Anti Drug Essay 2010 Cars

Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) is an education program that seeks to prevent use of controlled drugs, membership in gangs, and violent behavior. It was founded in Los Angeles in 1983 as a joint initiative of then-LAPD chief Daryl Gates and the Los Angeles Unified School District[1] as a demand-side drug control strategy of the American War on Drugs.

Students who enter the program sign a pledge not to use drugs or join gangs and are informed by local police officers about the government's beliefs about the dangers of recreational drug use in an interactive in-school curriculum which lasts ten weeks.[2]

D.A.R.E. America's operating revenue has declined from $10 million in 2002 to $3.7 million in 2010 following the publication of government reports that uniformly discredited the effectiveness of the program.[3] D.A.R.E implemented a new curriculum based on work by Penn State and Arizona State researchers.

Its American headquarters is in Inglewood, California. DARE expanded to Great Britain in 1995. The D.A.R.E. program has received a substantial amount of criticism since its creation.

Instructors of the D.A.R.E. curriculum are local police officers who must undergo 80 hours of special training in areas such as child development, classroom management, teaching techniques, and communication skills.[citation needed] For high school instructors, 40 hours of additional training are prescribed.[1] Police officers are invited by the local school districts to speak and work with students.[citation needed] Police officers are permitted to work in the classroom by the school district and do not need to be licensed teachers. There are programs for different age levels. Working with the classroom teachers, the officers lead students over a number of sessions on workbooks and interactive discussions.

[4][5] The Surgeon General reports that positive effects have been demonstrated regarding attitudes towards the police.[6] The D.A.R.E program's use of police officers in schools alleviates some children's concerns about situations like school shootings and other threats of violence to children while at school.[5]

In 2007, a new curriculum for prescription drug abuse and over-the-counter drug abuse was created by D.A.R.E. America. Other contributors included: law enforcement officials; PhRMA; Abbott Laboratories; the Consumer Healthcare and Products Association (CHPA); and a number of other organizations, including the ONDCP, the DEA, the FDA, the NIDA, the SAMHSA Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (SAMHSA/CSAT) and the Partnership for a Drug-Free America.[7]

In 2009, D.A.R.E. adopted their implementation[8] of Penn State University's keepin' it REAL middle school curriculum,[8] an evidence-based curriculum listed on the National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices (NREPP). keepin' it REAL is now being implemented in the US and worldwide by D.A.R.E.[9] Keepin' it REAL has been developed since the late 90s at Arizona State University[10] as well as at Penn State University.

The program's mascot is a lion named Daren. In various cartoons and media productions, his voice is performed by Michael Glover .

Age groups[edit]

Starting in 4th or 6th grade, elementary students are given lessons to act in their own best interest when facing high-risk, low-gain choices and to resist peer pressure and other influences in making their personal choices regarding:[11]Tobacco Smoking, Tobacco advertising, Drug Abuse, Inhalants, alcohol consumption and health, and Peer Pressure in a Social Network.

In 6th, 7th and 8th grades, the new keepin' it REAL middle school lessons are enhanced with activities on Teen OTC (over-the-counter)/Prescription Drug Abuse, Methamphetamine, Bullying, Gangs, Internet Safety, and more. Beginning in the fall of 2009, D.A.R.E. officers across the nation began to teach The keepin’ it REAL program which was developed in partnership with Penn State University.

In senior high school, D.A.R.E. is a reinforcement and "Equal emphasis is placed on helping students to recognize and cope with feelings of anger without causing harm to themselves or others and without resorting to violence or the use of alcohol and drugs."[12]


According to the D.A.R.E. website, 36 million children around the world —26 million in the U.S. — are part of the program. The program is implemented in 75% of the nation's school districts, and 43 countries around the world.[1] D.A.R.E. was one of the first national programs promoting zero tolerance.

DARE Car[edit]

A number of local police departments D.A.R.E. programs have police cars marked as DARE cars to promote their program. The D.A.R.E. cars appear at schools and in parades. Typically these cars are high-end or performance cars that have been seized in a drug raid.[13] They are used to send the message that drug dealers forfeit all their glamorous trappings when they get caught. D.A.R.E. cars can also be regular police vehicles that are nearing the end of their service life, pressed into service for the promotion,[14] or new police cars outfitted especially for the D.A.R.E. program.[15]


D.A.R.E. America is funded largely as a crime prevention program working through education within schools. Over the years contributors have included the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of State, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Bureau of Justice Administration, U.S. Office of Justice and Delinquency Prevention, corporations, foundations, individuals and other sources.[16] In addition, state training and local programs typically receive funding from state legislature appropriations, state agencies, counties, cities, school districts, police agencies, individuals, and community fund raisers and other sources.[17][18][19][20]

In the United Kingdom[edit]

D.A.R.E. programs are now delivered in the UK by Life Skills Education Charity., a community interest company set up in 2011.[21] D.A.R.E. Courses currently available include the D.A.R.E. Primary programme, the secondary school Keepin' it REAL programme, the community-based D.A.R.E. Active programme and the newly updated D.A.R.E. Game.


