A 2003 study by the Government Accountability Office, found that there were "no statistically significant differences" between those students involved in Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) programs versus those who were not. In other words, tests that indicated drug abuse resistance, showed no significant differences between the two groups. This may be a wake up call for drug prevention programs, and ought to make them rethink how they are telling kids to "say no to drugs" considering the program itself is estimated to cost over 215 million dollars annually.
In an article titled "D.A.R.E. Generation Wants Marijuana Legalized" author Jonathan Perri of the Los Angeles Times addresses this issue by telling the reader "As a graduate of D.A.R.E., I know all too well about the shortcomings of this program and of America's war on marijuana. Anti-drug groups such as D.A.R.E. refuse to acknowledge that today's marijuana prohibition causes the same problems as alcohol prohibition did in the 1920s. It's no wonder, then, that D.A.R.E. has been called ineffective by the National Academy of Sciences and, in 2001, was placed under the category of 'ineffective programs' by the U.S. surgeon general."
Although I believe the over arching problem of ineffective drug prevention programs seems to be the biggest concern, spending large amounts of money on programs that showed "no statistically significant differences" does not seem like the solution. However this could explain why drug use among teens continue to rise. While it only makes sense to stop funding such a wasteful program; as a graduate of D.A.R.E. I still feel it was better than nothing.
No comments:
Post a Comment