Rhetorical Analysis Of Lowering The Drinking Age To 18

In her Article, “Lower the Drinking Age Back to 18: We Don 't Have Students Teach Each Other to Drive, Why Is Alcohol Different?” Elizabeth Glass Geltman describes why the legal drinking age should be reduced from 21 to 18. According to Geltman, both students and parents alike feel the frustration of the law; parents aren’t able to lawfully educate their children and students aren’t able to responsibly know their limits. The article comes after one University chose to ban hard liqueur on campus rekindling the age old debate. Between those that oppose and those that support the law, the topic appeals to a reader’s logos, pathos, and ethos in a variety of ways. Geltman’s main appeal in her article is an appeal to emotion. Geltman begins the article by introducing a personal story when she was coming of age in the late 1970s and early 1980s. During this time the drinking age was 18 and most students in Geltman’s high school graduating class were able to lawfully drink beer, wine, and hard liqueur without any consequences. This allowed for an environment where alcohol could be served at school events in the presence of parents and proctors. Geltman recalls how this environment helped her when she entered college, by being exposed to the effects of alcohol she was able to know her limits. Geltman furthers her …show more content…
Geltman describes how she is a “professor of public health and the parent of a 25-year old, 23-year old, and a 16-year old” which certainly gives her a sense of qualification when speaking about the matter. The life experiences she describes also give her a level of qualification. Geltman attempts to convince the reader of her credibility by making these statements and by describing how policymakers should follow the advice of 150 university and college presidents who signed the Amethyst Initiative and who advocate for the Choose Responsibility proposal to reduce the drinking age back to