Pubdate: Thu, 19 May 2005
Source: Daily Herald, The (Provo, UT)
Page: 3
Copyright: 2005 The Daily Herald
Contact:  http://www.newutah.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1480
Author: Joseph A. Califano, Jr.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion)

THE RIGHT DRUG TO TARGET: CUTTING MARIJUANA USE

WASHINGTON -- The increased potency of today's marijuana and the greater 
knowledge we have of the dangers of using marijuana justify the increased 
attention that law enforcement is giving to illegal possession of the drug. 
But the disappointing reality is that a nearly 30 percent increase in 
marijuana arrests does not translate into a comparable reduction in use of 
the drug. Something more is needed.

Rudolph Giuliani's success in slashing New York City's crime rate by, among 
other things, going after low-level street crimes such as smoking and 
selling small amounts of marijuana inspired many other mayors to follow 
suit. When President Bush announced in 2002 a goal of reducing illegal drug 
use by 10 percent in two years and 25 percent in five years, he knew he had 
to focus on cutting marijuana use. Eliminating all other illegal drug use 
combined would not even get him close to his highly touted objective.

 From the standpoint of protecting children, teens and the public health, 
reducing marijuana use makes eminent sense. For even though marijuana use 
has leveled off or waned slightly over the past several years, the number 
of children and teen-agers in treatment for marijuana dependence and abuse 
has jumped 142 percent since 1992, and the number of teen emergency room 
admissions in which marijuana is implicated is up almost 50 percent since 
1999. Though alcohol remains by far the teen substance of choice, teens are 
three times likelier to be in treatment for marijuana than for alcohol (and 
six times likelier to be in treatment for marijuana than for all other 
illegal drugs combined).

As has been true of tobacco since the 1960s, we've learned a lot about the 
dangers of marijuana since the 1970s. The drug adversely affects short-term 
memory, the ability to concentrate and motor skills. Recent studies 
indicate that it increases the likelihood of depression, schizophrenia and 
other serious mental health problems. Nora Volkow, director of the National 
Institute on Drug Abuse, has repeatedly expressed concern about the adverse 
impact of marijuana on the brain, a matter of particular moment for 
youngsters whose brains are still in the development stage. Volkow has 
stated: "There is no question marijuana can be addictive; that argument is 
over. The most important thing right now is to understand the vulnerability 
of young, developing brains to these increased concentrations of cannabis."

The issue of marijuana use (and most illegal drug use) is all about kids. 
If we can get kids not to smoke marijuana before they reach age 21, they 
are virtually certain never to do so. So let's do more than trumpet the 
arrest rate. Let's focus on discouraging children and teens from getting 
involved with the drug in the first place.

This begins with understanding the importance of preventing kids from 
becoming cigarette smokers. Most kids who smoke cigarettes will not smoke 
marijuana, but a 2003 survey of 12- to 17-year-olds, conducted by the 
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia 
University, reveals that teens who smoke cigarettes are much likelier than 
nonsmokers to try marijuana; they are also likelier to become regular 
marijuana users.

The next question is how to make public policies, including law enforcement 
approaches, more effective in discouraging marijuana use. Availability is 
the mother of use, so doing a far better job of reducing availability is 
high on the list. Beyond that -- and recognizing that reducing demand is 
key to that goal -- we should use the increased arrest rate as an 
opportunity to discourage use.

Years ago, while I was visiting Los Angeles, then-Mayor Dick Riordan told 
me that in his city kids were arrested an average of nine times for 
possession of marijuana before anything happened to them. I have since 
discovered that this situation is common in many American communities. Most 
kids do not even get a slap on the wrist the first few times they're nabbed 
for smoking a joint. As a result, we let them sink deeper and deeper into 
drug use, with its dangers to their physical, mental and emotional 
development and its risk of addiction.

I am not suggesting that we put kids in jail for smoking pot. But why not 
treat a teen arrested for marijuana use much the same way we treat a teen 
arrested for drunk driving? Why not require kids arrested for marijuana 
possession to attend classes to learn about the dangers of marijuana use 
and to develop some skills (and the will) to decline the next time they are 
offered the drug? The incentive to attend such classes would be the threat 
of the alternative: for the first couple of arrests, loss of a driver's 
license or a fine stiff enough to hurt; for continued use, a few nights in 
a local prison. Getting kids to attend sessions designed to discourage 
their marijuana use would give some practical meaning to increased law 
enforcement and would bring reductions in drug use more in line with 
increased arrest rates.

These steps will help, but the fact is that we cannot arrest our way out of 
the teen marijuana problem when (in a recent CASA survey) 40 percent of 12- 
to 17-year-olds report that they can buy the drug within a day, and 21 
percent say they can buy it within an hour.

Parents are the first line of defense. Parents must understand that the 
drug available today is far more potent than what they might have smoked in 
the 1970s. For their children, smoking marijuana is not a harmless rite of 
passage but rather a dangerous game of Russian roulette.

- -----

Joseph A. Califano Jr. is president of the National Center on Addiction and 
Substance Abuse at Columbia University. He was secretary of health, 
education and welfare from 1977 to 1979 and President Lyndon Johnson's 
assistant for domestic affairs from 1965 to 1969. 		
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake