In my sophomore year of high school here at Ripon High, I reached one milestone; I got my license. At 16 years old, getting my license feels as if I have total freedom, but then I realized the hard truth. I can drive, but I can’t vote, drink, or even rent a car. Then I thought, “Maybe at 18, I’ll finally have full adult freedom.” But that isn’t true either. At 18, I can vote, work full-time, and be legally considered an adult, yet I still can’t legally buy alcohol or rent a car. These inconsistencies made me wonder, is there any real reason behind these age limits, or are they just arbitrary laws? After doing further research I came to the conclusion that there is no set age of maturity for every individual, so rights should be granted based on competency rather than age.
The contradictions in U.S. law send mixed messages about what it means to be an adult. We are expected to follow rules that don’t make any sense. Catherine Rampell, a journalist, explains these inconsistencies, “For drinking, driving, fighting in the military, compulsory schooling, watching an R-rated movie, consenting to sex, getting married, having an abortion or even being responsible for your own finances, the dawn of adulthood in America is all over the place.” America still hasn’t figured out a way to explain how an 18 year old operates a tank in the military, but still can’t rent a car, and these are just some of the contradictions that American teens face in everyday life.
However, these adulthood rights are a tricky situation to figure out. It is unrealistic to expect one legal age of maturity to fit everyone, as everyone matures differently. Professor Leah Somerville provides brain developmental data that shows that there actually isn’t one age of adulthood in the brain. Somerville states, “Brain development occurs in waves, with different brain regions having their major developmental events at different times. So, the measurements that index brain maturation will give you different answers depending on what measure you’re focusing on and where in the brain you’re looking.” This means that there is no set age in which your brain will tell you that you are an adult.
Dr.Jess Shatkin further proves Somerville’s point. Shatkin comments on his research, “There are big changes in the brain until the early 20s, and there may be pretty significant changes still until the early 30s. We’re still learning. Whereas, once upon a time, we imagined adolescence to end at 18, now we don’t really know when this process of development ends. … Twenty-five, 26, 28, 30, 32? We don’t know.” This research proves that assigning all adult rights at a single age does not align with the way our brains actually work, as there is not a single adult age. If adulthood is a gradual process that varies based on each person, then our legal system should reflect that.
Some may argue that it doesn’t matter if logistically there is no set age of maturity, because there needs to be a set age of maturity for legal consistency no matter what. But having one set age of adulthood isn’t exactly the answer, as there is evidence proving that a more flexible maturity system could work. In some states, a flexible maturity system has been set up in the form of a “graduated drivers license”. States saw an issue in the number of car crashes among teens, so they decided to come up with a way to ensure teen drivers could handle the responsibility of driving. Graduated Drivers License still allows teens to get their license at 16, but only when proved that the teen is responsible enough to drive by completing a certain amount of hours. After the teen gets their license, they will still have it on a probationary basis. Alan Greenblat provides data proving how well a flexible maturity system like a GDL works. Greenblat states, “In 2007 in Illinois, 155 teens between the ages of 16
and 19 died in automobile crashes. In 2008, that number fell to 92. Those results
track with findings on GDLs nationally.”
The competency based system of the GDL should be applied to two inconsistent laws; the drinking and voting laws. 18 year olds can be trusted to decide the future of the country by voting, yet they cannot be trusted to drink alcohol? These age limits are not rooted in science and do not account for individual maturity at all, which is why a competency based system like the GDL would fix the voting and drinking age laws. Instead of automatically granting full voting rights at 18, people could gain voting privileges based on civic knowledge and engagement. And instead of 21 being the drinking age, alcohol could be gradually introduced to those who prove themselves responsible enough.
When should people be considered an adult, and at what point should they attain the legal rights of adulthood? Adulthood varies based on every individual, and the rights that they attain should be reflected on that. Like the graduated drivers license, laws should be based on teens being educated, rather than reaching an arbitrary age.
