cannabisnews.com: Just Say No Just Isn't Enough


cannabisnews.com: Just Say No Just Isn't Enough 





Just Say No Just Isn't Enough 
Posted by FoM on April 17, 2000 at 13:19:13 PT
By David C. Leven, The Lindesmith Center
Source: USA Today
As suggested in ''Parents get involved by discussing drugs'' (Life, Tuesday), it is critically important for parents to speak frankly with their children about drugs -- and more parents are doing so.However, increased discussion, even if it may result in greater professed disapproval of drugs by teens, has not, so far, translated into less teen drug use.
In 1999, the annual Monitoring the Future Study showed, for example, that the use of marijuana remained stable across age groups. Almost 1 in 4 high school seniors sampled said that they had smoked marijuana over the past month, and 6% said they did so on a daily basis, virtually the same figures as the prior year.The sad truth is that after two decades of the zero-tolerance-based ''just say no'' message, 80% of high school teens experiment with alcohol, 54% have used illicit drugs, while about one-third leave high school as cigarette smokers.None of us wants our teenagers to use drugs. Still, many children at least experiment with drugs. One reason is that they have learned that America is hardly drug-free; there are vast differences between experimentation, abuse and addiction; and the use of one drug does not inevitably lead to the use of others.Even as we stress abstinence, a safety-first strategy is necessary that provides our teens with information and resources so that they do the least harm to themselves and those around them. It needs to be honest and science-based. Students who use marijuana despite our strong admonitions to abstain need to be strongly encouraged to use in moderation and only occasionally -- never at school, work, while playing sports or while driving.If we are going to have a positive impact on teen drug use and not just attitudes, it is our responsibility as parents and teachers to engage students and provide them with credible information so they can make responsible decisions, avoid drug abuse and stay safe.David C. Leven, Deputy Director The Lindesmith Center New York, N.Y.  Published: April 17, 2000 Page 16A © Copyright 2000 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. Related Articles & Web Site:The Lindesmith Centerhttp://www.lindesmith.org/What Should You Tell Your Kids About Your Drug Usehttp://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3704.shtmlCannabisNews Articles From USA Today & The Lindesmith Center:http://google.com/search?lc=&num=10&q=cannabisnews+usa+today+site:cannabisnews.comhttp://google.com/search?lc=&num=10&q=cannabisnews+lindesmith+site:cannabisnews.com
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #5 posted by Kanabys on April 18, 2000 at 10:07:34 PT
What we need......
This is the type of article that needs to be printed in ALL newspapers in the US, hell, the world!! We need more of this!! I'm proud of Mr. Leven.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by Freedom on April 17, 2000 at 22:12:25 PT
Alex...
You might enjoy this older piece from USAToday, I know I recall it fondly:US: USAT: On The Web: A Virtual Breeze Comes To Washingtonhttp://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98/n1075/a10.html?104768
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by Tim Stone on April 17, 2000 at 14:23:46 PT
What!?!
It is fascinating to reflect back to the mid-to-later 80s when the prohibitionists had such total control of the media as would have been the dream of any old drunken Soviet commisar. All official pronouncements on the drug war were duly reported as gospel truth. Not even the most basic fact-checking of gov't propaganda statistics was ever allowed by any reporter's editor. No alternative source - NORML, Lindesmith, Drug Policy Foundation - would ever be interviewed for any drug war article. If the first casualty of war is the truth, as has been said, the second must be the closely related editorial "balance." The latter 80s were really, _really_ scary for fundamental freedom of the media, the more so because it was such rigorous editorial prior-restraint self-censorship. Most of the editors doing the censoring smoked pot back in college, fer crying out loud. And even though they knew better, they consistedntly regurgitated the gov't's part line, with no apparent guilt, shame or remorse. Anything but the Drug war, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a topic where the media have so sold out their long-term self interest so totally. But as Alexandre's example suggests, there does seem to be a sea change going on now. Editors - some of them anyway - are now actually permitted to allow into print points of view at variance with drug war orthodoxy. They still pretty much don't and won't fact-check the usual gov't lies, but they do now often actually dare to interview a reputable drug policy reformer for the article. The astounding pile of steaming myths and lies that have supported drug prohibition since the 20s, however, still seem to be mostly off-limits. The reporting is still, with rare courageous exceptions, couched in terms of how to learn from mistakes and how to prosecute the drug war more efficiently, not that the drug war is a crock from beginning to end. But yeah, Alexandre, I hear you. It's nice - after the free-speech horror of the 80s - it's _really_ nice to see less inhibition among the media in opening up the dialogue a bit. Better days, Tim Stone
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by Dankhank on April 17, 2000 at 14:20:01 PT:
Not Drug-Free?
"One reason is that they have learned that America is hardly drug-free; there are vast differences between experimentation, abuse and addiction; and the use of one drug does not inevitably lead to the use of others."Let's examine our drug-fused life here in America.We have competing drugs for nail fungus, athelete's foot and various foot creams.We have drugs for hair loss, substances for hair care, hair color eye care, wrinkles, appliances for snoring, sleeping with legs spread and sleeping flat, upright or any angle between.We have drugs for heart control, stroke prevention, cancer prevention, syphillis, herpes and aids coctails.We have drugs to stave baldness off, to stiffen men's resolve and ability.We have drugs for all manner of diseases that heal, and only kill about 100,000 people a year due to "side effects."The newest "'class" of drugs seems to be mood elevators ... recently advertized as encouraging you to "join the party."Side effects for that one are: elevated heart rate, dry mouth ... (see amphetamine) ...So now there is a legal "speed" analogue for sale for those who are shy.And the whole problem seem to be a group of drugs that have the capacity to make us feel good ???????Will wonders never cease ????? 
Hemp n Stuff
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Alexandre Oeming on April 17, 2000 at 13:42:43 PT:
Say WHAT?!?
>Students who use marijuana despite our strong admonitions to abstain need to be strongly encouraged to use in moderation and only occasionally -- never at school,work, while playing sports or while driving.THIS came out of USAToday?!? I am agogh, i am agahst! Has primetime seen common sense at last? This is the best thing to hit mainstream Amerika since the invention of sliced bread! This little tidbit is going to t.p.d. post-haste! :)
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: