The zero-tolerance drug programs that have
become institutions in American schools and communities do not
deter teen use, according to five separate studies, which accuse
proponents of using flawed or misleading data to keep programs
intact. The studies, released in concert today, argue that students
tune out programs that overstate the ill effects of drugs and
are more influenced by peers and the media than by teachers. They
were written by seven researchers and published in the February
edition of Evaluation Review, a scientific journal featuring peer-reviewed
evaluations of social programs. "As soon as kids are told
that they can make decisions but there is only one right decision
to make, they stop listening," said Joel Brown, one of the
evaluators and a co-editor of the Evaluation Review issue. Brown
is director of the Center for Educational! Research and Development
in Berkeley and the author of a similar study in 1995 for the
state Department of Education. He believes "Just Say No"
type programs can erode already tenuous relationships with adults
and create unnecessary psychological tension" by telling
teens there are dire consequences to drug use when teens are seeing
peers use without effect.
But the director of the federal Safe and
Drug Fire Schools Program said the U.S. Department of Education
will not tolerate programs that tell students that some use is
OK. "It's foolhardy," said Bill Modzeleski. "We've
had this debate with Dr. Brown in the past. The administration
cannot and will not endorse any type of program whereby the position
is anything less than, Kids are not to use drugs. And at least
one prominent researcher accused the authors of portraying all
programs as rigid and sensationalistic. Phyllis Ellickson, a Rand
Corp. researcher who helped create the Project Alert anti-drug
curriculum, said good programs acknowledge that there can be a
variety of drug experiences, but tell students that drugs are
not to be used and help them learn to fend off peer pressure.
Today's drug programs have not been effective in deterring all
teens, she said, but she believes some prevention is better than
none. She also disagreed with the studies' notion that simply
delaying drug use equates to failure. "Delaying the onset
of drugs or the transition to regular use is a very desirable
goal," she said.
The debate is particularly heated because
the age of first use has seen a steady decline. According to a
1997 study by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, more than
half the countrys eighth-graders had tried alcohol and nearly
one-quarter had tried marijuana. An average of one student in
every eighth-grade class had tried LSD or cocaine. Michael Koerner,
who coordinates anti-drug programs for the San Juan Unified School
District; said he no longer is surprised when third-graders take
drugs and that parents should expect their children will be exposed
to drugs by the sixth grade. "It used to shock me,"
he said. "Now I get calls (about elementary children) more
and more often." The number of teens trying drugs also has
skyrocketed. More 12- to 17-year-olds reported using marijuana
in 1995 than at any time in the history of the National Household
Survey on Drug Abuse, which began in 1962.
More than double the number of teens reported
trying cocaine and inhalants than in 1991. And the rate of teens
using heroin and hallucinogens like LSD posted particularly sharp
increases. One educator said the leap in use actually may prove
that anti-drug programs work. According to a state Office of Education
consultant; forced cutbacks in 1992 for elementary and middle-school
drug counseling and other anti-drug programs coincide with sharp
increases in use. "To be effective, drug and alcohol programs
have to be stable and comprehensive,' said Greg Wolfe, a consultant
for the state's Healthy Kids Program.
Copyright The Sacramento Bee 1998
