The repeal of prohibition by the 21st Amendment on December 5, 1933, allowed each state to establish its own laws on alcohol consumption. At the time, most states set the legal drinking age (MLDA) at 21. In the late 1970s, some states raised their minimum age to combat the incidence of impaired driving. Why is the legal drinking age 21 and not 18? As can be seen in the table below, since the repeal of prohibition in 1933, there has been great volatility in the age of alcohol consumption in the states. Shortly after the 21st Amendment was ratified in December, most states set their purchasing age at 21, which was the voting age at the time. Most of these limits remained constant until the early 1970s. From 1969 to 1976, about 30 states lowered their purchasing age, usually to 18. This was largely due to the fact that the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 with the passage of the 26th Amendment in 1971. Many states began lowering their minimum drinking age, most in 1972 or 1973.
[2] [3] [4] Twelve states have maintained their purchasing age at 21 since the repeal of prohibition and have never changed it. Despite these improvements, too many teenagers still drink. In 2012, 42% of Grade 12 students, 28% of Grade 10 students, and 11% of Grade 8 students reported drinking alcohol in the past 30 days. In the same year, approximately 24% of Grade 12 students, 16% of Grade 10 students, and 5% of Grade 8 students reported excessive drinking in the past two weeks. In most European countries, the minimum age to consume alcohol is 18, while some countries even allow legal consumption at the age of 16. In addition to increased enforcement of the MLDA, other procedures and policies can be implemented to improve the effectiveness of MLDA laws. To ensure that adults do not sell or supply alcohol to minors, public and institutional policies can be developed that complement the MLDA laws (Wagenaar et al. 1996a). For example, liquor establishments may implement a variety of policies and practices, including (1) requiring all liquor servers to receive training on responsible service to verify age identification and refuse sale to teens, (2) implementing server monitoring systems to prevent illegal sales to teens, and (3) implement warning labels (Wolfson et al., 1996a, b).
Wolfson and colleagues (1996a,b) found that establishments that met these guidelines were less likely to sell alcohol to young women who appeared to be under 21 years of age and did not provide age identification. Question: How can researchers be sure that the decline in alcohol-related injury rates among 19- and 20-year-olds after the MLDA dropped to 21 is related to MLDA policies? Germany is one of the most interesting countries when it comes to the minimum drinking age. It has one of the lowest minimum drinking ages in the world, allowing teenagers to drink alcohol at the age of 14 if accompanied by an adult. Given the low level of enforcement action, it is not surprising that many adults do not hesitate to sell or give alcohol to minors. In order to act as a deterrent, we need to increase the likelihood that we will have negative consequences for the illegal sale or supply of alcohol to young people. One approach is to encourage ABC and local law enforcement agencies to strengthen enforcement against illicit liquor suppliers. Preusser and colleagues (1994) found a dramatic decline in alcohol sales to minors (from 59% initially to 26% 1 year later) after an enforcement campaign involving three «stabbing operations» in which underage men attempted to purchase alcohol. In recent years, Europe has reconsidered its minimum drinking age, its alcohol policy and what they commonly call drunk driving across the Atlantic. However, the European Union`s progress report on the 2009 alcohol strategy also highlights other factors that have reduced the number of drunk driving deaths, such as lowering blood alcohol limits without increasing the MLDA. All fifty states had raised their minimum drinking age to 21 by the summer of 1988. South Dakota and Wyoming were the last states to comply with the change. An in-depth review of enforcement actions in 295 counties in 4 states (Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, and Oregon) found that over a 3-year period, 27% of counties took no action against licensed establishments selling liquor to minors, and 41% of those counties did not arrest adults who provided liquor to minors (Wagenaar and Wolfson, 1995).
States were chosen because of the diversity of their alcohol control systems and the availability of data. While the majority of counties have taken at least one action against liquor establishments and adults who provide alcohol to teens, many have not taken action frequently. In examining the success of another country with a particular policy, one cannot simply compare international rates of alcohol-related problems without assessing the role of factors contributing to the problems. Many cultural, political and social conditions, which differ from country to country, influence the rate of alcohol consumption. The most robust research, though conducted in the United States, has shown a strong inverse relationship between MLDA and alcohol consumption and associated problems: As MLDA increases, alcohol-related problems decrease in adolescents. As MLDA changes occur in Europe, researchers will be able to more accurately determine the effects of higher MLDA on alcohol-related problems in European adolescents. Q: If people can`t legally drink until they`re 21, will they just drink more when they reach MLDA? Answer: Different activities have different ages of initiation: a person can drive a car at 16, participate in elections, serve in the army at 18, and serve as president at 35. These limitations are based on the demands of specific activities (e.g., motor skills, judgment, and experience) and take into account the risks and benefits of participation in different age groups (Fall, 1985). For example, research shows that adolescents are more likely to be impaired than adults at a certain blood alcohol level.
Underage drinking is closely linked to serious public health problems, including injuries and deaths from car accidents, homicides, assaults and recreational injuries. As a result, policymakers and researchers have come to believe that the risk to youth and society in general can be reduced by excluding people under the age of 21 from alcohol consumption. * For established religious purposes;* If a person under twenty-one years of age is accompanied by a parent, spouse or guardian twenty-one years of age or older;* For medical purposes, if purchased as an over-the-counter drug or prescribed or administered by a physician, pharmacist, dentist, nurse, a hospital or an authorized medical facility;* In a private dwelling, which includes a residential dwelling and up to twenty contiguous hectares on which the dwelling belonging to the same person who owns it is situated;* the sale, handling, transport or service of supplying alcoholic beverages on the basis of the lawful ownership of an establishment or the lawful employment of a person under twenty-one years of age by a duly licensed producer, wholesaler or retailer of alcoholic beverages. Commercial establishments licensed to sell alcohol, as well as social sources, face criminal penalties, fines, licence suspensions and prosecution for selling or supplying alcohol to minors. Why do they still provide alcohol to teenagers? One reason for this is that policies are not actively enforced. For policies to effectively prevent certain behaviours, people must believe that they have a chance to get caught and face quick consequences if they do not comply (Gibbs, 1975; Ross, 1992). Wolfson and colleagues (1996b) found that only 38% of alcohol dealers surveyed thought they were likely to be cited for selling alcohol to minors. More research is needed to determine whether social sources are aware of their legal responsibility for providing alcohol to adolescents and whether they see a high likelihood of being punished for it.