2010/02: Should the legal drinking age in Australia be raised?

Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window

Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).

Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis

For later or follow-up newspaper items (additional to the items displayed in the newspaper items section at left) , go back to the Newspaper Index section of the Echo site

2010/02: Should the legal drinking age in Australia be raised? Should the legal drinking age in Australia be raised?

2010/02: Should the legal drinking age in Australia be raised?

What they said...
'One of the most toxic things that a young brain can encounter is a high level of blood alcohol'
Professor Ian Hickie, the executive director of Sydney University's Brain and Mind Research Institute

'Alcohol will always be a part of Australian culture. And an overwhelming majority of Australians consume alcohol responsibly and want to continue to be able to do so'
Hugh Tobin, the managing editor of the Institute of Public Affairs Review

The issue at a glance
On November 19, 2009, Professor Ian Hickie, the executive director of Sydney University's Brain and Mind Research Institute called for the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, to push for the legal drinking age in Australia to be raised to 19 in order to break the connection between school leaving and drinking.
Professor Hickie was responding to international research which demonstrates that the brains of adolescents and those in their early twenties are particularly susceptible to damage from alcohol.
The following day, November 20, 2009, the federal Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, dismissed calls to increase the drinking age.
The minister said the Government's preventive health task force had not called for an increase in the drinking age. Ms Roxon stated, 'Of course people in the community will raise these issues and will continue to do that and we will, of course, continue to follow that debate.' At this point, however, the federal government appears to have no plans to precipitate that debate.
Dr John Herron, the chairman of the government-appointed Australian National Council on Drugs, supported Professor Hickie's call. Rob Moodie, the chairman of the preventive health task force, said he was not against lifting the drinking age but that we should focus on enforcing current legislation.

Background
(The information relating to alcohol-related problems in Australia is largely taken from 'Preventing Alcohol-related harm in Australia: a window of opportunity', prepared for the Preventative Health Task force by the Alcohol Working Group including addendum for October 2008 to June 2009. The index to the full text of this document can be found at http://www.health.gov.au/internet/preventativehealth/publishing.nsf/Content/tech-alcohol
The information relating to the United States was taken from 'Alcohol - Problems and Solutions. The full text of this document can be read at http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/LegalDrinkingAge.html)

The legal drinking age refers to the earliest age at which a person is legally allowed to buy alcoholic beverages. This may be different from the age at which they are permitted to drink alcohol, especially in the privacy of their home. The legal drinking age varies around the world - from countries in Europe where people may consume alcoholic beverages at a young age (generally 16 or 17) to states in India where the drinking age is as high as 25. Some Islamic nations prohibit alcohol consumption by Muslims, and others prohibit it by anyone.

Drinking behaviour in Australia
Almost three-quarters (72.6%) of Australians drink below levels that would incur long-term risk of harm. However, among young adults (aged 20-29 years), the prevalence of drinking
at levels posing long-term risk of harm is significantly higher (16%) than among other
age groups (see Fig. 3). This pattern of drinking is the equivalent of consuming 29 or more standard drinks per week for males and 15 or more standard drinks per week for females. Among Australian teenagers in 2007, this drinking pattern was considerably higher among females (10.6%) than among males (7%).
For persons aged 10-19 years receiving treatment for alcohol problems, the proportion treated has increased from 15% to 23% between 2001-2002 and 2005-2006.
Rates of risky drinking in Australia peak amongst young people, and alcohol-related harm is substantial for both adolescents and young adults. Drinking contributes to the three leading causes of death among adolescents - unintentional injuries, homicide and suicide - along with risk-taking behaviour, unsafe sex choices, sexual coercion and alcohol overdose. A recent study of self-reported harm found that drinkers under the age of 15 years are much more likely than older drinkers to experience risky or antisocial behaviour connected with their drinking, and the rates are also somewhat elevated among drinkers aged 15-17 years. Furthermore, initiation of alcohol use at a young age may increase the likelihood of negative physical and mental health conditions, social problems and alcohol dependence.

The situation in the United States
Though it is commonly believed that the minimum drinking age in the United States is 21, there are a variety of exemptions that make it possible to do so earlier.
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required all states to raise their minimum purchase and public possession of alcohol age to 21. States that did not comply faced a reduction in highway funds under the Federal Highway Aid Act. However, it does not prohibit persons under 21 (also called youth or minors) from drinking. By 1987 all states had complied with the 21 minimum age law.
The term 'public possession' is strictly defined and does not apply to possession for the following:
An established religious purpose, when accompanied by a parent, spouse or legal guardian age 21 or older
Medical purposes when prescribed or administered by a licensed physician, pharmacist, dentist, nurse, hospital or medical institution
In private clubs or establishments
In the course of lawful employment by a duly licensed manufacturer, wholesaler or retailer. 1
Many of the states that have chosen to specifically prohibit alcohol consumption by those under age 21 have a variety of exceptions. For example,
Some States allow an exception for consumption when a family member consents and/or is present. States vary widely in terms of which relatives may consent or must be present for this exception to apply and in what circumstances the exception applies. Sometimes a reference is made simply to "family" or "family member" without further elaboration.
Some States allow an exception for consumption on private property. States vary in the extent of the private property exception which may extend to all private locations, private residences only, or in the home of a parent or guardian only. In some jurisdictions, the location exception is conditional on the presence and/or consent of the parent, legal guardian, or legal-age spouse.

Internet information
In 2002, Dr Alexander Wagenaar and Dr Traci Toomey published a literature review titled, 'Effects of Minimum Drinking Age Laws: Review and Analyses of the Literature from 1960 to 2000'
This surveyed a wide range of studies on the effectiveness of the United States' increased drinking age on alcohol-related problems. The review found that the effects were essentially positive. This is a quite complicated document, however, it repays careful reading as many of the conclusions popularly reported about the effects of the United States' legal drinking age of 21 are based on what this survey has stated.
The full text of the report can be found at http://www.noys.org/Wagenaar-MLDA_Literature_Review.pdf

On October 22, 2009, The Sydney Morning Herald published an article titled, 'Call to lift minimum drinking age to 21, written by its urban affairs reporter, Paul Bibby. The report focused largely on the views of Professor Ross Homel, of Griffith University, who criticised the NSW Government's attempt to reduce pub assaults in Sydney with measures such as a 2am lockout.
The professor said overseas research had shown overwhelmingly that raising the drinking age, increasing the cost of alcohol and reducing hotel opening hours were the best ways to cut violence. The full text of the report can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/national/call-to-lift-minimum-drinking-age-to-21-20091021-h92i.html

On October 23, 2009, The Maitland Mercury published an editorial titled, 'Too late to raise the drinking age'. The editorial argues that the grounds that lead to the drinking age first being lowered in Australia still pertain now. The full text of the editorial can be found at http://www.maitlandmercury.com.au/news/opinion/editorial/general/too-late-to-raise-the-drinking-age/1657405.aspx

On November 18, 2009, The Courier Mail published a report of recent calls to have the legal drinking age in Australia raised to 21. On the Courier Mail's website there is a video accompanying this report which includes the views of a number of Queensland young people on this proposal. The full text of the news report together with the video can be found at http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26373798-952,00.html

On November 19, 2009, The National Times published an opinion piece titled, 'Through a glass, darkly' by Chris Middendorp. Middendorp argues that raising the legal drinking age will not solve Australia's alcohol-related problems. The full text of this comment can be found at http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/through-a-glass-darkly-20091119-iot9.html

On November 19, 2009, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Brisbane Times published a news report titled, 'PM under pressure to raise drinking age ' which details the views of a leading mental health advocate, Ian Hickie, and others, who are calling on the Australian Prime Minister to open a debate on whether the legal drinking age in Australia should be raised to 19. The full text of this report can be found at http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/pm-under-pressure-to-raise-drinking-age-20091119-imuu.html

On November 20, 2009, The Daily Telegraph published a news report titled, 'Raise the drinking age, says NSW's top cop' written by Joe Hildebrand. The report detailed the views of New South Wales Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione that the state government should consider raising the legal drinking age. The full text of this news report can be found at http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/indepth/raise-the-drinking-age-says-nsws-top-cop-andrew-scipione/story-fn4hfjim-1225799903072

On December 10, 2009, The Sydney Herald published an opinion piece written by James Pitts, the chief executive of Odyssey House McGrath Foundation. Mr Pitts argues that it is time Australia reconsidered raising the legal drinking age to 21. He suggests many of our supposed remedies to curb alcohol-related problems are not working. The full text of this comment can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/ignore-the-whines-of-protest-and-raise-the-drinking-age-forthwith-20091209-kk68.html

The editor of the Institute of Public Affairs Review, Hugh Tobin, has published an opinion piece claiming that current calls on governments to take stronger action against alcohol-related problems are an over-reaction. The piece is titled, 'How long until our pubs have no beer?'
The full text of this comment can be found at
http://www.ipa.org.au/publications/1366/how-long-until-our-pubs-have-no-beer-

Arguments in favour of raising the legal drinking age
1. Alcohol harms the adolescent brain
Recent research has indicated that although excessive alcohol consumption can cause brain injury to any person, irrespective of age, it is particularly harmful to adolescents and young adults. This is because the adolescent brain is still developing and its therefore very vulnerable to the toxic effects of alcohol.
Professor Ian Hickie, the executive director of Sydney University's Brain and Mind Research Institute, has stated, 'New research in neuro-science tells us that the brain continues to develop right through until the late teenage and early adult period. In fact, particularly in young men, it may not reach adult maturity till the mid-20s.
It is the frontal part of the brain that regulates complex decision making, forward planning and inhibition of impulsive behaviours that is undergoing final development at this age.
One of the most toxic things that a young brain can encounter is a high level of blood alcohol.
The evidence from animal models of teenage intoxication, and recent brain imaging studies among teenagers who binge drink, is clear.
Longer-lasting brain changes and related neuro-psychological impairments can result from excessive use of alcohol during this critical period.'
Similar points have been made by James Pitts, , who has written, 'Alcohol as a neurotoxin affects young brains in the area known as the amygdala, which controls rewards, gratification and risk taking. It also affects the pre-frontal cortex which is responsible for planning, logic, and judgement. By 18, half of males and females aged 14 to 24 are risky drinkers, and 264 young people aged 15 to 24 die each year because of it. The brain has its most rapid physical development between 12 and 24 years of age. Between 19 and 23 per cent of adolescents engage in binge drinking, and a fifth of 16- and 17-year-olds drink at least weekly.
Beyond what we need to do as parents and a society, it's now clear we need to consider raising the legal drinking age.
Many feel it wouldn't work, but given what we know about the effect of alcohol on developing brains, wouldn't the debate be worthwhile?'
Jon Currie, the chairman of a national expert panel on alcohol guidelines, has stated that the community would have to consider lifting the drinking age to 21, given the impact alcohol had on brain development.

2. It would reduce the incidence of alcohol-related violence
It has been claimed that increasing the legal drinking age would be an effective step toward decreasing the incidence of alcohol-related violence.
Professor Ross Homel, of Griffith University, has claimed that overseas research overwhelmingly demonstrates that raising the drinking age, increasing the cost of alcohol and reducing hotel opening hours were the best ways to cut violence.
Professor Homel has stated,'If you increase the cost of a schooner in Kings Cross from $5 to $10 there will be a difference in terms of people drinking and a direct impact on all forms of alcohol-related harm.'
David Crosbie, the chief executive of the Mental Health Council of Australia, has stated that research shows that the higher the drinking age, the less problems there were with youth drinking.
Mr Crosbie has stated, 'There is little doubt that if the drinking age in Australia is increased, there would be less deaths and hospitalisations among young people. While the extent of benefit is debated, I have never seen anyone argue that alcohol-related harm would be higher if the drinking age was higher.'

3. It would reduce the incidence of alcohol-related road fatalities
It has been noted repeatedly that where the legal drinking age and the legal driving age coincide this is an effective encouragement to young people to drink and drive. Overseas experience seems to bear this out. In many states in the United States the legal driving age is 16, whereas the legal drinking age is twenty-one. This gives young people five years' experience as drivers before they are legally able to drink. It is claimed that the effect is reduced road fatalities involving young drivers and alcohol.
Professor Hickie, the executive director of Sydney University's Brain and Mind Research Institute, has rejected claims that raising the drinking age would merely encourage more under-age drinking. He notes that countries such as the US, where many states have a drinking age of 21, experienced lower rates of accidents and violence involving young people.
Drug Free Australia has claimed, '"Raising the drinking age back up to 21 was a successful strategy in the United States. This is a country that has a far greater population base and diverse legal system to contend with, than we do in Australia. The research from the US (from its National Traffic Safety Administration) has revealed that by raising the drinking age back up to 21, 16,409 lives have been saved from road death in a sixteen year period. The estimates from the study show that the raised minimum age drinking laws in all states have reduced traffic fatalities in 18 to 20 year olds by 13%.'

