Brain Development And

Public Policies
Some Background
Public policies especially legal
ages are formed responsively to
certain events dictating they are
necessary. Legal ages are set so
that individuals that reach that
age are deemed mature enough to
handle the responsibility of their
actions and are less likely to
engage in risk behaviors.
Whether or not they are mature
enough is determined largely by
evidence presented by those in
the neurosciences that anyone
outside of the field would not
understand but are easily
convinced by.

The Prefrontal Cortex

This region of the brain is
located behind the forehead and
is the basis for many arguments
regarding its development and
cognitive control. The prefrontal
cortex is widely accepted as the
last area of the brain to
develop and is associated with
rationalization and decision
making. Knowing what the
prefrontal cortex is responsible
for a logical assumption would
be that since younger adolescents
do not have this area fully
developed, it would be unwise to
allow them to shoulder the
responsibility of high risk
activities such as alcohol
consumption and driving.

Neuroscience Informing Public

Policy?
In short, yes it should but not
entirely. Neuroimaging and
Neuroscience is a study plagued
with few established measurement
variables and limited
understanding. Because of this
presenting evidence from this
study to advise public policies
should be done in moderation and
with great caution since it is
highly convincing to non-experts
and the results generated from
careless presentation may not be
in the best interest of adolescent
health professionals. Public
policies should be
multidisciplinary and thus relying
solely on neuroscience for these
decisions could produce negative
results.

Psychosocial Maturity
Psychosocial maturity is a
variable following a framework
where individuals that are able
to make consciously rationalized
decisions are considered more
mature. The more psychosocially
mature the individual is the less
likely they are to engage in
risky behaviors. A study done by
Sigrun Adalbjarnardottir
demonstrated that psychosocial
maturity seems to grow with age
and younger adolescents with
lower psychosocial maturity are
likely to engage in risk behaviors
regardless of peer involvement
with their rationalization based
on compulsion.

Legal Age Setting

Since adolescents that lack
maturity have followed a trend
where they act compulsively with
little to no rationalization,
setting legal ages on alcohol
and driving would be a well
advised strategy but what
should be the proper number to
settle on? Legal ages have been
set on the assumption that once
someone reaches that particular
age then they are culpable
enough to control their actions
and impulses. What if some
individuals develop culpability
sooner or later? There is no
evidence that suggests that 21 is
the only age where the
individual can begin to drink
responsibly and the age of 16 has
no empirical basis that the
adolescent will not take any
risky driving behaviors.

An Improved Model
Since raw numbers for ages are
insensitive to many contexts and
dimensions of maturity, a more
flexible model for public policies
regarding legal ages would
prove to be much more beneficial.
One way to approach this is to
assess the mature cognitive
competence at early ages and
progressively evaluate them to
determine when they are ready
to handle responsibilities of high
risk activities. This model would
likely follow age ranges instead
of fixed legal ages so that
psychosocial maturity evaluations
could serve as reliable predictor
variables for how likely the
individual will behave in drinking
or driving contexts.