The New Old Gateways

According to a recently released research study by the University of Pittsburgh, marijuana use does not predict or cause later substance abuse problems — that is, marijuana is not a gateway drug. The article’s press release asserts that “individuals [who used marijuana before alcohol and other, legal drugs] were no more likely to develop a substance use disorder than those who followed the traditional succession of alcohol and tobacco before illegal drugs.” These findings have serious implications for drug prevention.

Although others are arguing for national law changes, the implications of this research affect families and communities directly and immediately. The findings mean that when parents discover their children drinking or smoking, they must react with the same seriousness that discovering marijuana would elicit. Furthermore, parents and community leaders must be particularly careful of the example they set. What parent would smoke marijuana in front of her child? Not only is it illegal, but it would be absurdly irresponsible. However, there is not nearly the same stigma about drinking in front of children. This needs to be rethought—parents are the biggest influence in children’s choice to avoid drugs, and parents must be aware of the message they send to their children. If alcohol use is just as dangerous as marijuana use, then it must be discouraged just as strongly.

From a community perspective, we will need to rethink our strategies for drug deterrence. According to the press release, “interventions focusing on behavior modification may be more effective prevention tactics than current anti-drug initiatives.” This has direct implications for community anti-drug programs and dollars. If the report is correct, programs that focus on parenting will be far more effective than programs that focus on specific drugs and their effects. Furthermore, instead of drug testing students, schools could better serve their communities by looking for and treating certain anti-social behaviors that are reliable warning signs of future substance abuse problems. Resources should be spent on modifying behaviors and environments, not discouraging particular “gateway” drugs.

Hat tip to Correctional Sentencing and kudos to them for an interesting discussion of coherence in the law.

Comments

[Sarah]

Whoa! I think you are taking your argument a little to far, how do we show are children to responsible?

[Matthew Bowen]

Sarah, thank you for your comment and your critique. My hope with these entries is to spark some sort of discussion. I believe you’re asking how a parent knows if her child is responsible, or, the way the report puts it, how a parent knows if his or her child is showing deviancy. Part of it is self-assessment. A parent is a huge influence in how a child behaves. If the parent talks to her child about drug abuse and its consequences; presents a positive, drug free role model; and is loving and supporting, she’s gone a long way to ensuring her child is responsible.

The other key is to be involved and look for warning signs. If a child is spending an inordinate amount of time alone, that’s a bad sign. If the child’s grades sink, that’s also a good indicator that something’s wrong. The warning signs tend to be relatively clear (depression, anti-social behavior, etc., and the important thing is that a parent intervenes and shows that she cares.