Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:


After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.

UK: The drug campaigns don't work

Mary Brett

The Telegraph

Wednesday 19 Nov 2003

---
Parents naturally tend to assume that drug education is all about
prevention, but they are wrong. For the past 15 years, "harm reduction" has
been the line peddled by most drug educators, teachers, youth workers,
local authority advisers, independent consultants and trainers. And the
Government, although it formally advocates prevention, clearly agrees with
the approach.

I am not saying harm reduction doesn't have a place: it is a legitimate
strategy when dealing with known users. Heroin addicts can be encouraged to
inhale the fumes rather than inject the liquid, thus avoiding blood-borne
diseases such as Aids and hepatitis. But I believe it has no place in the
classroom, where 90 per cent of pupils have no interest in pursuing a
drug-taking lifestyle. Yes, 40 per cent will try cannabis, but most will
give up after a puff or two.

The harm reductionists say they want to give children "informed choices"
and so they tell them how to use drugs "safely". But there should be no
choice - drugs are illegal. Do we let children choose to speed or pilfer?
And, anyway, they are not being properly informed. GPs say there is no
guaranteed safe way to take any drug.

Even the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority's guidelines for Key Stage
2 - pupils aged seven to 11 - advocate "informed choice". Do we really
think children of that age are mature enough to make critical life
decisions? As a teacher, I know that many sixth-formers are not.

Harm reduction does not tackle drugs - it accommodates them. An acceptance
of drug use ensures that the number of users will increase. As adults, we
have a duty to guide and protect our offspring; currently, they are being
betrayed.

The literature on harm reduction from such sources as DrugScope,
Healthwise, Folens PSHE books, Lifeline, HIT, Release, etc abounds in our
schools. I am a biologist, but few drug educators are. Teachers are busy
people. When manuals appear with ready-made worksheets, games and drug
information, they will use them, assuming them to be reliable and accurate.

Cannabis is consistently trivialised, despite abundant scientific evidence
of its dangers, especially in relation to the incidence of mental illness.
On its website, DrugScope, the charity that advises the Government on
drugs, denies the physical addictiveness of cannabis, and makes no mention
of its effects on the heart or the immune and reproductive systems. The
persistence of the drug in brain cells and the huge increase in its
strength since the 1960s are both ignored.

A cannabis leaflet from Lifeline, a Manchester-based charity, shows how a
joint is rolled. The advice to children is: "Don't get caught." Connexions,
the Government-funded careers and advice service, sends trendy literature
to schools from the "Clued-up Posse", a group of kids from Fife. Its
cannabis pamphlet resembles a Rizla packet. My sixth-formers thought it
patronising and reckoned it encouraged drug use.

The "Frank" campaign, the latest Government-backed drugs helpline, heavily
publicised in TV and radio adverts, is an opportunity lost. Where are the
hard-hitting messages? Since January, when stark warnings appeared on
cigarette packets, the National Smoking Helpline has received an average of
800 more calls a week.

"Just Say No" was a spectacularly successful prevention campaign waged in
the United States between 1979 and 1991. Over that period, the number of
drug users fell from 23 million to 14 million. Daily cannabis use fell by
75 per cent. Parents, tired of the trendy excuses for drug-taking, joined
the police, customs, social and youth workers and teachers to promote the
idea that, far from being normal or socially acceptable, drug-taking was
harmful.

A survey of American high school students at the time found that among
those who had decided to abstain from cannabis use, 70 per cent were
concerned about physical and psychological damage, 40 per cent were
deterred by the law and 60 per cent by parental disapproval.

America is once again advocating prevention and witnessing a decline in
use, aided by hard-hitting adverts. One shows teenagers dying in a car
crash after smoking pot. Zero tolerance policies are reducing crime.

I don't "Just Say No". After 16 years' experience of drug education in a
secondary school, I find that if I explain to pupils, using cell diagrams,
exactly how the damage occurs to the brain and body, point out the social
and economic consequences of illegal drug-taking, and draw attention to the
lost educational opportunities and employment prospects, they start to
appreciate the futility of the lifestyle.

Children need and want rules and regulations. They feel safe and secure
when they have boundaries to kick against. They dislike weak teachers, and
they often use parental indifference as an excuse to opt out.

The recent decision by David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, to downgrade
cannabis from a class B to a class C drug has sent out a powerful message.
Among primary school children, 86 per cent now think the drug is legal and
79 per cent that it is safe. Mr Blunkett's obsession with heroin and
cocaine is misguided. Of the six million drug addicts in America, 60 per
cent are dependent on cannabis.

And cannabis can act as a gateway drug. The war on drugs has not been lost;
it has yet to be waged.

 

 

 

After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back. 




This page was created by the Cannabis Campaigners' Guide.

Feel free to link to this page!