EXPERT: RISKY TEEN BEHAVIOR IS ALL IN THE BRAIN

A new review of adolescent brain research suggests that society is
wasting billions of dollars on education and intervention programs to
dissuade teens from dangerous activities, because their immature
brains are not yet capable of avoiding risky behaviors.

The analysis, by Temple University psychologist Laurence Steinberg,
says stricter laws and policies limiting their behaviors would be more
effective than education programs.

"We need to rethink our whole approach to preventing teen risk," says
Steinberg, whose review of a decade of research is in the April issue
of Current Directions in Psychological Science. It's published by the
Association for Psychological Science.

"Adolescents are at an age where they do not have full capacity to
control themselves," he says. "As adults, we need to do some of the
controlling."

Neurological researchers around the country, spearheaded by Jay Giedd
of the National Institute of Mental Health, have in recent years found
that the brain is not fully developed until after 18. The brain system
that regulates logic and reasoning develops before the area that
regulates impulse and emotions, the researchers say.

Studies by Steinberg and others have found that the mere physical
presence of peers increased the likelihood of teens taking risks.

Now he's using brain imaging to better understand why teens are so
susceptible to peer pressure. He has just begun pilot projects to
study brain activity in teens when doing various tasks with their
peers, compared with adults under similar circumstances.

Steinberg believes raising the driving age, increasing the price of
cigarettes and more strongly enforcing underage drinking laws are
among ways to really curb risky behavior.

"I don't believe the problem behind teen risky behavior is a lack of
knowledge. The programs do a good job in teaching kids the facts," he
says. "Education alone doesn't work. It doesn't seem to affect their
behavior."

Michael Bradley, a Philadelphia-area psychologist and author
specializing in teenagers, says U.S. culture tends to view teens as
small adults when, neurologically, they are large children.

"Kids will sign drug pledges. They really mean that, but when they get
in a park on a Friday night with their friends, that pledge is nowhere
to be found in their brain structure. They're missing the neurologic
brakes that adults have."

Bradley also is worried about the future now that risky behaviors have
trickled to the preteen set.

"People look at risk statistics, and they're more or less steady. It
looks like things aren't getting that bad. But risk behaviors have
been ratcheted down to younger and younger ages," he says. "What the
parents may have dealt with at ages 16 and 17, the kids are dealing
with at 11, 12 and 13 -- at the time when their brains are least able
to handle complex decisions about risk behaviors."

Such policy talk -- even from psychologists -- sparks a useful
conversation, says Isabel Sawhill, co-director of the Center on
Children and Families at the Washington-based Brookings
Institution.

"It is good research for policymakers to consider, but we shouldn't
infer from this research that all our past efforts have been
ineffective," she says. "I'm not in favor of just doing education, but
I'm also not in favor of not doing it, either. We need to do some of
both."

Experts such as Sawhill and Caterina Roman, a senior research
associate at the Washington-based Urban Institute, say some
educational programs do work. But the widely popular Drug Abuse
Resistance Education program known as DARE, launched in the 1980s, was
determined to be ineffective.

Roman believes that recent findings that the teen brain is not yet
fully developed will spawn some of the restrictions Steinberg recommends.

"Ten years from now, the driving age will be higher than it is now.
The price of cigarettes will increase," she predicts.

Steinberg says he's not advocating a police state. But he says parents
must help their children make wise decisions.

"We've given them too much freedom," he says. "We don't monitor and
supervise them carefully enough."