D.A.R.E. began its life in the UK in 1995 after the CEO of Mansfield District Council saw it being delivered in Mansfield Ohio whilst on an exchange visit. The program was fully introduced within Nottinghamshire following 2 years of successful trials. To operate on a more independent basis, Drug Abuse Resistance Education (UK) Ltd was established as a registered charity and delivered it's programmed to over 320,000 young people until the organization was dissolved.[22]

All D.A.R.E. programs were adopted by Life Skills Education C.I.C. with the agreement of D.A.R.E. International in September 2011 and delivery into schools in the East Midlands has continued unaffected.

DARE Primary[edit]

DARE Primary is a life skills and drug education program for 9-11-year-olds. The course, consisting of 10 one-hour sessions, aims to provide children with knowledge, skills, and an opportunity to explore attitudes, to help them to make informed decisions, and to develop safe and healthy lifestyles. Topics covered include, tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, volatile substances, bullying, anti-social behavior, and different types of pressure. Children look at normative beliefs about alcohol and tobacco. The sessions are interactive and provide a range of learning opportunities through individual activities, teamwork, discussions, storyboards, and appropriate role play. DARE Primary can be delivered by:

• DARE Officer (Serving or former Police Officer, Police Community Support Officer, or School Officer--- a school liaison officer)

• Teacher and DARE Officer where the Officer attends every other week (called 50/50). It also becomes part of the Health Unit in most schools.

• Teacher delivered (Teachers receive training from DARE)

Each pupil is provided with a DARE workbook for use during the course. DARE Officers and Teachers (where the Teacher delivered option is chosen) are provided with session guides. An important part of the program is the graduation ceremony which is an opportunity for families and schools to celebrate the children's achievements.

The Primary program is now being delivered in the East Midlands, the City of London, part of the Metropolitan Police area, the Falkland Islands and by the Royal Military Police in Germany, Cyprus and Malta.


An independent randomized control sample evaluation of the D.A.R.E. Primary program was carried out in 2015/2016 using a sample of over 50 schools and 1500 young people. The evaluation was carried out by Nottingham Trent University's Professor Andromachi Tseloni and showed that the program had a significantly statistic effect on:

  • Increasing knowledge surrounding drugs, alcohol and substance abuse
  • Making safe and responsible choices
  • Communication and listening
  • Getting help from others.

Teachers have routinely rated the programme as 'Good' or 'Outstanding' and parents and young people rate it as 7.5 out of 10 in most cases.[23]


DARE Active is principally led by DARE Champions, members of the community (professional and nonprofessional) who are actively involved in teaching, training, supporting or coaching young people and are trained and licensed by DARE UK to deliver the resource. DARE Active consists of eight sessions which can be delivered as an eight-week program or stand alone (a modular approach). It includes an optional celebration of achievement where guests can be invited to share the celebration or speak in a role model capacity. This opportunity lends itself to the local Policing teams attending and reinforcing some of the key messages.

Composition of sessions[edit]

  1. Introduction to the program
  2. The Six Keys to Success
  3. Team building and positive communication
  4. How can we work together and value others in order to achieve success
  5. Self-Esteem and Motivation
  6. Discipline and Responsibility
  7. Preparing to attempt a new challenge
  8. Review and Self-Assessment – (celebration for success)

DARE Active student benefits[edit]

  • Develop key life skills to stay safe, healthy and to make a positive contribution within society
  • Set goals with success criteria for their development
  • Review and assess their performance
  • Raise their self-esteem and develop the skills to maximize their life opportunities
  • Become inspired and motivated, to achieve their goals and focused in their lives as a whole
  • Be disciplined and take responsibility for their own actions
  • Develop support networks and communicate with the networks in a positive manner
  • Make informed decisions about health, social and moral dilemmas (e.g. misusing drugs)
  • Work within the framework of personal, learning and thinking skills (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority)

DARE Secondary School (keepin’ it REAL)[edit]

DARE UK is planning the launch of a Secondary school program during 2011 so it is available during the new academic year, Autumn, 2011. The curriculum and resources (including high-quality DVD) will be an adaptation of the DARE America Middle School program developed by Penn State University, USA. Current developments are taking place to ensure relevance and suitability for the UK.

It will follow on from the DARE Primary curriculum (although this is not essential) and is designed to help young people in years 7 and 8 deal with the many challenges they face during the transition. It is expected that the program will be delivered by teachers and DARE Officers.

Studies on effectiveness[edit]

1992 – Indiana University[edit]

Researchers at Indiana University, commissioned by Indiana school officials in 1992, found that those who completed the D.A.R.E. program subsequently had significantly higher rates of hallucinogenic drug use than those not exposed to the program.[24]

1994 – RTI International[edit]

In 1994, three RTI International scientists evaluated eight previously-done quantitative analyses on DARE’s efficacy that were found to meet their requirements for rigor.[25][26] The researchers found that DARE’s long-term effect couldn’t be determined, because the corresponding studies were “compromised by severe control group attrition or contamination.”[26] However, the study concluded that in the short-term “DARE imparts a large amount of information, but has little or no impact on students’ drug use,” and that many smaller, interactive programs were more effective.[25][27]

After the 1994 Research Triangle Institute study,[28][29] an article in the Los Angeles Times stated that the “organization spent $41,000 to try to prevent widespread distribution of the RTI report and started legal action aimed at squelching the study.”[30] The director of publication of the American Journal of Public Health told USA Today that "D.A.R.E. has tried to interfere with the publication of this. They tried to intimidate us."[31]

1995 – California Department of Education[edit]

In 1995, a report to the California Department of Education by Joel Brown Ph. D. stated that none of California's drug education programs worked, including D.A.R.E. "California's drug education programs, D.A.R.E. being the largest of them, simply don't work. More than 40 percent of the students told researchers they were 'not at all' influenced by drug educators or programs. Nearly 70 percent reported neutral to negative feelings about those delivering the antidrug message. While only 10 percent of elementary students responded to drug education negatively or indifferently, this figure grew to 33 percent of middle school students and topped 90 percent at the high school level." In some circles educators and administrators have admitted that DARE in fact potentially increased students exposure and knowledge of unknown drugs and controlled substances, resulting in experimentation and consumption of narcotics at a much younger age. Criticism focused on failure and misuse of tax-payer dollars, with either ineffective or negative result state-wide. [30]

1998 – National Institute of Justice[edit]

In 1998, a grant from the National Institute of Justice to the University of Maryland resulted in a report to the NIJ, which among other statements, concluded that "D.A.R.E. does not work to reduce substance use."[32] D.A.R.E. expanded and modified the social competency development area of its curriculum in response to the report. Research by Dr. Dennis Rosenbaum in 1998[33] found that D.A.R.E. graduates were more likely than others to drink alcohol, smoke tobacco and use illegal drugs. Psychologist Dr. William Colson asserted in 1998 that D.A.R.E. increased drug awareness so that "as they get a little older, they (students) become very curious about these drugs they've learned about from police officers."[34] The scientific research evidence in 1998 indicated that the officers were unsuccessful in preventing the increased awareness and curiosity from being translated into illegal use. The evidence suggested that, by exposing young impressionable children to drugs, the program was, in fact, encouraging and nurturing drug use.[35] Studies funded by the National Institute of Justice in 1998,[32][36] and the California Legislative Analyst's Office in 2000[37] also concluded that the program was ineffective.

1999 – Lynam et al.[edit]

A ten-year study was completed by the Donald R. Lynam and colleagues in 2006 involving one thousand D.A.R.E. graduates in an attempt to measure the effects of the program. After the ten-year period, no measurable effects were noted. The researchers compared levels of alcohol, cigarette, marijuana and the use of illegal substances before the D.A.R.E. program (when the students were in sixth grade) with the post D.A.R.E. levels (when they were 20 years old). Although there were some measured effects shortly after the program on the attitudes of the students towards drug use, these effects did not seem to carry on long term.[38]

2001 – Office of the Surgeon General[edit]

In 2001, the Surgeon General of the United States, David Satcher M.D. Ph.D., placed the D.A.R.E. program in the category of "Ineffective Primary Prevention Programs".[6] The U.S. General Accounting Office concluded in 2003 that the program was sometimes counterproductive in some populations, with those who graduated from D.A.R.E. later having higher than average rates of drug use (a boomerang effect).

