agree with drinking but I do believe our youth need their communities to provide a place for them to be together as youth.
This is the fault of the neighborhood people calling themselves "Friends of the Southside". They are against the REC Center so these kids have nowhere to go. Bring the REC Center.
you know andrew, you're basically right. my question to the people that want to continue the prohibition, why do they not have the same problems in other countries that have a lower drinking age. if you have a solution and it only makes the matter worse, than is it a solution???? and certainly drinking a glass at home is not the end of the world. education, a real solution, in the real world people drink alcohol, like it or not.
just a small point, Mr murphy puts out a stat saying there are 10,000 crashes a years between 16-24. does that mean underage drinking now covers 24 years of age and lower? whats the percentage 16-20? people 21-24 still crash their cars, drunk or not. raise the driving to 18, and lower the drinking age to 19.
Let's hope policy makers are more like Mr. Murphy, basing decisions on research and careful deliberations, and not like Mr. Bernstein who writes based on what "I believe".
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home