This multi-award winning channel produces programmes made by volunteers trained by the charity WORLDwrite

Subscribe to our podcasts using your preferred service:

Help with our podcasts

Don’t Shout at the Telly: Booze Bans


Don’t Shout at the Telly: Booze Bans

Suzy Dean takes government intervention on alcohol to task in this spikey on the sofa discussion. Are we incapable of deciding for ourselves or with our peers what, when, where and how much we drink? Do the army of advisors and advice from students unions to health professionals see us all as out of control victims of the demon drink and treat us like children? Should our social lives be controlled by the new temperance police and is it any of the state’s business what we consume? Suzy is clear the alcohol police will harm more than our livers, but not everyone agrees.

Recommended links:

Related topics: Civil Liberties, Debates

Subscribe to our newsletter


Leave a comment now

Claudia said:

Tolerance and damage to health are two completely different things, one speaker uses an example of how someone might be fine after ten pints, they may well be , in terms of their behaviour or how they are feeling but that doesn’t mean that that amount of alcohol is not doing any health damage to your body both in the short term and long term. Secondly an example is used about the use of pictures being patronising to poorer people, there i s some correlation between adult literacy problems and poverty and there are many young people in prisons who can barely read and write and who are there for drink related offences, and visual material is often used for this reason.

Tauras said:

I do not know about government position about that, but there are a few points to look at this issue: Alcohol can be addictive. Addicted individual usually long time disagree about his/her addiction. Not everyone is able to behave responsibly. Does anyone have addicted people amongst friends, relatives and family members? This addiction cannot be healed. It means that we have an issue not only at individual level. We can disagree about service need, or the way how to do. But it doesn’t mean that everyone is conscious enough to work out what is better for them. I can agree, that army of advisors is not necessary and services can be doubtful. But It is important to have in mind that socializing may acquire negative forms as well as street fighting, windows smashing, antisocial behavior etc . Who can prove these activities are not caused by alcohol at all? It does not mean, that every drunk person should be more aggressive, but even this discuss shows us that problem is. The problem with Individual view is that individual do not want (able) to see things in complex view. Always focusing on “it is my freedom, I am deciding…”. Probably alcohol can be advertised, and now it is very good, that people can see on a packages “drink aware” notifications. And we need to find way how persuade each other, that there are an alternatives for alcohol. And occasionally to socialize of course. And let’s focus at the title of this report “Boose bans”. I do not know clearly the meaning of boose, but as chronic individual I suppose it is something what extremely goes beyond of socializing. Is it?

Lluisa V said:

Definitely government doesn’t have to say us where, when and how much we should drink, as well as where, when, what and how much we should eat. However it is important that everybody know that drink too much it isn’t healthy, as eat overmuch unhealthy food, as well as to smoke. We have to be free to decide what we put on our body and to have the ability to make always the best choices for us. This is not something that can be imposed with overregulation, but must be part of the education of each person.

Andy H said:

I agree with Jenny M, the main problem is government and some snooping NGO’s poking into our private and personal lives. I strongly disagree with Manish R’s comment, the state does not protect us from things, it attempts to take away our independence.

Manish R said:

You can’t ignore binge drinking it is happenning so is alchoholism and surely the state is supposed to protect us with laws for everyone’s good.

Sunia said:

I don’t drink but I wouldn’t push that on other people.

Jenny M said:

The anti drinking stuff is over the top I agree but we are all made to be obsessed with our health these days and in some ways I don’t mind that but should we really be worried about other people’s isn’t that their business? I do think politicians should keep out of our private lives I agree with the main speaker on that.

J Howard said:

Excellent but shocking discussion is it so bad to want have a drink we are not all out of control and stupid.