4. It would send a significant message to adolescents below the legal drinking age
It has been claimed that allowing legal drinking at 18 helps to normalise alcohol consumption and effectively encourages adolescents to begin drinking earlier. Those who hold this view argue that the lower the legal drinking age the lower the illegal drinking age is likely to be.
In a study of residents in treatment at Odyssey House, 90 per cent nominated alcohol as their first drug of intoxication and claimed to have begun using it at between 12 and 13 years of age.
In the general Australian population the proportion of 12- to 15-year-olds consuming alcohol at risky levels for short-term harm has doubled since 1990 from 2.5 per cent to 5 per cent. Critics of Australian attitudes to alcohol note that drinking to excess has become an entrenched and normal behaviour. It has become a way for many young people to establish their identities and thus ensure themselves a 'place' within their preferred peer group.
Professor Ian Hickie, executive director of Sydney University's Brain and Mind Research Institute, has stated, 'The benefits would be most direct for those in their last year of school or their first year of university or employment. However, the benefits would also extend to a younger group since there is a clear relationship between the legal drinking age and first use of alcohol.'

5. The higher legal drinking age in the United States has had positive effects
Countries such as the United States with higher legal drinking ages appear to have a lower incidence of alcohol-related problems.
Professor Ross Homel, of Griffith University, has stated, ' A number of countries have bitten the bullet and raised the drinking age, particularly for high-alcohol beverages, and seen a reduction alcohol-related harm for that age group and in the tendency of younger people to become heavy drinkers.'
A recent US literature review of a wide range of previously-conducted studies of the effect of a higher legal drinking found the following, 'In conclusion, the preponderance of evidence indicates that higher legal drinking ages reduce rates of traffic crashes. Of all analyses that reported significant effects, 98% found higher drinking ages associated with lower rates of traffic crashes. Only 2% found the opposite.' Referring to health and social problems, the survey concluded, 'Of all analyses that reported significant effects, 75% found higher drinking ages associated with lower rates of problems. Only 25% found the opposite.'
The review's final conclusions were 'Compared with a wide range of other programs and efforts
to reduce drinking among teenagers, increasing the legal age for purchase and consumption of alcohol to 21 appears to have been the most successful effort to date...
The social costs from injuries, deaths and damage associated with under-age drinking remain high. The benefits of the legal drinking age of 21 have occurred with little or no active enforcement in most areas. Simply by increasing enforcement levels and deterring adults from selling or providing alcohol to minors, even more injuries and deaths related to alcohol use among youth are likely to be
prevented each year.'
Wendy Herbert, Drug Free Australia's spokesperson on alcohol issues, has stated, 'This is a solution that has worked in the United States.
The research from the United States (from its National Traffic Safety Administration) has revealed that by raising the drinking age back up to 21, 16,409 lives have been saved from road death in a sixteen year period. The estimates from the study show that the raised minimum age drinking laws in all states have reduced traffic fatalities in 18 to 20 year olds by 13%.'
Ms Herbert has also noted, 'Apart from reducing road carnage, raising the drinking age is one of the key issues to reducing overall alcohol and drug abuse. Alcohol is the main gateway drug. When people delay the start of alcohol use to 21 they are less likely to develop addiction to alcohol or any other drug.'

6. Governments are only refusing to act out of political cowardice
A number of those who support an increase to the legal drinking age in Australia have accused Australian governments of political cowardice for refusing to take this action. They argue that governments are afraid of a backlash from young voters if they take the legal drinking age above 18.
Professor Ian Hickie, executive director of Sydney University's Brain and Mind Research Institute, has noted, 'The Prime Minister and the Health Minister are out touring the country and asking for serious health reform proposals, particularly in the areas of preventative and youth health...
It is clear to those of us in health and social policy that simply lifting the age to 19 would break the current impasse and deliver immediate benefits...
Given that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd meets all the premiers on December 7 to discuss health reform, our national government has an ideal opportunity to put a simple clear proposal on the national agenda.'
Despite what Professor Hickie sees as the common-sense appeal of increasing the legal drinking age as part of the federal government's preventative health measures he has little confidence that Australian governments will actually take such action. He appears to believe that they are too afraid of alienating young voters by removing their legal access to alcohol.
Professor Hickie has stated, 'While the evidence related to the benefits that could be derived from lifting the drinking age are clear, to date, there has been little political stomach for the task.'