2007 – Perspectives on Psychological Science[edit]

In March 2007, the D.A.R.E. program was placed on a list of treatments that have the potential to cause harm in clients in the APS journal, Perspectives on Psychological Science.[39]

2008 – Harvard[edit]

Carol Weiss, Erin Murphy-Graham, Anthony Petrosino, and Allison G. Gandhi, “The Fairy Godmother—and Her Warts: Making the Dream of Evidence-Based Policy Come True,” American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 29 No.1, 29–47(2008) Evaluators sometimes wish for a Fairy Godmother who would make decision makers pay attention to evaluation findings when choosing programs to implement. The U.S. Department of Education came close to creating such a Fairy Godmother when it required school districts to choose drug abuse prevention programs only if their effectiveness was supported by "scientific" evidence. The experience showed advantages of such a procedure (e.g., reduction in support for D.A.R.E., which evaluation had found wanting) but also shortcomings (limited and in some cases questionable evaluation evidence in support of other programs). Federal procedures for identifying successful programs appeared biased. In addition, the Fairy Godmother discounted the professional judgment of local educators and did little to improve the fit of programs to local conditions. Nevertheless, giving evaluation more clout is a worthwhile way to increase the rationality of decision making. The authors recommend research on procedures used by other agencies to achieve similar aims.

2009 – Texas A&M[edit]

“The Social Construction of ‘Evidence-Based’ Drug Prevention Programs: A Reanalysis of Data from the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) Program,” Evaluation Review, Vol. 33, No.4, 394–414 (2009). Studies by Dennis Gorman and Carol Weiss argue that the D.A.R.E. program has been held to a higher standard than other youth drug prevention programs. Gorman writes, “what differentiates D.A.R.E. from many of the programs on evidence-based lists might not be the actual intervention but rather the manner in which data analysis is conducted, reported, and interpreted.” Dennis M. Gorman and J. Charles Huber, Jr.

As the D.A.R.E. program has been subjected to increasing scrutiny over the years, its overall effectiveness has become something of a controversy and is still much debated.

The U.S. Department of Education prohibits any of its funding to be used to support drug prevention programs that have not been able to demonstrate their effectiveness.[40] Accordingly, D.A.R.E. America, in 2004, instituted a major revision of its curriculum which is currently being evaluated for possible effectiveness in reducing drug use.[41]

The U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) identified alternative start-up regional programs, none of which have longevity nor have they been subjected to intense scrutiny.[42]

Intervention registries[edit]

2006 SAMSHA/NREPP[edit]

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and mental health Services, National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices reviewed D.A.R.E.’s Keepin’ it REAL curricula. It meets NREPP's requirements as an evidence-based intervention in the categories of tobacco, alcohol, and drug use.[43]

2005 California's Healthy Kids Resource Center[edit]

2005 The California Department of Education and California Department of Health’s Healthy Kids Resource Center lists D.A.R.E.’s keepin’ it REAL curriculum as being research validated.[44]


The D.A.R.E. program is consistent with the "zero-tolerance orthodoxy of current U.S. drug control policy." According to researcher Dr. D. M. Gorman of the Rutgers University Center of Alcohol Studies, it supports the ideology and the “prevailing wisdom that exists among policy makers and politicians."[45] When the LA Unified School District announced they were ceasing the use of zero tolerance policies over concerns at disproportionate use against racial minorities,[46][47] California DARE Coordinator Steve Abercrombie expressed displeasure, saying "I'm surprised they don't hand [cannabis] out when they hand out their workbooks."[48]

It also claims to meet the needs of stake holders such as school districts,[49] parents, and law enforcement agencies. "D.A.R.E. America also has been very successful in marketing its program to the news media through a carefully orchestrated public relations campaign that highlights its popularity while downplaying criticism."[50]

Psychologists at the University of Kentucky concluded that "continued enthusiasm [for D.A.R.E.] shows Americans' stubborn resistance to apply science to drug policy."[51]

Marsha Rosenbaum, who headed the West Coast office of the Lindesmith Center, a drug policy reform organization, provided an opinion for a 1999 Village Voice article, "In D.A.R.E.'s worldview, Marlboro Light cigarettes, Bacardi rum, and a drag from a joint are all equally dangerous. For that matter, so is snorting a few lines of cocaine." D.A.R.E. "isn't really education. It's indoctrination."[52] The article also stated, "Part of what makes D.A.R.E. so popular is that participants get lots of freebies. There are fluorescent yellow pens with the D.A.R.E. logo, tiny D.A.R.E. dolls, bumper stickers, graduation certificates, D.A.R.E. banners for school auditoriums, D.A.R.E. rulers, pennants, D.A.R.E. coloring books, and T-shirts for all D.A.R.E. graduates."[52]

D.A.R.E. has failed to fact check some articles on their website, promoting one news piece that was satire, titled "Edible Marijuana Candies Kill 9 in Colorado, 12 at Coachella."[53][54]

Use of children as informants[edit]

"Children are asked to submit to D.A.R.E. police officers sensitive written questionnaires that can easily refer to the kids' homes" and that "a D.A.R.E. lesson called 'The Three R's: Recognize, Resist Report' … encourages children to tell friends, teachers or police if they find drugs at home."[55]

In addition, "D.A.R.E. officers are encouraged to put a 'D.A.R.E. Box' in every classroom, into which students may drop 'drug information' or questions under the pretense of anonymity. Officers are instructed that if a student 'makes a disclosure related to drug use,' the officer should report the information to further authorities, both school, and police. This apparently applies whether the 'drug use' was legal or illegal, harmless or harmful. In a number of communities around the country, students have been enlisted by the D.A.R.E. officer as informants against their parents."[56]

"In the official D.A.R.E. Implementation Guide, police officers are advised to be alert for signs of children who have relatives who use drugs. D.A.R.E. officers are first and foremost police officers and thus are duty-bound to follow up leads that might come to their attention through inadvertent or indiscreet comments by young children."[57]

As a result, children sometimes confide the names of people they suspect are illegally using drugs. In October 2010, an elementary school student in North Carolina brought cannabis to school to turn his parents in.[58]

Responses to criticism[edit]

Motivation of the critics[edit]

D.A.R.E. America has generally dismissed many criticisms and independent studies of its program, labeling them false, misleading, or biased. "D.A.R.E. has long dismissed criticism of its approach as flawed or the work of groups that favor decriminalization of drug use," according to the New York Times in 2001.[59] In a press release titled "Pro-drug Groups Behind Attack on Prevention Programs; D.A.R.E. Seen as Target as Mayors' Conference Called to Combat Legalization Threat," D.A.R.E. asserted that pro-drug legalization individuals and groups were behind criticisms of the program, which were portrayed as based on "vested interests" and "to support various individual personal agendas at the expense of our children."[31]

D.A.R.E. has attacked critics for allegedly being motivated by their financial self-interest in programs that compete with D.A.R.E. It has charged that "they are setting out to find ways to attack our programs and are misusing science to do it. The bottom line is that they don't want police officers to do the work because they want it for themselves."[60] Critics have also been dismissed as being jealous of D.A.R.E.'s success.[61]

Rebuttal of statistics[edit]

Ronald J. Brogan, New York City's D.A.R.E. fundraiser, and spokesperson said in 1999 that "If you take German for 17 weeks, you're not going to speak German. The critics say the effect dissipates over the years.[52] The article in which he was quoted observed that "DARE officials say the solution to this problem is not less DARE but more of it, and they urge cities to teach DARE in middle and high school."[61]

One leader explained that "I don't have any statistics for you. Our strongest numbers are the numbers that don't show up.”[62] The 1998 University of Maryland report presented to the U.S. National Institute of Justice stated, "Officials of D.A.R.E. America are often quoted as saying that the strong public support for the program is a better indicator of its utility than scientific studies."[32]

New curriculum[edit]

In 2009, D.A.R.E. adopted the keepin’ it REAL curriculum.[8][63][64][65] Rather than solely focusing on the perils of alcohol and drugs, keepin’ it REAL utilizes socio-emotional learning theory and a life skills approach to conceptualize substance use resistance as a situated, contextualized process and emphasizes communication competence as central to effective resistance strategies.[64] keepin’ it REAL uses a culturally grounded approach that acknowledges the importance of cultural differences and similarities in the effectiveness of communication strategies and norms surrounding substance use. The program was developed by Penn State researchers, who evaluated its effectiveness, though critics contend the program does not implement a long-term evaluation system.[8] In 2013, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration ranked its “readiness for dissemination” at 1.5 out of 4.[8] Two field randomized controlled trials showed the effectiveness of the multicultural keepin’ it REAL for reducing substance use across grade levels and ethnic/racial groups, which highlights the importance of grounding substance use prevention programs in their audiences’ cultural attitudes, values, norms, and beliefs.[65][66] The second study "evaluated onset of drug use across and within ethnic groups and the ideal times to intervene" finding "a double dose of intervention in elementary and middle school was no more effective than middle school intervention alone."[66]

—Following the passing of Washington Initiative 502 that legalized cannabis consumption in Washington state, the D.A.R.E program was changed in the state to remove cannabis messages from their year 5 curriculum, arguing "research has found that teaching children about drugs with which they have never heard of or have no real life understanding may stimulate their interest or curiosity about the substance."[3]


