TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT DRUGS TO KIDS, IF WE DARE

Suppose you're a seventh-grade teacher. The school's new drug education
curriculum requires you to lead your students in an "honest discussion"
about marijuana. Drawing from the suggested questions, you ask students how
marijuana use might affect their schoolwork, athletic performance,
friendships, family life.

Then a hand shoots up.

"Did you ever smoke pot?"

Like millions of other American adults, you probably did. Maybe you still
do, every now and then. But if you want to keep your job, you'll dodge the
question. Or you'll answer it - with a lie. So much for "honest discussion."

America's leading drug-education program, Drug Abuse Resistance Education,
recently announced a fundamental shift in its approach. For almost two
decades, DARE has sent police officers into schools to teach children the
dangers of illegal narcotics.

But in the face of mounting evidence that the program doesn't deter drug
use, DARE officials decided on a different tack. Instead of lecturing on
the perils of drugs, police officers will lead discussions about why people
use these substances. Teachers will conduct role-playing and other
exercises to provoke dialogue about drugs and especially to help children
make "responsible decisions" about them.

These changes echo the historical shift in education about America's most
commonly abused drug: alcohol. By 1901, every state required instruction in
"the dangers of alcoholic drinks." Textbooks emphasized liquor's damaging
effects upon the brain, liver, lungs, heart and stomach.

Even eyesight was imperiled. One 1906 text noted "the red eyes of the hard
drinker," saying, "It is useless for such a person to ask the doctor to
cure his eyes as long as he uses strong drink."

With the rise of medical science, chemists and physiologists began to
challenge many of these claims. So did newly minted experts in the field of
experimental psychology, who charged that scare tactics and exaggerations
would alienate students or even tempt them to drink. Better to lead them in
a discussion of the full scientific, historical and sociological facts
about alcohol, so they could reach their own decisions about it.

By the 1933 repeal of national prohibition, textbooks had dropped many of
their distortions and lies about alcohol. In the guise of "discussion,"
however, schools continued to teach the same basic theme that had permeated
the subject from the start: abstinence. Adults now could use alcohol
legally, of course, but they did so at great risk to themselves and their
families. Children must never drink, because even a small amount of alcohol
could lead them into a life of ruin.

The new DARE approach reflects a similar mix of sincerity and duplicity. We
should applaud the program for abandoning its singular focus on the dangers
of illegal drugs, especially its wildly inflated estimations of their
addictive properties.

But we should also realize that DARE's goal has remained the same: to deter
kids from using drugs. Despite the new rhetoric, every lesson will
encourage children to choose abstinence and abstinence alone.

That might be a worthy objective, but it's dishonest. It's not even a
discussion. An honest discussion of illegal drugs would have to acknowledge
that many people have used them without harm, that other democracies
regulate them differently, that legal drugs sometimes cause more damage
than illegal ones and so on.

If we truly believed in our children's ability to make "responsible
decisions," we would allow - even encourage - this type of dialogue.
Instead, we provide only the information that tends to support our decision.

That's indoctrination, not education. Children always know the difference,
even when educators do not.