Related Articles

7 Comments

  1. 1

    Bogdanovist

    I don’t think many people would disagree, but I think this misses the point of the argument slightly. We could raise the drinking age and we’d get some of the above benefits. We could even ban alcohol altogether, or make it insanely expensive via taxation, and get even more benefit across the community. This is not fundamentally in dispute, so pointing out that the evidence is ‘scientific’ doesn’t really get you any further in the debate.

    The question is whether society wants to forgo the pleasures of drinking in order to make these gains. At present I’d say that’s a resounding no. Not because people want to ‘bypass decades of scientific research evidence’ but because people accept that there is always a trade off between pleasure and risk.

    As a scientist, I cringe when I see people trying to beat society over the head with ‘the scientific evidence’, especially when that evidence accords with common sense anyway, but then ignore the more complex cultural questions. We can’t reduce this debate to simply an exercise in statistics.

    Reply
  2. 2

    Doctor Whom

    I can’t really see how rising the drinking age to 21 or so will stop 14, 15 16, 17 years olds from drinking.

    They do now. They did when I was young. And they will in the future.

    A thing most people forget is that drinking, and drinking too much, is generally bloody great fun when you are young. It’s even good fun for a few older people.

    Drinking and driving isn’t fun.

    I want to see figures on how many of those killed in road accidents X age – were in a car driven by an unlicensed driver or a drunk driver or a driver over 22. We already have laws against drunk or unlicensed driving.

    I think the increases in crashes and crime noted above have too many confounding variables to note much more than a correlation.

    Reply
  3. 3

    Andrew G

    I had some great times with mates drinking at 16, 17 and beyond. No fights or drink driving incidents, just great times with mates and great memories that we still talk about now we are in our mid 20’s.

    People from the suburbs with parents who aren’t great role models get bored and do silly things. no-one is willing to say that but I think thats the main cause.

    Reply
  4. 4

    peach1

    Raising the drinking age will not solve the problem.

    A better approach would be to leave the drunks where they fall over and not waste time by taking them to the hospital.
    If they wake up a few times covered in their own vomit in the gutter they may learn a bit.
    Those who beat each other up should be also left in the street. Perhaps if they are half bled to death and covered in bruises that hurt once the sobered up plus missing a few teeth they may realize getting pissed isn’t worth that much trouble.

    Lets face it do you want your Medicare levy (tax dollars) dollars be spent on some drunk who caused it ,what ever his problem is, himself.

    Have those that despite the above approach are still admitted pay four times the cost of the stay and treatment ( no Medicare) and you will find they won’t have the money for getting pissed for a number of weeks.

    It is an approach worth trying.

    Reply
  5. 5

    Doctor Whom

    peach1 – and why boot not smokers out of health care and doddery old farts on zimmer frames who stagger out on the road 10 meters form lights and get run over and any chubby bugger who is drinking a can of soft drink and idiots who crash their cars and silly old coots who fall and break their hips after too much cooking sherry……

    Reply
  6. 6

    chantel

    I doubt anyone would disagree with this statement on evidence based support on raising the drinking age, as alcohol consumption is particularly high in this country especially amongst those aged between 18-25.

    But I have to wonder with all of this scientific evidence, how many people actually read it and take on board what’s being put forward and say “well now that it’s been scientifically proven, I better stop?” unfortunately, not enough. We’ve all heard that excessive drinking especially from an early age can cause problems in later life especially with alcohol dependency and other related health issues.

    The Alcohol use and Harms (2009) study found supporting evidence to suggest that adolescents are consuming alcohol at an earlier age with most drinking at levels their health and others at risk. Though with all of this evidence available for public viewing why is there still a problem with under age drinking and how can raising the drinking age combat such a widespread and growing problem.

    I think there is too much focus on accident related concerns rather than social ones and influences on why adolescents are more likely to engage in risky drinking behaviours. For example many studies in both Australia and the US have found that alcohol consumption in adolescents was significantly higher amongst adolescents who socialize with other adolescents who drink rather than those engaging in other activities, making it a social issue. Or the fact that parents are also a major influence on their children’s drinking behaviours. Some studies found that parent’s who drank excessively himself or herself were more likely to condone their own children’s drinking behaviours.

    From a political perspective do you think that raising the legal drinking age will gain many if any votes from anyone between the age of 18-21? When Rudd was on Q&A on February 8 he was asked a question on whether the drinking age should be raised to 21 (to which he initially said “of course”, before realising he had inadvertently given a straight answer and backpedalling.) The question is why do you think that he felt he had to do that? Not that it matters as he soon learned later that taking a strong stance on something can in the long run be political suicide.

    Don’t get me wrong I don’t disagree with what has been presented in recent papers, and especially with the argument put forward by Chikritzhs, however if most people were to do their own research they might actually find that some of the studies conducted in the US on traffic related accidents found that the most common age of those involved in car accidents is actually 18-25 with most unrelated to alcohol, along with crime and violence being more drug related than alcohol.

    I guess at the end of the day regardless of whatever information is put out there even with the scientific evidence to support it, people are still going to make their own decisions based on other factors and besides do you think that raising the age will actually deter anyone from drinking when it doesn’t seem to now?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

© 2015 – 2019 Croakey | Website: Rock Lily Design

right-share-menu

Follow Croakey