Spring Break
Drinking is ready for debate
by Doug Nevins
Staff writer
Op-Ed | 9/9/08
Posted online at 3:07 AM EST on 9/9/08
/ Last updated at 3:30 AM EST on 9/9/08
THIS ARTICLE WAS UPDATED 7:15 P.M. SEPT. 9. IT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ARTICLE IN THE PRINTED JUSTICE.
A coalition of college students advocating for a reduction of the drinking age would hardly be notable -- self-interest is always a powerful catalyst for political action. At the same time, it's also the job of college administrators to be aware of student interests and concerns, even if it means that administrators must reassess the very laws they are obligated to enforce.
Such is the case with the Amethyst Initiative, a group of college presidents who have signed a statement questioning the wisdom of the current drinking age and several associated laws, including one that deprives states of federal highway funds if they set the drinking age below 21. Contrary to many media accounts, the group isn't specifically endorsing a change in the law. Its main aim is simply to encourage discussion about possible solutions to the prevalence of binge drinking on college campuses. It's a tough issue, but the presidents and chancellors who have joined this initiative should be commended for discussing it.
Statistics detailing the issue paint a fuzzy picture. On the one hand, according to CNN, 40 percent of college students show signs of alcohol dependence, and thousands of students per year sustain injuries related to drinking -- all despite the current drinking age. On the other hand, as Mothers Against Drunk Driving argues, studies show that raising the drinking age has cut drunk-driving deaths. Given such statistics, it's debatable whether changing the drinking age is wise, but the importance of the Amethyst Initiative is its willingness to have that debate.
Indeed, the debate itself seems as important as any potential changes in law. At a school like Brandeis, where freedom of speech is a central concern for the student body, it's fair to question whether college administrators truly have the freedom to express their concerns or if certain topics are so stigmatized that discussing them risks provoking an unfair response such as MADD's.
A coalition of college students advocating for a reduction of the drinking age would hardly be notable -- self-interest is always a powerful catalyst for political action. At the same time, it's also the job of college administrators to be aware of student interests and concerns, even if it means that administrators must reassess the very laws they are obligated to enforce.
Such is the case with the Amethyst Initiative, a group of college presidents who have signed a statement questioning the wisdom of the current drinking age and several associated laws, including one that deprives states of federal highway funds if they set the drinking age below 21. Contrary to many media accounts, the group isn't specifically endorsing a change in the law. Its main aim is simply to encourage discussion about possible solutions to the prevalence of binge drinking on college campuses. It's a tough issue, but the presidents and chancellors who have joined this initiative should be commended for discussing it.
Statistics detailing the issue paint a fuzzy picture. On the one hand, according to CNN, 40 percent of college students show signs of alcohol dependence, and thousands of students per year sustain injuries related to drinking -- all despite the current drinking age. On the other hand, as Mothers Against Drunk Driving argues, studies show that raising the drinking age has cut drunk-driving deaths. Given such statistics, it's debatable whether changing the drinking age is wise, but the importance of the Amethyst Initiative is its willingness to have that debate.
Indeed, the debate itself seems as important as any potential changes in law. At a school like Brandeis, where freedom of speech is a central concern for the student body, it's fair to question whether college administrators truly have the freedom to express their concerns or if certain topics are so stigmatized that discussing them risks provoking an unfair response such as MADD's.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
A. C.
posted 9/09/08 @ 8:32 AM EST
MADD is a front for the Christian Right.
They are obsolete now.
Chris Freeman
posted 9/10/08 @ 3:49 PM EST
I'm not sure where the idea that the Amethyst Initiative is not concerned with a change in the law is coming from. If you look on the AI website, there does not seem to be any question that this is exactly what these college and university presidents are urging legislators to do. (Continued…)
Post a Comment