Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Binge and the Bias

By Maia Szalavitz, STATS. Posted April 19, 2005.


There's a lot to debate about teen drinking -- but you'd never know it from the way the issue is covered by news organizations like '60 Minutes.'
Advertisement

The April 17 edition of 60 Minutes included a piece on parents who allow teens to drink at parties in an attempt to prevent drunk-driving and other alcohol-related problems. It could have been a great opportunity to explore the complex issues and controversies surrounding under-age drinking. But as with almost all of the media coverage of this issue, it was one-sided.

There are two expert views on teen drinking: one that says it cannot be stamped out and that adults should try to "reduce the harm" associated with it; and another, which says that only a "zero tolerance" approach will work. There is data to support both perspectives.

The problem is that, typically, only the latter view gets a hearing-- which was the case in Lesley Stahl's segment. While parents on both sides of the issue were given a chance to say their piece, the only expert interviewed was Jim Mosher, who comes down clearly on the zero-tolerance side. He told Stahl, "We are not doing our children a favor by providing them a quote, 'safe place' to drink."

The slant of the piece was clear from its opening sentence, which claimed that the fact that 10-20 percent of all alcohol is consumed by under-age drinkers is "stunning." While this might shock people living under a rock, with more than 75 percent of Americans taking their first drink before they graduate high school the truly amazing fact is that the statistic is not higher. (In fact, the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse got into trouble when it miscalculated the number as 25 percent a few years ago).

The segment didn't include the most relevant study--one recently published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in 2004, which demonstrates the equivocal nature of the data in this area. It found that teens whose parents held drinking parties for them were twice as likely to binge drink as teens whose parents did not. But it also found that teens who drink with their parents were half as likely to have had a drink in the last month and one-third as likely to binge drink as those who didn't.

Does this mean that parents shouldn't hold parties for their teens, but should teach them to drink moderately? Which teens are at greater risk for drunk-driving deaths--those who binge more, but whose parents hold parties and take away the keys or those who binge less but do so underground with no supervision? Is the stigma associated with criminalizing these parties a factor in why they might be associated with greater binge drinking -- perhaps because the only parents who will hold them in such circumstances are those who have drinking problems themselves, and thus have children at higher risk for such difficulties?

There's a lot to debate here -- but you'd never know it from the way teen drinking is covered by news organizations like 60 Minutes. By reporting that the only way to stop adolescent alcohol use is to "crack down harder," such as by passing laws which criminalize parents who hold drinking parties for teens, is neither an accurate account of the research into alcohol abuse, nor a genuine way to help create better alcohol policies.

Digg!

Maia Szalavitz is a senior fellow at the media watchdog group STATS.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Zero Tolerance Has Zero Effectiveness
Posted by: julesvern on Apr 20, 2005 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Extreme points of view are just not an answer to most of life's problems. And I mean both extremes - being too strict or too lenient. As a parent of grown kids, I allowed my kids to drink at home with friends and they have become responsible adults. I remember what it was like, most kids during their later teen years will drink with friends if they get the chance. I'd rather they do if safely and wisely. Now as adults, my kids do not have problems with drugs or alcohol. I also encouraged them to make their own decisions in other areas of their lives (where possible) and as a result they are very capable, and self assured adults. You also need to be a good role model. If you yourself have a drug or alcohol problem, regardless of whether you let them drink or restrict their drinking - the chances are they will also have problems. In the end it comes down to wise moderation. Just my 2 cents as a parent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Playing it safe.
Posted by: lamar on Apr 21, 2005 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How could 60 Minutes possibly advocate parents break local laws? Parents hosting drinking parties potentially are liable for child abuse, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, in addition to being civilly liable for any injuries sustained at the party. 60 Minutes is merely playing it safe. I also elect to play it safe by never watching that dumbed-down-for-middle-America show.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A symptom of something else
Posted by: Chanutin on Apr 21, 2005 10:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps we are missing the point in this debate. Excessive use of any drug is a symptom of other problems. Or, to put it in neurological terms, "It's the dopamine." If teenagers don't have ready outlets for their energy and creativity, if they spend their days in stultifying, humiliating, stressful environments, then they will want something to give them relief. Do you remember high school as a safe, emotionally rich, intellectually stimulating, creative, supportive, joyful place? Neither do I. Ditto the suburban sprawl wasteland. Give high school age kids a better deal and they won't need or want to binge drink.
Even so, most kids are going to show their lack of judgement at some point, get drunk, and puke. Whether they puke out the driver's door of a car on a back road, or off their own back porch, is something their parents can influence. Speaking as a driver, I'd like them to drink (moderately and occasionally, if ever) at home.
Which brings up the European paradigm. Let's teach kids that alcohol is a substance that you consume small amounts of with meals or in social situations, and is no big deal. Right now it is a rite of passage to adulthood, an act of rebellion, and a secret practice - with as much crammed into as little time as possible as a result. The zero tolerance approach will reinforce this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

mom
Posted by: djbh04 on Aug 9, 2005 7:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The simple fact is that underage drinking is illiegal and unsafe. New research shows the teen brain is continuing to develop until 20, and the areas which are undeveloped are the areas responsible for impulse control and decision making. As the mother of a 20, 17.14 and nine year old much more parental tolerance for drinking than not. As a result, kids can find a party any where which makes it hard to even let them out! If you combine this with the fact that most are so spoiled with cells, computers in their rooms, not having to work for what they want (lots of my kids friends don't even get summer jobs yet they are crusing around in cars provided by parents) you have a real problem. I do feel the laws are not strict enough and parents should be held legally accountable when they allow alcohol in their homes. Once parents get on the clue buss and they won't unless held accountable, you will see an impact on teenage drinking. I for one resent the idea that another parent would provide a "safe place to drink" (there is no safe place, parents can't watch kids all night anything can happen and has) and would sue a parent who provided a place for my child to drink should any harm come to him or her. It is unfortuante because of the current "party" climate, I have come to feel that sleepovers are history once my kids get to middle school, that cells are not a good idea (take on of ours if you go out and don't give out my number), computers can't be in their rooms and time on them should be limitedu and of course you have to check and double check everything.... it is more exhausting than having a toddler! Definately easier to hand them a car and a cell and say have a great time...oh you are going to so and so's Okay? you may be sleeping over? okay Everyone's doing it ? Okay!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]