The Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth reported that 96% of the alcohol drunk by 15-20 year-olds is consumed when the drinker is having five or more drinks at a time. Identifying how the age of legal consumption alters behavior is as important, if not more important, than if it affects whether one first begins to legally drink.
A study of 10,271 students in the UK in the online journal Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy found that when parents provided alcohol to their children in a family environment, children were less likely to engage in binge drinking and experience negative drinking outcomes. This rigorous study confirms cultural evidence from many other countries: drinking alcohol in the presence of parents has a protective affect against binge drinking.
Experiments have shown that despite age, the adolescent brain actually maintains better balance, reaction time, and hand eye coordination than an adult brain under the same level of alcohol impairment. While some researchers use that evidence to assert that it allows young adults to get drunker before becoming incapacitated, is it not an equally valid assertion that under the same level of alcohol impairment the young adult driver would perform better than the older driver?
If you thought that Alcopops encouraged drinking amongst young adults, wait until you hear about a new craze: ShotPaks. ShotPaks are small, shot-sized alcoholic drinks that come in little plastic pouches—perfect for a drinker on the go, according to manufacturers. Marketed as a “party in a pouch,” ShotPaks are sweet, sugary drinks called “Purple Hooters” and “Kamikazes,” although the more serious drinker may want to pick up the “STR8UP” ShotPaks, which contain only straight liquor without any mixer.
Sure, there may be no glass to break, and therefore ShotPaks might seem safer at events like concerts and sports games. However, the real danger is that the small size and sweet taste of ShotPaks make them tasty, easily concealable and, in other words, very appealing to underage drinkers. By helping to push drinking more undercover, ShotPaks make binge drinking even harder to monitor amongst both underage and of-age drinkers—something that have dangerous consequences.
The results of a nationwide survey looking at the social context of underage alcohol use, performed by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, were released today. This National Survey on Drug Use and Health looked at many aspects of alcohol use and drinking behaviors amongst 12-20 year olds, and the major finding capturing the headlines is that underage drinkers are obtaining alcohol from adults, including parents and guardians. Blaming parents and adult family members for underage alcohol use and labeling them as “enablers” may be a hasty conclusion, however. The study indicates that 40% of underage drinkers obtained alcohol from an adult (someone over 21) for free in the past month. However, one in four youths received alcohol from an unknown adult, and only one in twelve youths received alcohol from a parent or guardian.
More importantly, the study does not clearly specify how parents are giving their kids alcohol. A glass of wine at a family dinner might be statistically the same as a mother buying a keg for a son’s graduation party; however, the implications of these actions are much different. Conclusions from the study stress that parents should be involved by providing proper guidance and ensuring their kids’ safety by preventing them from the dangerous act of drinking. Is it possible, however, that allowing a son or daughter a glass of wine with dinner helps teach responsible drinking, and thus can be considered parental guidance? A recent Time Magazine article discussed in a June 20th post does an excellent job debating this issue.
In general, we are having a hard time seeing how the results of this study support a legal age 21. Kids are finding alcohol and drinking underage, and one in five underage drinkers have binged at least once in the last month. Moreover, this drinking is happening in private, unsupervised locations, and over half of underage drinkers have drank in someone else’s room or house during the past month. If you ask us, that is more scary than the fact that some youths are sharing a beer with mom and dad.
We encourage you to visit this ABC article for more information, links, and comments.
“Should You Drink with Your Kids?,” published in the June 30th Issue of Time Magazine, is an insightful and balanced article on underage drinking and the drinking age. Aside from addressing multiple points of view on the topic of underage drinking and drinking with parental supervision, we think that it does an excellent job of citing appropriate research and raising some important points about drinking and public health that are at the center of many of Choose Responsibility’s ideas. We particularly like its attention to the problem of binge drinking and what may be contributing to increases in binge drinking rates over the last few years. We encourage you to check out the article and, as always, we welcome your comments and questions.
We have previously commented on the growing popularity of “alcopops” and our concern that their advertised reputation as sweet drinks masking the taste of liquor, while delivering intoxication, makes them appeal to underage drinkers. Alcopops are usually sold in stores’ beer aisles, also making them popular among underage drinkers, who most frequently choose beer as their drink of choice. Large-scale consumption of these drinks by young and underage drinkers fuels the binge-drinking problem in this country, and so we were happy to read that California has recently decided to regulate and tax alcopops as distilled spirits and not as beers. The change, which will take place in October, will tax alcopops with the current liquor tax of $3.30 per gallon, up from $0.20 per gallon, the current tax on beer.
