Forbidden Fruit

I blame the parents. The influences that surround young people in the home have a significant effect on the way that person grows up. In many ways you would think then that Sir Liam Donaldson's latest advice is sound: Don't let children drink before they are 15 and don't permit drinking in front of children. This is based on scientific research, and a final guidance is given on alcohol and children.

There is an underlying principle here that is absolutely correct. The way we deal with alcohol in the eyes of our children will effect their attitude to it when they are older. It is the responsibility of parents and any other adults to ensure young people develop with a mature and healthy regard for social drinking. How then can we make sure that this happens?

In the eyes of our chief medical officer the best way of doing this is to be overly protective and bring up our children in a completely alcohol free environment. I fundamentally disagree with this and once again I shall try and explain why.

Responsible drinking does not just happen by running a prohibitionist attitude towards young people and then suddenly letting them loose in an adult drinking culture once they reach a legal age. There are significant and detrimental effects of this method of youth discipline. For a start, no adult has enough control over youngsters to be able to watch their every waking hour. Levels of responsibility have to be carefully increased as the young person gets older. By the age of 15, which is the age that is now being recommended for a young person to start their responsible alcohol training, most young people already have a strong social life outside of the family home. If no parentally supervised drinking has taken place there is a very real risk that this activity will have already commenced on the park benches. The age old forbidden fruit will have tempted too much and the real problem of park bench drinking will have started.

I do have to point out that I understand the medical and social risks of young people under the age of 15 drinking too much and too often. But then that is something that even a 44 year old like me has to worry about a little for my own health. It is however a matter of, and here is that word again, responsibility. Of course I'm not going to allow my children to drink 4 pints every night, for that matter 4 pints in any night. At the age of 12 and 13 I wouldn't even consider allowing them more than say a couple of units one night a week. I cannot see how this level of responsible and supervised drinking can damage their well being. Indeed, if it is backed up with the one message that I believe is more important than anything else: It is not big and it is not clever to get drunk and behave like a dick head.

On Christmas day I hope we will sit down for dinner. There may be as many as 3 under 15 year olds at the table. There might be some wine and there might be some beer; we have a good cellar to choose from here. Does Liam really think I'm going to tell these young and intelligent people that even one glass is endangering their lives? Does he really think that telling them they are not old enough to understand yet how to enjoy this mysterious pleasure is somehow going to lessen their desire to try this out-of-reach taboo?

I firmly believe that it is the steady alienation of young people that creates some of the problems today. Drinking culture is much more generation divided today than it ever has been in the past. I know it is perhaps becoming a cliché, but the public house is a safe and supervised place to drink. A public house and a private house have some things in common and private houses, where a responsible adult can supervise, represent the best training ground a young person can get for responsible and healthy drinking.

There is a base message underneath the prescriptive detail that perhaps we need to look at. The way we deal with young people and alcohol can shape their future drinking habits. This I fundamentally agree with. I just do not believe that prohibition ever helped anybody when it comes to drinking. Being drunk in front of young people is indeed showing a poor role model. Excessive drinking by young people will cause medical problems with immature and developing physiology. These are facts that presumably is where the science is. However, the occasional drink never hurt anybody and if done as part of education this can only be a good thing. I believe there is a poor connection from the science to the advice which is further proof of the neoprohibitionist stance of this Government.

I do not believe this sort of detached thinking is the solution to the problems of drink induced health problems. I am not denying that there is evidence of real problems and there really are sections of society where drunken behavior is a big problem. Education is the solution, not draconian age limits. I feel insulted that as one of the "middle class" who really does believe that the education of the developing future adults in my care is being handled correctly, they have the wrong target as usual. Of course, I would like to think that if the young people who are carrying my genetic information into the future, along with instilled wisdom, will realise that lack of respect for the culture I'm training them in will result in a firm rebuff.

A slow and careful introduction to the art of drinking is more effective than false and arbitrary age limits. People do not suddenly mature into a different person at a magic age. Of course we should be concerned about how those young people in our care are nurtured. Of course we should be worried about them drinking on park benches and do what we can to prevent it. Giving young people the park bench as the only option available will drive them there, unsupervised and with the inevitable consequences that brings.

While I was checking the information about this issue on the Department of Health website I did find some good news; Sir Liam Donaldson is to retire next year. Not before time. Unfortunately, I doubt his successor will be any better.