I'm putting this in the Culture forum because it's a cultural issue, one whose difficulties won't be resolved through legal interventions.

This morning I heard the story of a couple whose three small children were taken into temporary custody while on holiday in the Algarve - because their parents were too drunk to look after them.

Just after 10pm a children's charity was asked to look after the children where they remained for about 12 hours.

The father passed out on sofa in reception and couldn't be woken and the mother fell asleep beside the bar and couldn't be woken. The parents are unavailable for interview.

This isn't an isolated incident and because I spend a little time in the courts I hear of all kinds of alcohol related incidents - just last week, one man who got eleven staples in the back of his head because of a blow to the face (by a man who had drink taken) and another man who got 26 stitches to his face and ear after being attacked in a pub with a bottle. He has a four inch scar across his left cheek. And that's just a flavour of what goes on.

My experience also, for what it's worth, is that while foreign nationals are likely to be found drunk in charge or driving under the influence they are almost never involved in assaults.

I'm very sceptical that a change in opening hours is going to make any difference.

What is it about the Irish and drink - and what are we going to do about it?

Hopefully nothing. I deal with alcohol and the vast majority of donkeys are full of drugs. The drugs allow them to drink many times what many would consider normal. I have seen people go from apparently sober to passed out in 10 minutes. I don't know what type of pill they take but blaming drink is tackling the wrong problem

There's an element of that here too, youngdan and it's becoming more prevalent. The trouble often is that there's a period of mania before the conked out stage kicks in.

In any case, the Irish were heavy drinkers before coke or E ever came on the scene here and I would say there are still a majority of drinkers who are not taking drugs - even if the number who do is growing all the time.

What is it about Irish people that they want to spend the weekend in a stupor? Or that they are aggressive while drunk? Or that the aim of a night out is to get smashed or hammered or locked...?

I disagree with you when you say we should do nothing about this - though I don't know that there is a way to 'make' people feel a sense of responsibility for their own alcohol intake. I'm not sure that outside interventions are of much use - but what else is there for a problem that seeps its way into every corner of society, in to many family homes, classrooms and sportsfields across the country? We can't force change on people - but how do we encourage them to change themselves?

It is a very difficult question and it is indeed a real problem. I think to change the habits of adults is the most difficult, it is far easier to change those of younger people. The best way to do it is surely to encourage people into other, more productive and rewarding activities. That would require a renewed spirit of volunteerism though- which again promotes a dilemma of how you achieve that.

Bertie Ahern launched some big think on civic engagement about two years ago. One of our lecturers in College sat on the committee. I've never heard anything of it since.

When I spent many the weekend in a stuper in Galway city I remember a level of violence that did not even register compared to my understanding of the present sitution. My opinion is that even in a sober state what has disappeared is the emotion of empathy toward other human beings. An average person of 45 has this and the average person of 20 does not. They are 2 different animals. An unusual poster on Pie opened a thread linking to a scotch guy who was broadcasting in Canada on how this destruction of empathy was deliberate. I was the only one to respond after listening to a fairly long audio clip. I thought what the guy said was astounding.

On a technical level, binge drinking has been found to give people a chemical high in the brain that is addictive, and that is quite different to the sleepiness and depression that can affect the slow and steady drinker.

A nurse in our family works in a ward in Enland with people in their early 30s dying of terminal liver damage - this was formerly a disease seen in 50 and 60 year olds.

Is it in any way linked to availability of cash and alcohol? Again, the evidence if we want to look at research results is that substantial price increases do reduce consumption.

In the States do you have to be 21 to drink and buy alcohol? Is it enforced?

I have seen very little in the way of guidance from older people in Ireland - it used to be a regular defence plea in courts to say "he had drink taken". Is that still the case? The Press also reflect an attitude that crack and drink are one and the same.

I agree with Johnfás that there is a need for state run youth services - every other country in Europe seems to have one. In Germany and France, people in their late teens and early twenties run the youth services for the teenage age group and take a lot of responsibility. In some of the most deprived urban areas in Ireland the only youth services are very small numbers of places provided under a Department of Justice run scheme for young people at risk of offending. Parents were giving out to me that the only way their teenage sons could get into a youth club was by committing an office. Time for a change on this.

Every state in the Union is 21 years. Enforcement depends on each town but generally speaking it is strictly enforced. Violation carry a penalty of 2/3 days closure with eventual loss of license. Most towns would have a cop solely dealing with alcohol. The State has maybe 10 enforcers as well but they are spread thin. People still get hammered but less violent which might be the extra 3 years

Kate P wrote:

This morning I heard the story of a couple whose three small children were taken into temporary custody while on holiday in the Algarve - because their parents were too drunk to look after them.

That's really sad. Was this covered in the media.

I had an alcoholic parent and I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

I don't think the State can change attitude or culture.

What the State can do is throw the book at publicans and off license owners who serve people who are obviously drunk. Furthermore, people should be prevented from buying large quantities of alcohol in a single purchase. There would be a lot of moaning about Christmas and other festivals but hey, here's news: Christmas isn't about getting drunk.

I also think that Local Authorities should have the power to designate certains days and dates as alcohol free days ie licenses holders in that area cannot sell drink on those days. Would the entire drinks industry collapse if for one day a month they couldn't sell drink?

