The Oct. 15 death of a Radford University sophomore has renewed the contentious debate about whether the legal drinking age should be lowered to reduce the occurrence of unsafe drinking practices. The Amethyst Initiative, a pledge to encourage discussion about the legal drinking age, was started two years ago and has since been backed by 135 college presidents. Former University President John T. Casteen, III did not sign the pledge during his term, but current President Teresa A. Sullivan should back the initiative. Such a move would not necessarily mean Sullivan endorses lowering the drinking age -- it would be a sign that she encourages more frank discussion about the issue.
Clearly, excessive alcohol consumption is a significant concern on college campuses across the country. The Amethyst Initiative calls for more studies to determine whether lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18 would discourage binge drinking. Sullivan's support would demonstrate that she is willing to take a stand to confront a problem that has long plagued universities.
Currently, there is not sufficient concrete evidence in favor of either argument. Some believe lowering the drinking age to 18 would not solve the problem but would actually place high-school students at greater risk. Additionally, these individuals point to medical evidence that the development of a person's frontal lobe - which impacts judgment - is not fully formed until about age 25.
Also, some individuals point to reductions in alcohol-related traffic fatalities following the nationwide increase in the legal drinking age from 18 to 21 during the 1970s and 1980s. Advocates for maintaining the current drinking age cite this statistic to demonstrate that the law is a deterrent to alcohol abuse. It is not clear, however, whether the reduction occurred because of safer vehicles or other policy changes.
On the other hand, the current drinking age creates a nonuniform standard for the responsibilities and expectations of 18-year-old adults in the United States. At the age of 18, individuals can enlist in the military, determine someone's guilt or innocence in a courtroom and marry without parental consent. Each of these decisions requires maturity and carries the expectation that these individuals will exercise sound judgment -- arguably more than is needed to consume alcohol responsibly.
In practice, the law does not successfully prevent underage individuals from obtaining alcohol. "Those who wish to lower the drinking age back to 18 argue that we know drinking is already taking place in the 18- to 21-year-old age bracket, but the current law simply forces it underground, resulting in higher levels of unsafe behaviors," Dean of Students Allen Groves said.
It is clear that more research needs to be conducted to further determine the effects of underage drinking. Although a single president's signature will not bring about more debate on its own, it would be a positive step for Sullivan to support the Amethyst Initiative. Her backing has the potential to fuel critical discussions at the University, which is one small way to contribute to the national debate.
Read More
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 7 hours agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
PARTING SHOT: Asked and answered
By Honor Wood | 12 hours agoLooking back, the answer has been abundantly clear all along. I did it for the people.
PARTING SHOT: Risk and reward
By Charlie Healy | YesterdayThe college newspaper was nowhere on my radar, and I had no previous experience with journalism.
