ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE-SOC F019

How Drug Assistance Rehabilitation Education (DARE) can prevent alcohol and drug abuse

Drug Assistance Rehabilitation Education (DARE) were classroom lessons offered by police officers to teach children on the impact of drug abuse and peer pressure. DARE was shaped by teachers and police officers rather than prevention specialists. Critics of the DARE program point out that police officers employed traditional methods of teaching that simply focused on creating awareness rather than incorporating interactive learning that emphasizes on general and social competencies. For instance, project DARE focused on teaching elementary-age children to say “no” to drugs. On a contrary opinion, when such children get older they become curious about some of the drugs they were taught by police officers and might secretly say “yes” (Faupel et al., 377). I think the DARE program needs to be a more effective social influence model and teach children drug-resistance skills. By doing this, the program will have taught children general social and personal skills they require in order to respond effectively when confronted with illegal substances.

While DARE has been testing various revisions with the aim of improving the program, there are a number of variables that should be included to increase the effectiveness of this social influence model. Faupel et al., (366) argue that the new DARE program has not been effective in changing drug use behaviors among students in elementary school and those in middle school. The program should hence focus more on addressing mental and emotional topics, support networks, assessing risk and coping skills. Rather than offering a program that is based on lectures, profits, politics, hysteria and media, the DARE program should consider offering a curriculum that is based on peer interaction and science. In a more divers and changing world, the DARE program should be more equipped in order to offer students a program that is more culturally competent. While predicting the future is almost impossible for us, the DARE program could be a very significant social influence model for preventing substance abuse by offering more nuanced and new approaches that include continuing scientific studies.

The Alcoholics Anonymous twelve-step approach is a community-based program, which is associated with concepts of lasting sobriety and recovery in debates surrounding addiction. The program was created to assist individuals that struggle with drinking habits by having daily discussions and meetings with peers to address issues of addiction. According to Faupel et al., (400), the Alcoholics Anonymous program combines medical understanding about alcoholism with spiritual focus, especially Christian teachings regarding redemption through a “higher” power, the need to confess sins and a sinful humanity. This implies that Alcoholics Anonymous gives people the opportunity to congregate and share different experiences that could help them maintain sobriety and recover from alcoholism. The concept of Alcoholics Anonymous approach revolves around the worldview that alcoholism is an example of an illness that could only be managed and not controlled. Therefore, the twelve steps are general guidelines meant to help the group build healthy relationships. These steps encourage people to practice self-discipline, forgiveness, compassion, courage, acceptance, humility and honesty, which are pathways for developing spiritual growth, emotional well-being and positive behavioral change.

While Alcoholics Anonymous might encourage participants to remain abstinent, measuring its effectiveness becomes a challenge. Although Alcoholics Anonymous program suggests that sobriety can best be viewed from a spiritual realm, some people view drugs and alcohol as things that connect them to the “higher power” (Faupel et al., 220). The twelve steps urge people associate their discoveries with such higher powers. Rather than promoting science-based treatment protocols, such approaches could create powerlessness. During the twelve-step program, people are encouraged to share their personal information. Some people become reluctant to share their pasts with others, especially those that are still dealing with painful emotions hence making it difficult to measure the effectiveness of the Alcoholics Anonymous program. Considering that Alcoholics Anonymous is in itself anonymous, some participants and members might equally not feel the need to participate and this makes it difficult to determine the overall effectiveness of the program.

Many scholars agree that the policy of prohibition is the most effective in reducing the consumption and sale of drugs such as marijuana, heroin and cocaine as compared to alternative policies including decriminalization and legalization. According to Faupel et al., (437), prohibition is an effective policy for enhancing source reduction whereby the number of illegal drugs produced is reduced. For instance, in the case of cocaine the policy can involve the government in order to eliminate drug crops. The policy of prohibition is also more effective because it involves the strategy of border interdiction, which ensures that illegal drugs from producing nations do not cross the border into the country. In the United States, federal agencies such as the Drug Enforcement Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the U.S border protection play a significant role in border intervention. Distribution networks for all illegal substances are also disrupted through the policy of prohibition.

Apart from the prohibition policy, decriminalization gives drug addicts the opportunity to get treated as patients. Consequently, new drug addicts are hardly registered because existing users get the required support including job opportunities. One advantage of decriminalization is that placing harsh criminal offenses on drugs such as marijuana does more harm as compared to when the drug is moderated (Faupel et al., 458). However, by adopting the policy of decriminalization the government lacks the mechanisms for regulating or monitoring the production of these substances. On the other hand, the policy of legalization could reap more economic benefits through taxation. This implies that rather than spending more money in curtailing drug distribution and importation, the local, state and federal governments could form stronger tax bases from such substances. On a contrary opinion, legalization could encourage increased use hence leading to increased public health costs due to the potential harm that such drugs might cause. As opposed to both legalization and decriminalization, the policy of prohibition reinforces the values of self-control and sobriety. This means that prohibition reinforces most of the values that are deeply held by society and traditional virtues that provide an institutional and normative support structure for lifestyles and behaviors embraced by our community. Although implementing the policy of prohibition could force the taxpayer to incur extra costs to support drug enforcement agencies as they require massive budgetary, it is the most effective policy in reducing the number of drug abusers.

Work cited Faupel, Charles E., Alan Mark Horowitz, and Gregory Weaver. The sociology of American drug use. McGr