Patel 1

Siddhi Patel
Mrs. Pettay
ENG 112
25 March 2016
The Drinking Age Controversy
Since 1984, the minimum drinking age all across the United States has been set at
twenty-one. The issue of alcohol consumption was first highly debated during the Prohibition
era, which occurred from the 1920s to the early 1930s. The Eighteenth Amendment was passed
to ban alcohol and as an attempt to decrease the evils of alcohol. Speakeasies soon started to
pop up all over the United States and the Twenty-First Amendment was passed, which repealed
the Eighteenth Amendment. The minimum legal drinking age has recently emerged as a highly
debated topic. Some believe the minimum legal drinking age should remain at twenty-one, but
others believe the drinking age should be dropped to eighteen. The issue of the minimum
drinking age has positives and negatives, but the ultimate question is whether or not the drinking
age should be lowered.
Many people all over the United States believe the legal drinking age should not be
lowered. One of the biggest reasons given as to why the drinking age should remain at twentyone would be because the frontal lobe of teens is not fully developed. Drinking alcohol can
interfere with development process, which can lead to chronic problems such as memory loss
or reduced decision-making ability (procon.org). I do agree with this reason because the health of
a person is important, so if alcohol can severely reduce the decision making process then alcohol
should be restrained until the age of twenty-one. Many have also stated the drinking age of
twenty-one would reduce the amount of alcohol related accidents. According to the National

Patel 2
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) of twenty-one
has decreased the number of fatal traffic accidents for eighteen to twenty year-olds by 13%.
Tamika C.B. Zapolski, PhD, Assistant Professor of Psychology at Indiana University, stated
lowering the drinking age would be harmful because those who are most likely to the be
harmed by alcohol will have greater access to alcohol. By keeping the MLDA at twenty-one,
the opponents are promoting the safety of teens and the public.
On the other hand, many people, including me, believe the drinking age should be
lowered. Many people argue saying eighteen is the age of adulthood (procon.org). When
someone turns eighteen, they have the rights and responsibilities to vote, serve on juries, join the
military and be prosecuted as an adult. One of the only downsides to turning eighteen is that we
still cannot consume alcohol. If an eighteen year old can go fight, and in certain cases die, for his
or her country, then why can they not consume alcohol legally? If the minimum legal drinking
age were lowered, the thrill to break the law would also diminish (procon.org). Teens have a
tendency to be rebellious and one way they are rebellious is through underage drinking. If the
MLDA was lowered to eighteen, the amount of underage drinkers would be reduced. We already
tried to limit alcohol by putting a ban on it in the 1920s, and the ban ended up not working. As S.
Georgia Nugent, PhD, Interim President of Wooster College, said Americas earlier ban of
alcohol was a notorious failure, so by limiting alcohol to people twenty-one and older we are
enacting another prohibition that is not working.
Clearly, both sides of this issue have well supported arguments. One side believes the
MLDA should remain at twenty-one due to reasons that include the frontal lobe not being fully
developed and drinking can lead to the use of illicit drugs (procon.org). The other side believes
the MLDA should be reduced because eighteen is the age of majority and it can diminish the

Patel 3
thrill of drinking illegally. The solution to the drinking age controversy is a balanced approach to
promoting safe drinking. Drinking and driving is an increasing problem in the United States.
According to the Center for Disease Control, young men between the age of twenty-one and
thirty-four were responsible for 32% of all instances of drinking and driving. Both sides of this
issue can come together for a panel discussion, made specifically for teenagers, regarding the
issue of drinking and driving. They could promote the dangers of driving while intoxicated and
then have survivors from drinking and driving accidents present their experience. The panel
discussion could be held in schools, more specifically in high schools, so it would be easier to
get teens to go to the presentation. A panel discussion will allow both sides of this argument to
come together as one unit to promote the dangers of drinking and driving.
The debate over the minimum drinking age is not going disappear any time soon.
Opponents of lowering the drinking age believe keeping the MLDA at twenty-one will reduce
risk of memory loss, while proponents of lowering the drinking age believe eighteen is the age
of the majority, so everyone should be allowed to drink at that age. Its time to rethink the
drinking age because an evolving society. By lowering the drinking age, teens will not have to
secretly drink alcohol, which can lead to them drinking and driving. Hopefully the opponents of
lowering the drinking age can see that to keep up with society, the drinking age should be
lowered.

Works Cited
"Should the Drinking Age Be Lowered from 21 to a Younger Age? ProCon.org. ProCon.org,
10 Mar. 2016. Web. 22 Mar. 2016.

Patel 4