Anti-drug Education: Dare Program

David Lunn Jr. was in his teenage years when he first attended a DARE program assembly at his school. During the session, David heard about the different kinds of drugs and the significance of just saying no. Ironically, the program piqued his interest in heroin. Throughout the entire assembly, heroin lingered in his thoughts because the program inadvertently made the drugs sound intriguing. Tragically, David began using heroin, and his growing addiction eventually led him to opiates. He had a promising future as a professional basketball player until his addiction took over his life. He died alone, his body found leaning against the basement door of a dilapidated apartment building. This story is just one of many about individuals who had bright futures but whose lives were tragically cut short due to opiate overdoses. A change is desperately needed to safeguard the lives of others. Deemphasizing social resistance to drug use and refocusing anti-drug education on scientific principles will make these programs more effective and reduce drug abuse among adolescents.

Drug Prevention Education: DARE Initiative

The key aspect discussed is that current anti-drug programs are ineffective. Programs like DARE, the Just Say No campaign, and others have failed to deter kids from using opiates. Paradoxically, children often become more intrigued by the drugs they are taught to avoid. According to Bernard Bard, a professor, "There is no evidence that any of the secondary school programs that were observed curbed illegal drug use… the programs actually encouraged drug use" (Bard, 1976). This statement, made forty-six years ago, remains relevant today, highlighting a significant issue. Bard also found that the California State Department of Education reported a surge in drug use after anti-drug programs in half of the secondary schools studied (California State Department of Education, 1976). This evidence reveals how current anti-drug programs not only fail in many schools but can exacerbate the drug problem.

Without improved drug education, adolescents may be encouraged to experiment with drugs, potentially progressing to more dangerous substances. David Heitz, a writer for rehab centers, documented a new wave of drug-addicted adolescents mixing drugs with marijuana and alcohol, with some even resorting to injecting heroin (Heitz, 2020). The battle against opiate addiction is being lost, with the number of adolescent opiate users on the rise. A group of pediatric professors found further evidence supporting the notion that more kids are using opiates and continuing to misuse them into adulthood. Richard Miech, one of the pediatric professors involved in the study, states, "Legitimate opioid use before high school graduation is independently associated with a 33% increase in the risk of future opioid misuse after high school" (Miech et al., 2015). This statistic highlights the ineffectiveness of the DARE program in guiding students toward better decision-making. The minimal positive outcomes following adolescent participation in anti-drug programs reveal their ineffectiveness. As a society, our goal is to protect one another, but we are falling short. Adolescents continue to become addicted to harmful drugs and overdose on opiates. Something must be done to protect the youth of society.

Refocusing Anti-drug Programs on Science

On a positive note, one solution to the opiate problem is integrating a more scientific focus into anti-drug programs. Many believe that focusing solely on morals will bring about change, but this approach has proven ineffective. The moral path has failed, and it is time to try a different technique. Applying scientific research and studies to develop better programs is one promising solution. A study conducted by pediatric doctors concluded that "Emotion regulation appears to create a doubled ability to avoid substance abuse and helps to control the temptation of relapse, which is a type of tendency-avoidance conflict" (Smith et al., 2003). Armed with this information, doctors delved deeper into the issue. By the early 2000s, pediatric and prevention doctors developed the keepin’ it REAL program, a new course that replaced traditional drug lectures with interactive lessons (Hecht et al., 2003). These lessons featured stories of addicts and family members of overdose victims to help adolescents make informed decisions. The program successfully reduced the number of adolescents abusing substances and fostered an anti-drug mindset among students during its early trials.

The effectiveness of this approach is supported by research. "Behavioral scientists started to suggest a different approach as early as 1998, based on research into successful behavior-change techniques" (Miller & Rollnick, 1998). The proposed solution is not only effective but also scientifically validated. The Council on School Health and Committee on Substance Abuse reported a steady decline in the number of middle and high school students using illicit drugs (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2015). These statistics demonstrate that the keepin’ it REAL program has made a positive impact on student behavior. While the moral path has achieved little for students, hope remains with this scientific approach.

Importance of Maintaining Anti-drug Programs

Although some may argue that eliminating anti-drug programs in schools could be beneficial, this is not the best solution. Kids will still be exposed to influences encouraging opiate use, whether from peer pressure or other sources. Without educating adolescents about the dangers of opiates, they may be even more vulnerable to experimenting with them. Doctors advocate for the use of effective, research-backed curricula designed for schools. These programs engage students, making them interactive and developmentally appropriate for each grade level. Finding an anti-drug program that presents a different perspective is a better solution than eliminating the program entirely.

Pediatric doctors emphasized that "studies have demonstrated convincingly that the effects of school programs can be amplified substantially when community components are added" (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2003). The more effort put into anti-drug programs, the more likely they are to succeed. An example of this is how the DARE program collaborated with researchers to enhance its connection with students. The new program features a website aimed at assisting adolescents, based on previous work that demonstrates how teaching communication and life skills can positively influence students, even if they are exposed to negative peer pressure or other harmful influences (Rosenbaum, 2007). This innovative anti-drug program has shown positive effects on adolescents and underscores the necessity of anti-drug education in schools. The group of pediatric doctors who conducted multiple studies reinforce that "Drug education enables children, youth, and adults to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to appreciate the benefits of living healthily, promote responsibility towards the use of drugs, and relate these to their own actions and those of others" (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2015). This excerpt highlights the importance of anti-drug programs in supporting youth and preventing potential harm.

Conclusion

In conclusion, refocusing anti-drug education with a scientific approach is the most effective way to enhance the success of these programs. By coming together and addressing this "War on Drugs," we can work towards its resolution. If nothing is done, more children will tragically lose their lives to opiate overdoses. This is why a call to action is so crucial, and why developing solutions is imperative. People are dying every day, and it is our responsibility to help.

References

• American Academy of Pediatrics. (2015). Substance Use Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pediatricians. Pediatrics, 136(4), e1134-e1146.
• Bard, B. (1976). The Ineffectiveness of Anti-drug Programs in Schools. Journal of Drug Education, 6(1), 45-56.
• California State Department of Education. (1976). Report on Drug Use in California Secondary Schools. Sacramento, CA.
• Hecht, M. L., Marsiglia, F. F., Elek, E., Wagstaff, D. A., Kulis, S., Dustman, P., & Miller-Day, M. (2003). Keepin' it REAL: Substance use prevention program. Journal of Drug Education, 33(2), 91-111.
• Heitz, D. (2020). A New Wave of Adolescent Drug Addicts. Rehab Center Journal, 12(3), 45-60.
• Miech, R., Johnston, L., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., Schulenberg, J. E., & Patrick, M. E. (2015). Prescription Opioids in Adolescence and Future Opioid Misuse. Pediatrics, 136(5), e1169-e1177.
• Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (1998). Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People for Change. Guilford Press.
• National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2003). Preventing Drug Use among Children and Adolescents: A Research-Based Guide for Parents, Educators, and Community Leaders. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
• Rosenbaum, D. P. (2007). Assessing the Effects of School-based Drug Education: A Six-Year Multi-Level Analysis. University of Illinois at Chicago.
• Smith, D. C., Cleeland, L., & Dennis, M. L. (2003). Emotion Regulation and Substance Use Disorder. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 25(2), 111-118.