  1. ^ abc, the official website of the D.A.R.E. program.
  2. ^
  3. ^ abMike, Riggs, (3 Dec 2012). "D.A.R.E., America's Most Famous Anti-Drug Program, Will No Longer Talk to 10- and 11-Year-Old Children About Marijuana". Hit and Run blog. 
  4. ^The program involves children interacting with police officers or sheriffs in a classroom environment rather than in a criminal justice setting, such as when officers must intervene in domestic violence.
  5. ^ abD.A.R.E is more than an anti-drug programArchived September 26, 2007, at the Wayback Machine. Ralph Lochridge. August 4, 2004. (Microsoft Word document)
  6. ^ abDavid Satcher, M.D., Ph.D., Surgeon General of the United States – Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General 2001., chapter five, Prevention and Intervention, box 5-2
  7. ^New School Curriculum Addresses Rx and OTC Drug Abuse. PRNewswire-USNewswire. December 12, 2007
  8. ^ abcdeTheodore Caputi, W’17 (1 Dec 2013). "'KEEPIN' IT REAL': THE COSTS OF A DRUG PREVENTION PROGRAM". INSIDE PENN WHARTON PPI. Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. 
  9. ^Penn State & D.A.R.E. Partner to Prevent Substance Use in Elementary SchoolsArchived April 11, 2013, at the Wayback Machine. Penn State University Social Science Research, March 8, 2010
  10. ^"Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2013-12-02. Retrieved 2013-10-08. 
  11. ^Objectives for D.A.R.E. Elementary School CurriculumArchived December 11, 2013, at the Wayback Machine. D.A.R.E. America (Word document)
  12. ^D.A.R.E. Senior High CurriculumArchived December 13, 2007, at the Wayback Machine. D.A.R.E. America. no date
  13. ^Cool new car for D.A.R.E.Archived 2008-07-08 at the Wayback Machine. Old Bridge, NJ Police department 2006 Dodge Charger seized in a drug raid and outfitted using seized assets. Greater Media Newspapers – Suburban. December 13, 2007,
  14. ^Franconia Township Police DepartmentArchived 2008-08-28 at the Wayback Machine.. Franconia Township, PA. 2000 Ford Crown Victoria that was made available by Chief Joe (Joseph Kozeniewski) after it was retired from the duties of a Police patrol vehicle in 2003.
  15. ^City of Burleson – D.A.R.E.[permanent dead link]Burleson, TX Police Department – dealer furnished new car
  16. ^D.A.R.E. web site: corporations-foundations-government
  17. ^Perrucci, R. and Wysong, E. The New Class Society. Latham, MD: FRESH, 2002, p. 223. ISBN 0-7425-1938-4No Supporting quote
  18. ^Laurel Police Department – Community Policing – What is D.A.R.E.?. Laurel, MD Police Department. No Date. Quote: "Funding for Laurel's D.A.R.E. Program is provided 100% through tax revenues or community donations. The City receives no grants from state or federal sources for our program. The City accepts donations from interested Community Groups or Corporate Sponsors to assist with funding for this program. Funds are used for teaching materials, awards, graduation tee-shirts, etc."
  19. ^Washington County Sheriffs Office – D.A.R.E. Fund raiser. Washington County, OR Sheriffs Office. January 20, 2005 (Example of call for fund raising). Quote:"The purpose of the event is to raise money for the Washington County Sheriff’s Office D.A.R.E. program. The money raised will be used right here at home to buy materials for students and help pay for ongoing training of the D.A.R.E. deputies."
  20. ^Michael A. Ranatza, Executive Director of LA COLE – SFY 2007–2008 D.A.R.E. State Funding[permanent dead link]. Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement. June 1, 2007. Abstract: Notification to Louisiana Sheriffs to Apply for D.A.R.E. funds from State appropriation. Quote:"House Bill 1 of the 2007 Regular Session of the Legislature continues the appropriation of funds dedicated to the D.A.R.E. program from the Tobacco Tax Health Care Fund established by ACT 19 of the 2002 Regular Legislative Session. The LCLE will accept grant applications based on the projected appropriation to fund D.A.R.E. grants. Funds will be made available to eligible agencies based on revenue recognized by the Department of the Treasury for LCLE and approved for the operation of D.A.R.E. programs."
  21. ^"LIFE SKILLS EDUCATION C.I.C. – Overview (free company information from Companies House)". Retrieved 2017-02-13. 
  22. ^"DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION (U.K.) LIMITED – Overview (free company information from Companies House)". Retrieved 2017-02-13. 
  23. ^"Evaluating Life Skills Programmes – Life Skills Education CIC". Life Skills Education CIC. Retrieved 2017-02-13. 
  24. ^Evans, Alice and Kris Bosworth – Building effective drug education programs.Archived December 8, 2007, at the Wayback Machine. Phi Delta Kappa International Research Bulletin No 19, December, 1887.
  25. ^ abMarlow, Kristina; Rhodes, Steve (November 6, 1994). "Study: DARE teaches kids about drugs but doesn't prevent use". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved March 6, 2014. 