Arguments against raising the legal drinking age
1. Any change in the law is likely to be ignored by many young people
It has been claimed that if the drinking age were increased to 19 or 21 many young people would simply decide to break the law. It has been noted that that is what is happening currently with the legal drinking age of 18.
Co-ordinator of Fairfield Migrant and Resource Centre, Ricci Bartel. has argued that raising the drinking age would not change the drinking culture of young people.
Ms Bartel has stated, 'Binge-drinking is most prominent among young people aged 14 to 26 and if the drinking age is increased to 21 you are not making any difference to the drinking habits of any one above the age of 21 and probably none to those below that age.'
Ms Bartel added, 'Education campaigns about the danger of binge-drinking are the only effective strategy because legislation can not prevent young people from accessing alcohol.
The youth will always find a way to purchase and access alcohol supplies even if new restrictions are put in place.'
In an editorial published on November 23, 2009, in The Redland Times, it was similarly argued, 'Raising the drinking age could be argued as a positive step, but it will do little to stop access to alcohol by young people.
A higher drinking age could limit their ability to frequent hotels and nightclubs, but in turn would send young people to private venues, or worse, onto the streets to meet the cult need for binge drinking.'
It has further been noted that irresponsible drinking is likely to increase if the drinking age were increased because young people would drink illegally in unsupervised environments. This appears to have been the experience in the United States. Professor Ruth Engs, of Indiana University, has stated, 'There has been an increase in other problems related to heavy and irresponsible drinking among college age youth. Most of these reported behaviours showed little change until after the 21 year old law in 1987. For example from 1982 until 1987 about 46% of students reported "vomiting after drinking." This jumped to over 50% after the law change. Significant increase were also found for other variables: "cutting class after drinking" jumped from 9% to almost 12%; "missing class because of hangover" went from 26% to 28%; "getting lower grade because of drinking" rose from 5% to 7%; and "been in a fight after drinking" increased from 12% to 17%. All of these behaviours are indices of irresponsible drinking. This increase in abusive drinking behaviour is due to "underground drinking" outside of adult supervision in student rooms and apartments were same age individuals congregate and because of lack of knowledge of responsible drinking behaviours.'

2. Changes to Australian laws to increase the legal drinking age would be a misuse of police resources
It has been claimed that raising the legal drinking age would create major implementation problems for Australian police forces.
Rob Moodie, the chairman of the preventive health task force, has noted that given the failure of enforcement against current under-age drinking, Australia's effort should focus on stronger licensing provisions against liquor outlets and more public information campaigns against alcohol abuse.
Professor Moodie has argued that focusing on liquor outlets and ensuring they do not serve alcohol irresponsibly would be a more effective use of police resources.
Michael Daube, the president of the Public Health Association of Australia, Michael Daube, has similarly argued that the focus should be on things that worked, including stronger enforcement of the law.
Hugh Tobin is the managing editor of the Institute of Public Affairs Review. He has argued that police resources are already overtaxed dealing with alcohol-related incidents and that giving police further laws to enforce will be ineffective, if only because the police do not have the numbers to do so.
Tobin claimed, 'Under-age drinking is already illegal, as is drink-driving, drunken violence and drunk and disorderly conduct. The introduction of lockouts and curfews to combat violence on the streets is a sign that police resources are under strain. In Melbourne, the same weekend that the 2am lockout was implemented, the Victorian Police Association claimed that there was a major shortage of police officers available for patrol work, particularly at night.
It is often speculated that the first European settlers in Australia drank more alcohol per head of population than any other community in the history of mankind. Alcohol will always be a part of Australian culture. And an overwhelming majority of Australians consume alcohol responsibly and want to continue to be able to do so. The majority do not deserve to be punished for the violent crimes of the few. But they should be protected from them, and that protection will come from more effective policing, not from knee-jerk policy decisions.'

3. 18 is the age at which young people are generally considered adult
It has been argued that it would be inconsistent to deny adolescents the legal right to consume alcohol at 18, when that is the age at which they assume many other adult responsibilities. Eighteen year-olds are required to vote, they can drive a car and they face adult penalties for crime they commit. Thus, it is claimed, they should also be able to legal consume alcohol.
In an editorial published in The Maitland Mercury on October 23, 2009, it was noted, 'Eighteen-year-olds have the right to vote to decide who will be this country's leaders, they can marry without their parents' consent and, at the other end of the spectrum, they can be sent to adult prisons if they break the law. It would make no sense to then tell them they cannot drink alcohol.'
The same editorial also noted that historically the legal drinking age was lowered from 21 to 18 in Australia during the Vietnam War because it was recognised that if a country could conscript 18-year-olds and require them to fight and risk their lives on its behalf, then it was not reasonable to deny them the right to drink alcohol. The Maitland Mercury editorial of October 23, 2009, states, 'The legal drinking age was lowered during the Vietnam War when it was quite rightly pointed out that if 18-year-olds were old enough to die for their country then they were old enough to have a beer at the pub.
It was as compelling an argument then as it is today.'
This view was also put by a letter writer to The Star Observer who noted, 'I am furious about the infantilisation of young adults. As I hear there is a push to raise the drinking age of voting adults from 18 to 21. I am livid.
The other day I was in a bottle shop that was demanding ID of anyone under 25. That is appalling discrimination...
By the time I was 21 I had left home, put myself through high school, got into Law, had slaved in refuges, was on a task force for a white paper for Cabinet on domestic violence and it would be an outrage if I couldn't have gone out for a drink.
If wowsers want to raise the drinking age to 21 then raise the age young adults can join the armed forces to 21. If the drinking age is raised I don't want to see one teenager in uniform.'

4. There are other means of reducing the incidence road accidents and violence
It has been argued that there are a variety of other measures which are more likely to be effective than raising the legal drinking age. In an emailed comment on the issue published in The Sydney Morning Herald on December 10, 2009, it was stated, 'Once again we see a simplistic solution being offered to a multi-layered issue ... why would raising the legal drinking age have any impact on young children who have access to alcohol and limited parental supervision to prevent its consumption? Answer - it wouldn't.
With respect, I think it's a knee jerk reaction to a broad social issue. Education has proved to be most effective at changing people's bad habits, for example, smoking. Current adverts advising parents not to offer alcohol to children under 18 will have an impact. As will teaching high school children the dangers of alcohol misuse.'

5. Australia needs to address the social and cultural origins of our excessive drinking
It has been claimed that no change in the law will alter Australian drinking behaviour unless we can shift the social attitudes that endorse the excessive assumption of alcohol.
In an editorial published on November 23, 2009, in The Redland Times, it was argued,'Therein lies the problem - the drinking culture, which can only be changed by realignment of attitudes through education.
A fragmented approach to achieving this culture change is unworkable. A Parliamentary Inquiry into alcohol related violence needs to embrace all avenues of the problem and take on board the great work that the Matthew Stanley Foundation, and other similar groups, have already achieved.
All the inquiries in the world, however, will not bring a solution unless government funding through education programs is sufficient to bring the culture change necessary to end the violence which costs the nation $1.7 billion annually.'
In the United States similar arguments have been put. It has been argued that a cultural change toward the use of alcohol needs to be affected, modelled on cultures who deal with alcohol more successfully. Professor Ruth Engs, of Indiana University, has argued, 'Alternative approaches from the experience of other, and more ancient cultures, who do not have these problems need to be tried. Groups such as Italians, Greeks, Chinese and Jews, who have few drinking related problems, tend to share some common characteristics. Alcohol is neither seen as a poison or a magic potent, there is little or no social pressure to drink, irresponsible behaviour is never tolerated, young people learn at home from their parents and from other adults how to handle alcohol in a responsible manner, there is societal consensus on what constitutes responsible drinking.'

6. The decrease in the United States' alcohol-related accidents is not the result of the higher legal drinking age
It has been claimed that it is a simplification to suggest that the United States' reduction in alcohol-related accidents is the result of the country's higher legal drinking age.
Professor Ruth Engs, of Indiana University, has stated, 'Research from the early 1980s until the present has shown a continuous decrease in drinking and driving related variables which has parallel the nation's, and also university students, decrease in per capita consumption. However, these declines started in 1980 before the national 1987 law which mandated states to have 21 year old alcohol purchase laws.
The decrease in drinking and driving problems are the result of many factors and not just the rise in purchase age or the decreased per capita consumption. These include: education concerning drunk driving, designated driver programs, increased seat belt and air bag usage, safer automobiles, lower speed limits, free taxi services from drinking establishments, etc.'

Further implications
Currently it appears unlikely that either state or federal governments in Australia will raise the legal drinking age. To increase the legal drinking age to 21 would be likely to have some political ramifications as young voters are likely to punish any government that removes their legal right to drink. It is also probable that brewers, the hotel industry and others involved in the production and marketing of alcohol would pressure governments strongly leave the legal drinking age at its current level.
However, there is substantial pressure from health officials, public health researchers and various police spokespeople to increase the legal drinking age. Statistically, Australia's alcohol consumption is not increasing. This, however, is a rather simplistic statement of the situation as alcohol consumption among young people remains a problem.
There is a high level of public concern about alcohol related violence in particular. Recent research findings indicating that excessive alcohol consumption is particularly harmful for the brains and mental development of young people is likely to increase community concern about the effect of drinking on young Australians.
These factors mean that there may come a time when state and federal governments in Australia may feel compelled to act on this question. Data from the United States appears to suggest that a legal drinking age of 21 (more accurately a ban on the purchase of alcohol by those under 21) is likely to reduce alcohol related road accidents involving young people. It is also likely to reduce a variety of social and health issues for which alcohol consumption is a partial cause.
It is more likely that the legal drinking age will be raised to 19 rather than 21 as there would be less opposition among a variety of stakeholders to such a development. Unfortunately, raising the drinking age by only a year would also be likely to have a less positive effect on alcohol-related problems experienced by young people.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
AGE, September 20, page 17, comment by Chris Berg, `On balance, alcohol is good - so let's drink to that'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/alcohol-is-good--so-lets-drink-to-that-20090919-fw1q.html

AGE, October 11, page 3, news item (photo) by Mark Russell, `Exposed: How easy it is for an under-age teen to get hold of two cartons of beer, no questions asked'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/exposed-grog-online-too-easy-for-underage-teen-20091010-grmm.html

AGE, November 1, page 14, editorial, `When zero tolerance looks like the safe option'.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/editorial/when-zero-tolerance-looks-like-the-safest-option/2009/10/31/1256835191195.html

AGE, November 1, page 1, news item by Jennifer Sheridan, `Booze bruising teen brains'. (PDF copy of original printed article)
http://www.mcri.edu.au/Downloads/Media/2009/11/01/booze.pdf

AGE, November 19, page 1, news item by M Metherell, `Call for rise in drinking age'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-to-raise-drinking-age-to-19-20091118-imkl.html

H/SUN, November 16, page 18, news item by Stephen McMahon, `Booze ban a fine idea' (see also page 23 comment by Sally Morrell, `Punish the parents? Fine by me').
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/booze-ban-a-fine-idea/story-e6frf7kx-1225797967946
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/punish-the-parents-fine-by-me/story-e6frfhqf-1225797937140

H/SUN, November 15, page 6, comment by Michael Carr-Gregg, `Blame the parents for drunken kids'. (PDF copy of original printed article)
http://www.mcri.edu.au/Downloads/Media/2009/11/15/blamethe.pdf

AGE, December 5, Insight section, page 4, analysis (ref to alcohol industry Drinkwise campaign) by Nick Miller, `Here's jeers!'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/heres-jeers-20091204-kb2e.html

AGE, December 2, page 3, news item by Julia Medew, `Underage drinking OK, says half of Australia (in survey)'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/underage-drinking-ok-says-half-of-australia-20091201-k3v0.html

AGE, November 28, Insight section, page 11, comment by Grace Robertson, `Teenagers pressured to guzzle the booze'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/teenagers-pressured-to-guzzle-the-booze-20091127-jwvf.html

AGE, November 20, page 20, editorial, `Raising the legal age won't stop bad drinking habits'.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/raising-the-legal-age-wont-stop-bad-drinking-habits-20091119-iot0.html

AGE, November 20, page 11, news item by Mark Metherell, `Drinking age rise dismissed'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/drinking-age-rise-dismissed-20091119-ioy9.html

AUST, December 14, page 7, news item (photo) by Stephen Lunn, `Teen drinkers corrupting "brain software"'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/teen-drinkers-corrupting-brain-software/story-e6frg6nf-1225809985245

AGE, December 14, page 4, news item by Mark Metherell, `Roxon rejects advice on drinking age'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/roxon-rejects-advice-on-drinking-age-20091213-kqif.html