<p>Northstarmom,</p>
<p>The difference with your example is that the things you list are illegal for everyone. There isn’t a magic age where suddenly it becomes legal to snort cocaine and shoplift. The reality is that most people will drink at some point in their lives, most people won’t indulge in the things that you list.</p>
<p>
evitajr~
I agree with you fully here. I know quite a few parents around here who choose to serve alcohol to h.s. kids for the express purpose of enhancing the “popularity” of their kids with their peers. They feel that because they are serving in their HOMES, they are demonstrating some sort of parental “reponsibility.” Ummmmmmmmm, no.</p>
<p>I do not understand the difference in parental attitude between other offenses (cheating, stealing, etc.) and underage drinking, especially as drinking can and often DOES have much more dire consequences. I’ve seen kids’ heads ripped off on this forum by some of these same adults for their even daring to question a binding ED agreement, but change the subject to alcohol and you will see a completely different tune. For some reason, kids should be spared the consequences of this particular activity. I am absolutely baffled by this.</p>
<p>
MOWC~
This is precisely what I’m talking about…I have never communicated to my children that this is a “reality.” I expect a different “reality” from them, and they well know it.
That said, y’all might be absolutely SHOCKED to know how strict I am NOT. At least so far, I haven’t HAD to be. I have encouraged my children to make good decisions, and so far they have. My oldest son has been at countless parties where alcohol was flowing, and he CHOOSES not to partake. I would not make a huge issue of it if he did decide to have 1 or 2 drinks. But, yes, I WOULD make a GIGANTIC issue of it if he decided to abuse alcohol, and I would want the consequences to be enough to serve as a major deterrent.</p>
<p>
alwaysamom~
Dh and I drink very moderately in our home. A short time ago, our son remarked to us that we were some of the FEW parents he had observed who had never over-consumed alcohol at some point in front of him. He said he thought that we were good examples! :)</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>“The difference with your example is that the things you list are illegal for everyone. There isn’t a magic age where suddenly it becomes legal to snort cocaine and shoplift. The reality is that most people will drink at some point in their lives, most people won’t indulge in the things that you list.”</p>
<p>Many if not most people also will drive, vote, marry, and even watch X rated movies once they are adults. That doesn’t mean, however, that most adults would enable or encourage teens and children to do those things that are illegal for underaged people.</p>
<p>If people don’t like the laws preventing underaged drinking, what they should do is work to change the laws, not encourage or enable teens to break the laws.</p>
<p>
NSM, this is a scary thought. Which never occurred to us. In my gut, I feel our decision was correct. But if you are right, then what? How to handle it without enabling to some extent? Parents?</p>
<p>
I dont disagree with you. I drink wine and the occasional mixed drink, and my children see me doing it. I really hope Im modeling for them moderate and responsible drinking. </p>
<p>Although poorly stated, what I was trying to say is that because many teenagers do not have the self-control to stop at one/two drinks, we parents should 1) have the backbone to set/enforce limits if/when necessary; 2) realize that while such modeling might produce responsible drinkers at some future time, it is optimistic to think that it might have the same effect in the short-term; and 3) not be surprised if that one drink ultimately results in a trip to a local hospital.</p>
<p>
I think that the links show that, at least in Spain, many have been given the chance. Drinking age is 16. The Spanish government is trying to increase the legal drinking age to 18 only because Spaniards are fed up with the out of control street binge drinking of 14-18 year-old kids. </p>
<p>I know. A huge problem with no easy answers.</p>
<p>As a parent, I do believe in modeling and in the “French way,” allowing a young teen to drink diluted wine at a family dinner; a little real wine at family dinner as they get older. This is what we did. I also like it for its, at least somewhat, dimming the Forbidden Fruit effect. However, we were always very careful to remind DS that allowing HIM, and him alone, to drink at our dinner table is legal in our state. We would NEVER serve alcohol to friends, at a party, on any occasion. In fact, even when his best friend and their parents (our best friends) would be at our home for a celebratory meal - no alcohol for the teens, because it is not legal.</p>
<p>I disdain the parents who provide alcohol at teen parties because “no one would come otherwise.” Just as bad, imo, are those who provide it because they can “control” it, taking away car keys etc. If lucifer’s death and this thread remind us of anything, they remind us that Drinking and Driving are not the only issues with teen alcohol abuse.</p>
<p>The research-based reasons why I don’t support teen drinking.
