DARE TO PREVENT DEATH FROM DRUG ABUSE

Having lost my treasured son three years ago to a drug overdose, I
feel compelled to comment on Alan Bock's article, "Do we DARE sav(sic)
it?" [Commentary, June 13], as well as John Boag's letter criticizing
both the DARE program and the Huntington Beach Police Department [June
15]. My main concern is that parents of elementary, middle school and
high school age children support their children's participation in the
DARE program and not be influenced negatively by articles like Bock's

The one truism in the article is that 17 weeks of exposure to a
program in the fifth grade will not solve the problem of substance
abuse. No single program could be expected to address such a
multifactorial problem. DARE is not meant to substitute for parents as
role models for their children, but rather to augment parental
influence. Many parents simply do not have the information or
experience necessary to educate their children about the dangers of
drugs, leaving them feeling powerless.

The DARE program provides parents both with this information and with
educational tools to use in the home. The program is based on sound,
well-tested psychological theories promoting assertiveness,
decision-making and resistance to peer pressure and is implemented at
an age when most children have not become resistant to authority figures.

The Bock article compares apples (costs), oranges (unrelated studies),
grapefruits (semantics) and lemons (politics of marijuana use) and
concludes with a fruit salad of misleading ideas and statistics.

The Rand study of unrelated programs is used to criticize DARE, which
the study did not test. Furthermore, the Rand study did not validate
Bock's premise that treatment is superior to prevention. To
categorically state that treatment is the most "cost-effective"
approach to drug abuse and thus to question continued support of DARE
misses the point in human and practical terms. It is also an
inaccurate interpretation of unrelated statistics that could be
presented to support whatever conclusions the writer intended.

Since my son's death at age 29, I have exhaustively examined my role
as a mother, searching for answers as to what I could have done
differently to prevent him from suffering the pain of drug addiction.
I have been particularly drawn to the positive work done by the DARE
officers in Huntington Beach and to other local programs aimed at
substance abuse prevention.

My son started using drugs at a very early age at a Huntington Beach
elementary school. In my attempt to be a good parent, I had warned him
about riding his bike in the street, talking to strangers and wearing
his jacket when it was cold. It did not occur to me, however, to warn
him not to buy Valium with his milk money in the third grade.
Education and awareness of the signs and symptoms of drug abuse were
not available in the schools and the media then as they are today;
this broader awareness is due largely to the existence of programs
such as DARE.

If Bock's logic and reasoning is valid, it was acceptable for my son
to simply develop his addiction since it would be "cost-effective" to
treat the addiction later. This is precisely what happened to my son;
yet after nine separate treatment programs he still died. I have often
wondered whether a DARE program at the time my son entered elementary
school would have provided me and the other adults in his life with
the information, insight and ability to intervene earlier and more
successfully. I would have liked to have had that chance because
watching a child suffer and struggle with addiction and then to
receive a phone call from the coroner's office that he had died is
painful beyond imagination.

Substance abusers are not universally unloved or from horribly
dysfunctional families; but just loving our kids is not enough. I am
comforted when I see bumper stickers that read "Proud Parent of a DARE
Graduate." I know that these parents are involved and have just a
little bit more knowledge that may save their child's life.

No program is perfect. I haven't heard any DARE officers claim their
program is. DARE has undergone gradual refinement over the years and
encouraged on-going studies to validate the efficacy of the program
and effect positive changes. Rather that criticize DARE and call for
its demise, shouldn't we all look toward even better solutions/