The current drinking age law strips personal autonomy from young Americans by prohibiting them to legally make their own life choices concerning alcohol consumption. The United States government grants many forms of autonomy to Americans at the age of eighteen. As the statement by the organization Choose Responsibility declares, “the drinking age is the lone exception to the legal age of adulthood in the US. 18 year-olds can vote, enlist and fight in Iraq, enter into binding contracts, marry, own businesses, serve in judgment on a jury and a host of other rights and responsibilities” (Abridgement). Regardless of consequences of changing the drinking age law, it is morally wrong to strip eighteen to twenty-year-olds of the autonomy that the government has granted them in most other rights. Personal autonomy is a deontic good, therefore it is unethical for the government to deny individuals’ right to personal autonomy.

Two unidentified soldiers enjoy some recreation time at a sandbagged Navy Army Air Force Institute (Public Domain)

Opponents to the argument about the importance of the individual right to autonomy believe that the overall effects of the drinking age law outweigh personal autonomy. They cite the risks of drinking for young people, for their brains are still developing in their twenties (Dean-Mooney). The former president of the organization Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Laura Dean-Mooney, states, “during this period, alcohol negatively affects all parts of the brain, including cognitive and decision-making abilities as well as coordination and memory” (Dean-Mooney).  This counterargument is unethical, it de-prioritizes personal autonomy due to the false notion that the current drinking age promotes the safety of young Americans.