OPTIMISM A WINNER WITH DRUGS

CONCERNED about the escalating drug problem in Canberra, a few of us
recently got together to form an action group, People for a Drug Free
Society. Our first public activity was an information stall at the ACT
Alive event on Canberra Day.

The response far exceeded expectations. Several hundred people visited
our stand, the overwhelming majority of them expressing support. This
rather refutes the claim made by those who advocate legalising illicit
drugs, that social policies with the aim of a society free from drugs
of abuse have little support and are doomed to failure.

The president of Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform (ACT) Inc.,
Brian McConnell, put such an argument in these columns last week
("Simple slogans no answer to drugs", CT, March 12, p.15). He
dismissed the aim of a drug-free society as a "simplistic slogan'' and
poured scorn on the drug policies of Sweden, a country that has this
goal underpinning its anti-drug strategies.

In his attempt to discredit Swedish drug policy, Mr McConnell produced
a table that purported to show that in the context of heroin abuse
Sweden in 1997 had an overdose death rate of 28.4 per million
population - only a little less that Australia's rate of 32.8. This
figure was not sourced, and it is in fact wildly inaccurate. The
Swedish Government's own estimate of the number of heroin overdose
deaths in 1997 is 62. For a population of nine million this is an
overdose death rate of seven per million, not 28.4 as Mr McConnell
claimed. The huge error in his figure perhaps indicates what reliance
can be placed on the rest of his argument.

If Mr McConnell knows so much about anti-drug policies in Scandinavia
he should be aware that the aim of a drug-free society is anything but
a "simplistic slogan''. To quote from the Swedish Government's
explanation of its policy: "A drug-free society is a vision expressing
optimism and a positive view of humanity: the onslaught of drugs can
be restrained and drug abusers can be rehabilitated.''

Conversely, the view held by those who advocate drug legalisation
seems to be one of cynicism and pessimism: that the war against
illicit drugs has been lost, that there is no point in trying to
rehabilitate drug abusers, and we should be content with making drugs
"safely'' available to all.

Such a defeatist attitude clearly has no appeal to the many parents
and others who called at our information stand. If the number of
inquiries fielded and the large number of drug information leaflets
taken away is anything to go by, there is a great hunger in Canberra,
particularly among parents of teenagers, for accurate information
about drugs of abuse and how to deal with this problem when it arises
within the family.

A point that has to be emphasised is that a key factor in the
Scandinavian approach to drug abuse is education. This is based on the
simple logic that if you can persuade school-age children not to use
illicit drugs in the first place, the results will be apparent later
in terms of a significant reduction in the demand for drugs and a
reduction in the number of habitual drug users.

This is what has happened in practice. In Australia in recent years
there has been an explosion in the number of teenagers becoming
addicted to heroin.

Heroin a small part of problem

For Sweden, in contrast, the preventative focus of drug policy has
helped to keep the new recruitment of intravenous heroin users at a
low level. The majority of Swedish heroin users began their drug abuse
in the 1960s or '70s. The average Swedish "heavy drug'' abuser is now
between 30 and 40 years old.

In Australia, and the ACT is no exception, the drugs debate has tended
to be hijacked by the heroin issue. This has happened at least in part
because heroin use is dramatic and can easily be glamorised: by now we
have all seen those TV news clips of addicts furtively huddled around
a table, filling their syringes. On the streets there is more fodder
for the cameras when some unfortunate addict is found dead in a back
alley.

Heroin is in reality only a small part of the problem. In the ACT
marijuana smoking is rife among school children and far exceeds heroin
use.

Statistics tucked away discreetly near the back of the ACT Health
Department's recently published (and ironically named) report
Minimising Harms, Maximising Outcomes reveal that in 1996 30 per cent
of boys at ACT secondary schools and 26 per cent of girls admitted to
having used marijuana

The comparable Swedish figure, not just for marijuana but for illicit
drugs of all kinds, is 8 per cent, and the Swedish Government is
worried because it considers this rate too high! Yet with marijuana
use by boys in Canberra now at four times the Swedish level, our ACT
Government appears totally unmoved.

If anyone still believes that marijuana is a "soft'' drug they had
better think again. It is addictive and its toxic effects on the brain
are now well documented. Even short-term use can interfere with memory
and cause distortion of the senses, reasoning and behavioural
attitudes. Taken over the medium or long term it can cause learning
difficulties, loss of motivation, hostility toward other family
members, and mental illness. Marijuana combined with amphetamines
("speed'') and/or alcohol can be a lethal combination. Our experience
at ACT Alive indicates one thing very clearly: there is much concern
among parents about perceived or suspected drug abuse by their teenage
offspring, and also much uncertainty about what action to take. A
frequently heard comment is: "Our kids tell us that marijuana is now
legal in the ACT; we try to tell them it's not, but they say they
can't see any difference between 'decriminalisation' and
'legalisation' it sounds all the same.''

Three years ago, in an interview in The Canberra Times, the departing
head of the ACT Department of Education, Cheryl Vardon, warned that
the "permissive'' atmosphere surrounding drugs in the ACT could have a
serious impact on adolescents. She urged that more emphasis be given
to drug education.

In 1995 the ACT's official drug strategy did in fact set a two-year
goal of "enhancing drug-education programs in schools and colleges and
for young people who have left education''. Three years later no
action had been taken other than to set up an "inter-agency
drug-education working group''.

In those three years all the signs are that ACT youngsters have been
taking to drugs of abuse in ever-increasing numbers, and as a
consequence a tragic minority are ending up in psychiatric hospitals
and methadone clinics, or dead in some back alley.

In early February I wrote to the Minister for Education, Bill
Stefaniak, seeking details of what was actually happening in drug
education. A month later I got a reply stating that the ACT was
"currently developing a drug-education policy framework''.

Talk about Nero fiddling while Rome burns!