  26. ^ abEnnett, Susan; Tobler, Nancy; Ringwalt, Christopher; Flewelling, Robert (September 1994). "How effective is drug abuse resistance education? A meta-analysis of project DARE outcome evaluations"(PDF). American Journal of Public Health. 84 (9): 1394–401. doi:10.2105/ajph.84.9.1394. PMC 1615171. PMID 8092361. Retrieved March 6, 2014. 
  27. ^Brunner, Jim (October 3, 1996). "How DARE they?". Associated Press. Retrieved March 6, 2014. 
  28. ^Jeremy Travis, director of the National Institute of Justice – The D.A.R.E. Program: A Review of Prevalence, User Satisfaction, and Effectiveness. October 1994 (PDF document) Quote:"While not conclusive, the findings suggest that D.A.R.E. may benefit from using more interactive strategies and emphasizing social and general competencies. A revised D.A.R.E. curriculum that includes more participatory learning was piloted in 1993 and is being launched nationwide this fall."
  29. ^Christopher L. Ringwalt, Jody M. Greene, Susan T. Ennett, Ronaldo Iachan, Richard R. Clayton, Carl G. Leukefeld. Past and Future Directions of the D.A.R.E. Program: An Evaluation Review.Research Triangle Institute. September 1994. Supported under Award # 91-DD-CX-K053 from the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
  30. ^ abDenise Hamilton – Hamilton, Denise. The Truth About D.A.R.E.; The big-bucks antidrug program for kids doesn't workArchived December 8, 2007, at the Wayback Machine. – Los Angeles New Times, March 20, 1997
  31. ^ abDrug prevention placebo: How D.A.R.E. wastes time, money and police. Elliott, Jeff. Reason Magazine, March, 1995.
  32. ^ abcLawrence W. Sherman, Denise Gottfredson, Doris MacKenzie, John Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn Bushway – Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising. Report for the National Institute of Justice. Chapter 5. School-based Crime Prevention 1998. Quote: In summary, using the criteria adopted for this report, D.A.R.E. does not work to reduce substance use. The programs (sic) content, teaching methods, and use of uniformed police officers rather than teachers might each explain its weak evaluations. No scientific evidence suggests that the D.A.R.E. core curriculum, as originally designed or revised in 1993, will reduce substance use in the absence of continued instruction more focused on social competency development. Any consideration of the D.A.R.E.'s potential as a drug prevention strategy should place D.A.R.E. in the context of instructional strategies in general. No instructional program is likely to have a dramatic effect on substance use. Estimates of the effect sizes of even the strongest of these programs are typically in the mid- to high-teens. D.A.R.E.'s meager effects place it at the bottom of the distribution of effect sizes, but none of the effects are large enough to justify their use as the centerpiece of a drug prevention strategy. Rather, such programs should be embedded within more comprehensive programs using the additional strategies identified elsewhere in this chapter.
  33. ^Rosenbaum, D. P., and Gordon S. Hanson. Assessing the effects of school-based drug education: A six-year multilevel analysis of project D.A.R.E. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency', 1998 35 (4, 381–412. abstract, Full text at Schaffer Library of Drug Policy
  34. ^Laugesen, W. The dire consequences of D.A.R.E.. Boulder Weekly, December 4, 1998
  35. ^Dennis P. Rosenbaum, Ph.D. Professor and Head and Gordon S. Hanson, Ph.D. Research Associate Department of Criminal Justice and Center for Research in Law and Justice University of Illinois at Chicago – Assessing the effects of School-based Drug Education: A Six-year Multi-Level Analysis of Project D.A.R.E. by April 6, 1998. Media Awareness Project (MAP) Inc. d/b/a DrugSense
  36. ^National Institute of Justice. Research in Brief, July, 1998. Summary of its Report to Congress, Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising. (PDF document)
  37. ^[[California Legislative Analyst's OfficeAnalysis of the 2000–2001 Budget Bill.] no date
  38. ^Donald R. Lynam, Richard Milich, Rick Zimmerman, Scott P. Novak, T. K. Logan, Catherine Martin, Carl Leukefeld, and Richard Clayton. "Project DARE: No Effects at 10-Year Follow-Up," , Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, vol. 67, no. 4.
  39. ^Lilienfeld, S. O. (2007). Psychological treatments that cause harm. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 53–70.
  40. ^Moilanen, Rene. Just say no again. The reason, January 2004.
  41. ^New D.A.R.E. ProgramArchived October 11, 2007, at the Wayback Machine.
  42. ^SAMSHA Model ProgramsArchived September 17, 2007, at the Wayback Machine. – Effective Substance Abuse and Mental Health Programs for Every community. December 2007
  43. ^"Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2013-09-24. Retrieved 2013-08-25

