Opinion: Binge drinking problems require a policy shift

In fraternity basements, at crowded house parties and behind dorm room walls, incoming college students will spend these first few weekends of the semester drinking.

For those 20 years old or younger, all of it will be illegal.

That should change.

The secretive binge drinking culture is easily the one of the most pressing long-term health and safety concern facing college campuses.

UNC administrators have rightfully taken notice. There is even a special task force devoted to studying the issue.

But more of the same — crackdowns, harsher penalties, press releases denouncing the evils of underage drinking — cannot solve the fundamental problem of binge drinking.

The negative consequences of the drinking age — one of the highest in the world — are great and many. It can prod students to drink hard liquor, which is easier to conceal and transport than beer or wine. It can create distrust and resentment between authority figures, like resident advisors or police, and students. It encourages underage adults to drink as much and as quickly as they can whenever presented with the opportunity.

UNC should update the way it advocates for safe drinking. There is another way forward.

Chancellor Carol Folt should sign the Amethyst Initiative. The Amethyst Initiative is a declaration by university presidents and chancellors that the drinking age has failed. Signatories don’t necessarily support lowering the drinking age to 18, although many do. The declaration simply states that a more enlivened and enlightened dialogue on drinking is needed.

Chancellor Folt’s endorsement of the initiative would show her dedication to reaching a meaningful solution for campus binge drinking culture. Folt’s backing of the Amethyst Initiative, as the leader of a large, prominent university, would generate much-needed discussion and attention on this overlooked issue.

The most credible arguments against lowering the drinking age are that raising the drinking age to 21 reduced drunk driving fatalities and that young adults drinking harms their developing brains.

The first claim is flimsy. The decline in drunk driving deaths began years before the law was changed and is largely the result of better safety devices: seat belts, airbags, and most recently, ridesharing services like Uber. Other countries with more sensible drinking ages experienced a similar decline in drunk driving deaths.

It’s true the brain is not fully developed until about age 25 — but the idea that government should protect adult citizens from self-imposed harm is wrongheaded. The brains of young adults ages 18-20 aren’t fully developed, but they are developed sufficiently for them to make decisions like joining the military, getting married or having a beer, even when these decisions might cause harm to themselves.

There will always be health and safety problems associated with alcohol. The real question is whether these problems will be addressed by allowing open, informed and responsible youth drinking or through a continuation of the failed policy of complete prohibition on drinking under 21.

Chancellor Folt can lead on this issue and endorse more effective solutions to this problem.