I really enjoy a drink, and get annoyed when my access to alcohol is curtailed by rules designed to deal with people who can't drink responsibly, but if it prevented kids seeing their parents lying on the floor in a drunken stupor I'd glady forgo a little convenience.

A drunk is a drunk and a junkie is a junkie. Accept reality. The idea that days should be alcohol free is the height of denial. Did I not read that drunk 10 year olds ran riot in Finglas. It is the luck of God that we had prohibition here or otherwise people would be calling for prohibition. If a drunk assaults someone bring him to court and punish him. He is most likely on drugs anyway. If a publican serves an obviously intoxicated person then punish him. The law here is very clear. If a cop is undercover and comes in to a bar he might notice that there is a guy out of his head or even passed out. He can not say anything because that person could have been sound when he got the beverage 15 minutes before. He will watch until he sees the drunk being served the next drink at which time an offense has been committed. This is a serious offense and is good for 3 days closure.

youngdan wrote:

A drunk is a drunk and a junkie is a junkie. Accept reality. The idea that days should be alcohol free is the height of denial. Did I not read that drunk 10 year olds ran riot in Finglas. It is the luck of God that we had prohibition here or otherwise people would be calling for prohibition. If a drunk assaults someone bring him to court and punish him. He is most likely on drugs anyway. If a publican serves an obviously intoxicated person then punish him. The law here is very clear. If a cop is undercover and comes in to a bar he might notice that there is a guy out of his head or even passed out. He can not say anything because that person could have been sound when he got the beverage 15 minutes before. He will watch until he sees the drunk being served the next drink at which time an offense has been committed. This is a serious offense and is good for 3 days closure.

I once had the displeasure of helping to carry a Minister of State for Education home from the pub.

If it is acceptable for our national leaders to drive the wrong way up a motorway without seeing the inside of a cell, this is where I would like to see a change made.

Could we not raise the age limit to 21 and raise the tax on alcohol enough to pay for all the medical and other costs and then double it?

Apart from that, I agree with youngdan that the novel approach of enforcing the law might do the trick.

A change to 21 is a bit much. What I would do is go to 19. That would give young people leaving home a chance to experience independence before they hit the pubs. Have a tamper proof id and have serious enforcement. The pubs would adjust very fast if their license was at stake. The problem is nobody has respect for cops or the law. This drunk driving is a joke. There is no difference given a farmer with a large capacity out the country drinking 2 pints and the man who must have 20 pints if he was that drunk. The blood alcohol limit is way to low. Raise it to 7 pints and make it severe. It is speed that is killing anyway. Taxes on drink is high enough because problem drinkers will buy in the off license anyway. I would allow smoking sections and non smoking and they would be enjoyable places to go. The owner could bar anybody for any reason because he is responsible for his house

I was going to suggest that maybe we over-regulate in this country (and under-enforce, which seems to be the worst of all possible combinations) then I read youngdan's post above.

Drunk Driving is a joke? Raise the limit to seven pints? You are kidding?

I'd start by banning the connection between the taking of The Pledge and confirmation.

I am not kidding. Anyone who can't drink 7 pints over the course of a night out should give it up altogether. I have seen a lot of drunk people but never saw one drunk after 7 pints. If a person drank 7 pints in an hour maybe but over 3 to 4 hours it is 2 pints per hour. Anyway I believe it is drugs that are causing the problem

youngdan wrote:

I am not kidding. Anyone who can't drink 7 pints over the course of a night out should give it up altogether. I have seen a lot of drunk people but never saw one drunk after 7 pints. If a person drank 7 pints in an hour maybe but over 3 to 4 hours it is 2 pints per hour. Anyway I believe it is drugs that are causing the problem

Alcohol is a drug.

[quote="cactus flower"]

youngdan wrote:

I am not kidding. Anyone who can't drink 7 pints over the course of a night out should give it up altogether.

No, they should stick with it. Rome wasn't built in a day, and nobody ever said that drinking 7 pints was easy.

The problem with people now is that they give up too easily. Get out there and keep at it, it what I say. Sure, you mightn't get to 7 pints for while, and you'll probably have all sorts of embarrassing incidents with chicken dinner boxes and the bouncers at Reynards, but before you know it, you'll be binge drinking with the best them. This is what you were born to do. Don't let the side down.

Scoff all you like but I hope you don't think that the problems seen are the result of a handfull of pints. How about a half bottle of vodka and a tablet before they hit the pub or club.

Kate P wrote:

I'd start by banning the connection between the taking of The Pledge and confirmation.

What would that do? And in what manner would the Pledge continue? Isn't it a church thing; can anyone say to the Church, 'stop conecting the two'?

I think I've asked this question before but bear with me, is drunkenness a crime now? I can just about get 'drunk and disorderly' (disorderly is a very loose term, is an untucked shirt disorderly?), but surely drunkenness is not a crime?

I've repeatedly heard it said that we have a problem, that things need to change, that we need to think about how we are affecting our children. I've been listening to this since I was a child, and it serves as an uninteresting background noise, much like images of horrific car-crashes are regular dinner-time viewing on the telly. I think that the debate itself, which has had no change that I know of, is becoming old and tired.