Study #1 </p>
<p>“Mean age of onset of drinking was 15 years 6 months old (range 1030 years). People who started drinking at age 13 or younger had significantly increased frequency of alcohol use and binge drinking in adulthood than those who started drinking at age 18 or later.” <a href=“http://ebmh.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/extract/8/4/98[/url]”>http://ebmh.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/extract/8/4/98</a></p>
<p>Study #2
"A survey of 4,202 students enrolled in the State University System of Florida from 1986 to 1988 showed that 14 percent started drinking in elementary school, 34 percent started in middle school, 45 percent in high school, and 7 percent in college. </p>
<p>A General Linear Models analysis of variance procedure showed that the time of first drink significantly predicted the quantity-frequency of alcohol consumption and the incidence of alcohol-related problems reported by students in college. </p>
<p>Students who started to drink while in elementary and middle school reported significantly higher levels of consumption and problems than those who started drinking while in high school or college." <a href=“Early onset of drinking as a predictor of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems in college - PubMed”>Early onset of drinking as a predictor of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems in college - PubMed;
<p>Study #3
"Age is a strong predictor of developing alcohol dependence and abuse, according to the results of a new study released by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) in January.[probably 1998]</p>
<p>Young people who began drinking regularly by age 15 were four times more likely to develop alcohol dependence and more than twice as likely to develop alcohol abuse as those who began drinking at age 21.</p>
<p>Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala commented in a press statement, “This study adds new evidence about the need to regard underage drinking as the serious problem it is. Parents, schools, and communities need to say to our young people with one voice that underage drinking can jeopardize health and lifetime prospects.”</p>
<p>The study, based on interviews with nearly 28,000 former and current drinkers, differentiated between tasting or having a sip of alcohol and drinking regularly. The authors defined alcohol dependency as an addiction and alcohol abuse as a maladaptive drinking pattern that repeatedly causes life problems.</p>
<p>Researchers found that more than 40 percent of respondents who began drinking before age 15 became alcohol dependent at some time in their lives. In contrast, only 25 percent of respondents who began drinking at age 17 and about 10 percent of respondents who began drinking at age 21 became alcohol dependent, according to the press statement."
<a href=“http://www.psych.org/pnews/98-03-06/alcohol.html[/url]”>http://www.psych.org/pnews/98-03-06/alcohol.html</a></p>
<p>“Well, it took 147 posts but once again a thought provoking discussion about risks to ALL our children has degenerated into an attack on Williams, the Great Satan of LACs.”</p>
<p>It’s NOT an attack on Williams, it’s a DEFENSE of all the wonderful students who attend Williams, and their parents who pay for it. If folks think the I-Dad is overly sensitive, it’s because he has right to be.</p>
<p>All schools of this calibre have honor codes. So as part of the application they could simple ask: “Have you have drunk alcohol or used illicit drugs with other students?” They could ask it on the form for recruited atheletes. A “yes” answer would NOT disqualify you from admission. A lie (in which the coach or GC said otherwise) would. Pretty soon the athletic departments and the admissions offices would know whether the GCs and coaches were covering for students and whether they could be trusted. Word would go out that the school was serious, and with 8 applicants for every place, the school didn’t mind “losing” a few. And as soon as one school did, dozens would follow suit.</p>
<p>If you lower the drinking age, you just back the pressure to drink illicitly down to the high schools and junior high schools even further. The reality is that drinking is DOWN among teenagers generally speaking, and the drunk driving and etc. that go with are also down. It just isn’t down among a bunch of fancy colleges who believe they have no responsibility in dealing with the illict behaviors of their student bodies.</p>
<p>As evatajr1 notes, cultures can change. In fact they do. But you have to put in the time, energy, money, and focus to change them, and be ready to accept the consequences for doing so.</p>
<p>“Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthStarMom
“This bill was close to $1000. Although it may seem to some beside the point, we made it clear to our child that this bill was child’s to pay.”
In principle, I agree with what you did because I definitely believe that people should be held accountable for the consequences of their behavior.
However, in this case what concerns me is the possibility that despite being held responsible this time, your child continues to drink, gets in possible medical trouble again, but refuses to go to the hospital for fear of having to shell out another $1,000… I have great fear that your strategy could backfire either for your child or your child’s friends who hear about it and make unwise decisions not to take impaired friends to ERs.
NSM, this is a scary thought. Which never occurred to us. In my gut, I feel our decision was correct. But if you are right, then what? How to handle it without enabling to some extent? Parents?”</p>
<p>For all we know, your strategy may work very well with your teen.</p>
<p>Another strategy could be to pay the bill, but require the teen to go with you to a specified # of open meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous. Open meetings of AA are for anyone, not just people who consider themselves alcoholics. One can choose to be silent as well as anonymous and no one will force you to say anything.</p>
<p>The meetings provide much useful information to people concerned about loved one’s drinking as well as as people who may have drinking problems themselves. One important lesson that virtually every visitor learns: most alcoholics look like most people one encounters in real life, no matter what kind of lifestyle one has.</p>
<p>Very few alcoholics look like skid row bums. What alcoholics tend to have in common is that they thought they were too smart to have an alcohol problem.</p>
<p>If you follow this suggestion to accompany your teen to some AA meetings, call your local AA hotline (in all phone books) and ask the person for suggestions about which open meetings would be best for a teen or college student to visit. This will help your teen attend a meeting in which they are likely to encounter other people around their age.</p>
<p>But NSM, couldn’t it be self-selecting, rather than causal? Perhpas those biological/personality types who showed the self-restraint to wait until 21 were inherently less susceptible to addictions, and those who plunged in were those who were more susceptible? In other words, even if the early drinkers were kept under lock and key away from booze until they were 21, isn’t it possible that a large number of them would still be susceptible to addiction?</p>
<p>Yes, it is very possible that genetic and other factors will still result in some of the late drinkers becoming alcoholic. Enforcing the age 21 drinking age won’t prevent all alcoholism.</p>
<p>It may be, though, that enforcement could result in fewer at risk people trying alcohol before 21. They may be able to feed their genetic or biological propensity to addictions by getting involved in extreme sports or less dangerous addictions such as video games or workaholism. </p>
<p>By the time that they can legally drink, they may have no interest in drinking because they’ve already found ways of feeding their need for lots of stimulation. At age 21, they also would probably have more adult responsibilities, so would have less free time available for partying involving heavy drinking. </p>
<p>They also may have matured enough not to think that there’s anything attractive about drinking until one feels sick or barfs. They’d probably be meeting their social needs through work, sports, hobbies, and would be feeding their adrenalin/stimulation needs the same way.</p>
<p>Very good points…</p>
<p>OK- I guess I am part of society’s problem. I was very firm with my kids about alcohol use (that it must not occur) for many years. I don’t believe either of them had a drink at 13 (except wine at family holiday dinners) or so. My son’s peers started experimenting a little at 15- we were still firm and consequences were imposed. I should add that my son is a year-round endurance athlete, so there isn’t much room for alcohol in his training schedule. I saw a huge increase in the amount of alcohol problems in his peer group (suspensions, parent’s catching the kids etc) in 11th grade. Now my son is 19. I just don’t have a big problem with him drinking responsibly. He is exposed to alcohol at every party. I suspect that he doesn’t walk away unless there is some other reason such as the fear of getting in trouble at school or athletic training. He is very independent and spent a month last summer living completely on his own in the mountains to train. I HAVE to trust him to make the right choices for himself.</p>
<p>jmmom,</p>
<p>I grew up in Spain and was allowed to drink a little wine diluted with lots of water at special occasions as a very young teenager. As I became older, the diluted wine was replaced with small quantities of the real thing. This was done with red wine, at the dinner table with family and friends, and never at a public setting. Since that approach had worked reasonably well for me, I have been trying similar modeling with my teenagers. </p>
<p>However, after reading and listening to the horror stories of completely out of control teenage binge drinking in the streets of Spain, I dont know whats right anymore. Most of these kids grew up just like me, drinking diluted wine at the family table. The practice does not seem to have curbed their drinking habits. </p>
<p>Im not questioning you or anyone here. Just myself.</p>
<p>I would note that both Lucifer and the young man who said that he plans to increase his drinking from 4 nights a week at St. Paul’s prep school in Concord, NH to 5-6 nights a week at Williams (both of whom served a alcohol-related suspension during high school) posted messages saying that parents serving alcohol at high school parties was OK as long as kids weren’t driving after they were drunk. </p>
<p>From what MOWC says, drinking is heavy at boarding schools and I suspect she’s right that it is also heavy at suburban high schools. I am becoming more and more convinced that the problems we are seeing in colleges with drunks have their roots in enrolling kids who are already drunks before college. The critical mass of high school drunks then perpetuates a center of drunkeness on campus. The missing ingredient here is social pressure that this kind of behavior is not acceptable. There is too much systemic enabling.</p>
<p>My experience and research has shown that on-campus drinking at boarding schools is much higher when there is a large proportion of day students. My son’s school is 75% boarding and in a rural location. There is very little on-campus drinking. The kids drink at parties in NYC on weekends off campus. I read some on-line blogs of kids from our local prep schools and they were all about drinking and how wasted everyone got on the weekends. My son’s school has some very good policies concerning drug and alcohol abuse. There is actually a network of adults (faculty members and staff) set up where concerned students can go for “help” for themselves or fellow students WITHOUT something going on their record. It is only kept off the record if the student is willing to get counseling or enter a substance abuse program of some sort. One reason we chose this school was because there was a recognition of the problem (with ALL teens) and a real desire on the part of the administration to provide a support network. There is a LOT of supervision in the dorms.</p>
<p>"I would note that both Lucifer and the young man who said that he plans to increase his drinking from 4 nights a week at St. Paul’s prep school in Concord, NH to 5-6 nights a week at Williams (both of whom served a alcohol-related suspension during high school) posted messages saying that parents serving alcohol at high school parties was OK as long as kids weren’t driving after they were drunk.</p>
<p>I doubt that 30% of the student body (and closer to 50% for white male athletes) were drunks before they got to college, though your thought is quite intriguing. Certainly a college that is willing to spend $4.8 million to overhaul its entire housing system (with opposition of the majority of the student body) in order to spread (and hence, they hope, “thin”) the problem across the whole campus hasn’t gotten around to entertaining your hypothesis yet.</p>
<p>But they have honor codes: they can ask. Fess up to your behavior, or risk being rejected for lying. Find out where the problems lie, and turn GCs and athletic coaches into part of the solution rather than part of the problem. I’d bet that if any top college stepped to the forefront in tackling things from your perspective, there would be an immediate piling on. (But I do think the prospect scares them.)</p>
<p>I believe that high schools and colleges would probably serve their students better by noting alcohol infractions on the record. This would create a strong deterrent for little Johnny if he knew that his seven infractions would be forwarded along with his transcript to the admissions offices at the Ivies of his choice.</p>
<p>I understand the need to allow for a simple youthful mistake by a student who is inclined to learn from the experience. So, perhaps the first one results in a probationary notation that is expunged after demonstrated responsible behavior. But, if you have a policy that a second alcohol infraction puts the whole list on the transcript sent to colleges, I think you would see a serious some behavior change. As Waylon Jennings once opined, “The devil made me do it the first time; the second time I done it on my own.”</p>
<p>BTW, this same thing applies to colleges who enable problem drinkers by covering up their indiscretions in exactly the same way. Let the i-bank recruiters see the list…and, more importantly, let the drunks know the i-bank recruiters will see the list.</p>
<p>“I understand the need to allow for a simple youthful mistake by a student who is inclined to learn from the experience.”</p>
<p>I take a harder line. I think that knowing that ALL alcohol-related infractions would be noted on one’s transcript would prevent lots of teens from drinking in high school.</p>
<p>I don’t see any advantage to giving a free pass. Teens don’t have to drink at all. The reason that so many do is that they know that it’s a longshot that they’ll experience any consequences that would hurt their college and other options.</p>
<p>I also think they should put indications of problem drinking on college transcripts. I am an employer, and am much more interested in whether my future employee has an alcohol- or drug-related history than what grade they received in freshman English. </p>
<p>But I don’t think they have to count on the high schools putting infractions on transcripts. If the colleges want to know, all they have to do is ask.</p>
<p>And, like Northstarmom, I don’t see the need for a “free pass”. The world won’t come to end because poor little student A has to go to college B instead, or alternatively, College A admits the student with a probationary warning.</p>