We believe that increasing the tax on alcopops will help decrease their consumption amongst underage drinkers since a higher price tag should decrease their appeal amongst consumers. In fact, past studies have indicated that throughout history, higher taxes on alcohol have led to a decreased likelihood of heavy drinking and binge drinking. Higher alcohol prices have also been correlated with decreased rates of underage drinking, sexually transmitted diseases, and traffic fatalities in the past…nothing wrong with that!
Recent comments on our May 27th, 2008 post argue that using higher taxes to deter alcohol consumption is a neo-prohibitionist approach and that focus should be placed on responsible drinking and not the type of alcohol consumed. However, we believe that alcopops are a unique case and that increasing the tax on these beverages is an appropriate strategy to combat irresponsible drinking. Alcopops appeal to underage and young drinkers, who are most likely to binge drink, and so making them less appealing by raising their price targets irresponsible drinking within this age group. This, coupled with the fact that studies have shown that higher prices deter alcohol abuse, suggests that increasing the tax on alcopops will be effective in reducing irresponsible binge drinking. Of course, we hope that measures to teach responsible drinking, such as education programs on safe alcohol consumption, are adopted along with these adjustments in taxes. With any luck, other states will begin to follow California’s lead and reconsider their tax policies for liquor in the near future.
To read more on the studies mentioned above, see Paying the Tab: The Costs and Benefits of Alcohol Control, by Philip J. Cook—a very interesting read.
Over 100 high-school students from New Jersey were caught and breathalyzed this past Friday night when police broke up a party in West Dover, VT, the Rutland Herald reported on Sunday. The police ended what was supposed to be a three-day after-prom party, taking place at three houses that the teens had rented, and 62 students received citations for being in possession of a malt beverage. Such a large scale party once again brings to light the issues of underage drinking and binge drinking, and the party’s isolated location in Southern Vermont highlights the problem of the secretiveness, stealth, and complex planning that often accompanies underage drinking—something that can increase its dangerousness.
The New Jersey teens are most likely juniors and seniors in high school and, therefore, would still be unable to drink even if the drinking age was 18. However, the furtive nature of their party and the huge quantity of alcohol present (police found 18 kegs of beer, 8 bottles of vodka, and 5 cases of beer) demonstrates a culture of secret binge drinking characterized by strategic planning, execution, and excessiveness that transcends the high-school/college boundary and is present amongst high school and college students, alike. Not being allowed to drink in public, such as at bars and restaurants, fuels this binge drinking culture, as young adults are driven to drink heavily in short amounts of time, in an attempt to “pre-game” parties and events.
The recent Vermont party also raises the issue of parental enabling of underage drinking, since the fact that the teens had three rented houses and such a large amount of alcohol suggests that parents may have been involved in planning the party. Recently, social host laws have been enacted in some communities to try and inhibit this parental involvement by claiming that parents will be held responsible and steeply fined for underage drinking in their homes. As the details of the Vermont party are investigated further, more information as to the involvement of parents will hopefully become available.
April is Alcohol Awareness Month and organizations across the nation are focusing on alcohol and its many implications for our society. Pertinently, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA), a government agency that deals with issues related to alcohol and underage drinking, is hosting a series of 1,600 town hall-style meetings across the country this week and next. These meetings are informal get-togethers whose goal is to bring together people from various roles within a community—parents, teens, law enforcement, educators, elected officials—to discuss and raise awareness of underage drinking.
We encourage you to attend a meeting near you, and to participate in the discussion. [CR] volunteer Beau Weston attended a meeting in Danville, KY where he brought up Choose Responsibility’s concept of alcohol education and licensing. “The drinking license idea was clearly new to most people there,” said Weston, “but only one was set against it, and most were willing to give it a hearing.” Check here for a list of meetings in your state, and find one to attend in your area. Email Grace Kronenberg at [CR] if you have questions about what to say!
Drunken acts of vandalism were recently inflicted upon Robert Frost’s historic Vermont farmhouse, prompting questions about the connection between the drinking age and destructive party environments. We strongly believe that what transpired on Frost Lane cannot and should not be connected to the drinking age, but rather, speaks to the lack of alcohol education and widespread disrespect for law amongst young adults.
In this case, the perpetrators were all under-18 — true minors by every standard marker of adulthood — eroding plausible connections to the drinking age. However, what the New York Times has coined a “violation of both the law and the spirit” (nice pun!) exemplifies the problematic culture of alcohol permeating youth circles in America. Drinking to excess is often seen as a noble act, and destroying property in the Homer Noble Farm (or dorm hallways, for that matter) an accepted rite of passage. Young adults need to receive a thorough alcohol education — one that is reality-based, interactive, and can curb unlawful and disrespectful behavior.
In reforming youth attitudes towards the law, there are miles to go before we sleep. But try, we must.