Although the College has recently taken steps to curb sexual assault and enacted programs to ensure student safety, the most potentially effective step, lowering the drinking age of “soft” alcohol (as in, not wine and spirits or liquor), is out of its hands.
Despite the commonly held belief that there is a national drinking age, the law is actually determined by each state. In fact, more than half of the 50 states had lower drinking ages 40 years ago, with some as low as 18 . However, when Congress passed the 1984 National Minimum Drinking Age Act, it imposed a 10-percent reduction in federal highway funds for noncompliant states, which pushed them to raise their drinking ages to 21.
While the increased drinking age has reduced the prevalence of drunk driving among 18- to 20-year-olds, other alcohol-related concerns would be easier to address if the drinking age were lowered. For instance, colleges could combat alcohol poisoning if they could take proactive steps toward prevention and response instead of turning a blind eye to underage drinking. According to the National Institute of Health, four in five college students report drinking alcohol, and of those who drink, about half binge drink. Because it is illegal, drinking in college remains secretive and dangerous. If students could report instances of excessive and dangerous alcohol consumption without fear of criminal charges or school disciplinary sanctions, these dangers could be dealt with more effectively and more frequently. As it stands, however, the avenues for underage drinkers to respond to dangerous alcohol-related situations are severely limited.
Furthermore, according to Hearts for Families, an advocacy organization devoted to family wellness, alcohol consumption is connected to about two-thirds of all reported sexual assaults and date rapes of students. This could prevent victims under the age of 21 from reporting sexual assault. This understandable hesitation could complicate evidence collection, especially forensic samples and identifying witnesses or even perpetrators. Additionally, the less time elapses after an assault, the more likely it is to be prosecuted.
Even at Dartmouth, a college that is fairly pragmatic about underage drinking and sexual assault, there are major considerations preventing students from reporting. For instance, those who have been “Good Sammed” cannot become UGAs, and if they want to hold executive positions in their Greek organizations, they will face an uphill climb. Furthermore, the process is expensive and oftentimes personally degrading. Most importantly, Greek organizations may be subject to legal charges if minors are Good Sammed in or found to have been drinking at their houses. This lets intoxicated students, who fear being caught drunk, stay in an unsafe environment and encourages other students to refrain from reporting. It also prevents members from getting involved in risky situations.
The drinking age also encourages students to join Greek houses or other social clubs to obtain alcohol, which then opens them up to hazing and other more dangerous consequences of drinking alcohol. With a drinking age set at 18, students would be able to make the decision to become affiliated completely out of their own volition, rather than as an easy way to procure alcohol.
Ultimately, lowering the drinking age to 18 would give colleges leeway to take effective steps to curb alcohol-related harm and sexual assault. They would be able to offer safe alternatives to covert or organized drinking, and the barriers to seeking medical attention or police assistance would be removed. A beer in the hands of an 18-year-old can lead to dangerous situations on its own — but the potential consequences are made scarier when he or she has limited safety options.
