THE DRUG CAMPAIGNS DON'T WORK

Britain's 'Harm Reduction' Policies Betray Our Duty To Guide And
Protect Children

Parents naturally tend to assume that drug education is all about
prevention, but they are wrong. For the past 15 years, "harm
reduction" has been the line peddled by most drug educators, teachers,
youth workers, local authority advisers, independent consultants and
trainers. And the Government, although it formally advocates
prevention, clearly agrees with the approach.

I am not saying harm reduction doesn't have a place: it is a
legitimate strategy when dealing with known users. Heroin addicts can
be encouraged to inhale the fumes rather than inject the liquid, thus
avoiding blood-borne diseases such as Aids and hepatitis. But I
believe it has no place in the classroom, where 90 per cent of pupils
have no interest in pursuing a drug-taking lifestyle. Yes, 40 per cent
will try cannabis, but most will give up after a puff or two.

The harm reductionists say they want to give children "informed
choices" and so they tell them how to use drugs "safely". But there
should be no choice - drugs are illegal. Do we let children choose to
speed or pilfer? And, anyway, they are not being properly informed.
GPs say there is no guaranteed safe way to take any drug.

Even the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority's guidelines for Key
Stage 2 - pupils aged seven to 11 - advocate "informed choice". Do we
really think children of that age are mature enough to make critical
life decisions? As a teacher, I know that many sixth-formers are not.

Harm reduction does not tackle drugs - it accommodates them. An
acceptance of drug use ensures that the number of users will increase.
As adults, we have a duty to guide and protect our offspring;
currently, they are being betrayed.

The literature on harm reduction from such sources as DrugScope,
Healthwise, Folens PSHE books, Lifeline, HIT, Release, etc abounds in
our schools. I am a biologist, but few drug educators are. Teachers
are busy people. When manuals appear with ready-made worksheets, games
and drug information, they will use them, assuming them to be reliable
and accurate.

Cannabis is consistently trivialised, despite abundant scientific
evidence of its dangers, especially in relation to the incidence of
mental illness. On its website, DrugScope, the charity that advises
the Government on drugs, denies the physical addictiveness of
cannabis, and makes no mention of its effects on the heart or the
immune and reproductive systems. The persistence of the drug in brain
cells and the huge increase in its strength since the 1960s are both
ignored.

A cannabis leaflet from Lifeline, a Manchester-based charity, shows
how a joint is rolled. The advice to children is: "Don't get caught."
Connexions, the Government-funded careers and advice service, sends
trendy literature to schools from the "Clued-up Posse", a group of
kids from Fife. Its cannabis pamphlet resembles a Rizla packet. My
sixth-formers thought it patronising and reckoned it encouraged drug
use.

The "Frank" campaign, the latest Government-backed drugs helpline,
heavily publicised in TV and radio adverts, is an opportunity lost.
Where are the hard-hitting messages? Since January, when stark
warnings appeared on cigarette packets, the National Smoking Helpline
has received an average of 800 more calls a week.

"Just Say No" was a spectacularly successful prevention campaign waged
in the United States between 1979 and 1991. Over that period, the
number of drug users fell from 23 million to 14 million. Daily
cannabis use fell by 75 per cent. Parents, tired of the trendy excuses
for drug-taking, joined the police, customs, social and youth workers
and teachers to promote the idea that, far from being normal or
socially acceptable, drug-taking was harmful.

A survey of American high school students at the time found that among
those who had decided to abstain from cannabis use, 70 per cent were
concerned about physical and psychological damage, 40 per cent were
deterred by the law and 60 per cent by parental disapproval.

America is once again advocating prevention and witnessing a decline
in use, aided by hard-hitting adverts. One shows teenagers dying in a
car crash after smoking pot. Zero tolerance policies are reducing crime.

I don't "Just Say No". After 16 years' experience of drug education in
a secondary school, I find that if I explain to pupils, using cell
diagrams, exactly how the damage occurs to the brain and body, point
out the social and economic consequences of illegal drug-taking, and
draw attention to the lost educational opportunities and employment
prospects, they start to appreciate the futility of the lifestyle.

Children need and want rules and regulations. They feel safe and
secure when they have boundaries to kick against. They dislike weak
teachers, and they often use parental indifference as an excuse to opt
out.

The recent decision by David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, to
downgrade cannabis from a class B to a class C drug has sent out a
powerful message. Among primary school children, 86 per cent now think
the drug is legal and 79 per cent that it is safe. Mr Blunkett's
obsession with heroin and cocaine is misguided. Of the six million
drug addicts in America, 60 per cent are dependent on cannabis.

And cannabis can act as a gateway drug. The war on drugs has not been
lost; it has yet to be waged.