Alcohol consumption is a widespread and often controversial in many countries, including the United States. Earl Rochester suggests a national system of licensing to combat this public health crisis in his proposal. In this essay, I will evaluate Rochester’s argument and discuss the extent to which I agree or disagree with his analysis, providing reasons and examples from my own experience, observations, or readings. I will also discuss counterarguments and refute them to provide a well-rounded perspective.
Earl Rochester argues that a large portion of American adolescents and adults drink alcohol, and a significant portion of them become alcoholics or problematic drinkers, leading to a major public health crisis. He suggests fighting this problem by implementing a national system of licensing for alcohol consumption, where applicants would have to study a manual on alcohol and the law and pass a written test before receiving a drinking license.
I partially agree with Rochester’s analysis. Implementing a licensing system for alcohol consumption could be one way to reduce the number of problematic drinkers, as it would require education on the responsible use of alcohol. However, there are several potential drawbacks to this approach.
Firstly, this licensing system may require more work to enforce. It would need significant resources to monitor and create the restrictions on alcohol sales to unlicensed drinkers, and the penalties for violations may need to be severe enough to deter these types of sales. Additionally, those who are determined to abuse alcohol may obtain it through illegal means, bypassing the licensing system entirely. For example, research has shown that simply reducing the availability of alcohol is not necessarily effective in reducing harm (Degenhardt et al.). Additionally, the enforcement of the licensing system and the penalties for violations may not be sufficient to deter problematic drinking.
Secondly, the licensing system may also be seen as intrusive and paternalistic, infringing on the rights of individuals to make their own choices about alcohol consumption. It could also perpetuate the idea that alcohol is a dangerous substance that requires government control rather than promoting responsible use (Duffy, 2). Finally, this licensing system may not address the root causes of problematic drinking, such as mental health issues or poverty, and may punish those who struggle with addiction rather than provide them with the support they need.
One counterargument to Rochester’s proposal is that it would infringe on individual rights and freedoms. It is arguable that individuals should be able to make their own choices about alcohol consumption without government intervention. Additionally, implementing a licensing system could be seen as an excessive government regulation that would burden individuals and businesses. Another counterargument is that the licensing system may not be effective in reducing problematic drinking. Additionally, the enforcement of the licensing system and the penalties for violations may be difficult to enforce and may not have an impact on problematic drinking.
However, this counterargument can be refuted by considering the deterrent effect of the licensing system and the penalties for violations. While it may not be perfect, the licensing system could still contribute to a reduction in problematic drinking. Additionally, the enforcement of the licensing system and the penalties for violations could be improved over time to increase their effectiveness.
In conclusion, while Earl Rochester’s proposal has some merits, it is not a complete solution to the problem of problematic drinking. Instead, a multi-faceted approach that addresses the underlying causes of problematic drinking, along with education and support for those who struggle with addiction, would be a more effective way to reduce the harm caused by alcohol. While it may have some benefits in terms of education and responsible alcohol use, there are also potential drawbacks and limitations to this approach. A more comprehensive solution that addresses the root causes of problematic drinking, provides support for those struggling with addiction and promotes responsible use through education is likely to be more effective in reducing the harm caused by excessive alcohol consumption.
Works Cited
Degenhardt, Louisa, et al. “Global Patterns of Opioid Use and Dependence: Harms to Populations, Interventions, and Future Action.” Lancet (London, England), vol. 394, no. 10208, 2019, pp. 1560–79, Web..
Duffy, Robert. Alcoholism: The Essential Guide. Bx Plans Ltd, 2019.