DARE logo

West Vancouver D.A.R.E. jeep

What is drug addiction?

Addiction is defined as a chronic, relapsing brain disease that is characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use, despite harmful consequences. It is considered a brain disease because drugs change the brain—they change its structure and how it works. These brain changes can be long-lasting, and can lead to the harmful behaviors seen in people who abuse drugs.

The term addiction as used in this booklet may be regarded as equivalent to a severe substance use disorder as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5, 2013).

Source: From the laboratories of Drs. N. Volkow and H. Schelbert
Addiction is a lot like other diseases, such as heart disease. Both disrupt the normal, healthy functioning of the underlying organ, have serious harmful consequences, and are preventable and treatable, but if left untreated, can last a lifetime.

Why do people take drugs?

In general, people begin taking drugs for a variety of reasons:

  • To feel good. Most abused drugs produce intense feelings of pleasure. This initial sensation of euphoria is followed by other effects, which differ with the type of drug used. For example, with stimulants such as cocaine, the “high” is followed by feelings of power, self-confidence, and increased energy. In contrast, the euphoria caused by opiates such as heroin is followed by feelings of relaxation and satisfaction.
  • To feel better. Some people who suffer from social anxiety, stress-related disorders, and depression begin abusing drugs in an attempt to lessen feelings of distress. Stress can play a major role in beginning drug use, continuing drug abuse, or relapse in patients recovering from addiction.
  • To do better. Some people feel pressure to chemically enhance or improve their cognitive or athletic performance, which can play a role in initial experimentation and continued abuse of drugs such as prescription stimulants or anabolic/androgenic steroids.
  • Curiosity and "because others are doing it." In this respect adolescents are particularly vulnerable because of the strong influence of peer pressure. Teens are more likely than adults to engage in risky or daring behaviors to impress their friends and express their independence from parental and social rules.

If taking drugs makes people feel good or better, what's the problem?

When they first use a drug, people may perceive what seem to be positive effects; they also may believe that they can control their use. However, drugs can quickly take over a person’s life. Over time, if drug use continues, other pleasurable activities become less pleasurable, and taking the drug becomes necessary for the user just to feel “normal.” They may then compulsively seek and take drugs even though it causes tremendous problems for themselves and their loved ones. Some people may start to feel the need to take higher or more frequent doses, even in the early stages of their drug use. These are the telltale signs of an addiction.

Even relatively moderate drug use poses dangers. Consider how a social drinker can become intoxicated, get behind the wheel of a car, and quickly turn a pleasurable activity into a tragedy that affects many lives.

Is continued drug abuse a voluntary behavior?

The initial decision to take drugs is typically voluntary. However, with continued use, a person’s ability to exert self-control can become seriously impaired; this impairment in self-control is the hallmark of addiction. Brain imaging studies of people with addiction show physical changes in areas of the brain that are critical to judgment, decision making, learning and memory, and behavior control.7 Scientists believe that these changes alter the way the brain works and may help explain the compulsive and destructive behaviors of addiction.

No single factor determines whether a person will become addicted to drugs.

Why do some people become addicted to drugs, while others do not?

As with any other disease, vulnerability to addiction differs from person to person, and no single factor determines whether a person will become addicted to drugs. In general, the more risk factors a person has, the greater the chance that taking drugs will lead to abuse and addiction. Protective factors, on the other hand, reduce a person’s risk of developing addiction. Risk and protective factors may be either environmental (such as conditions at home, at school, and in the neighborhood) or biological (for instance, a person’s genes, their stage of development, and even their gender or ethnicity).

Risk FactorsProtective Factors
Aggressive behavior in childhoodGood self-control
Lack of parental supervisionParental monitoring and support
Poor social skillsPositive relationships
Drug experimentationAcademic Competence
Availability of drugs at schoolSchool anti-drug policies
Community povertyNeighborhood pride

What environmental factors increase the risk of addiction?

  • Home and Family. The influence of the home environment, especially during childhood, is a very important factor. Parents or older family members who abuse alcohol or drugs, or who engage in criminal behavior, can increase children’s risks of developing their own drug problems.
  • Peer and School. Friends and acquaintances can have an increasingly strong influence during adolescence. Drug-using peers can sway even those without risk factors to try drugs for the first time. Academic failure or poor social skills can put a child at further risk for using or becoming addicted to drugs.

What biological factors increase risk of addiction?

Scientists estimate that genetic factors account for between 40 and 60 percent of a person’s vulnerability to addiction; this includes the effects of environmental factors on the function and expression of a person’s genes. A person’s stage of development and other medical conditions they may have are also factors. Adolescents and people with mental disorders are at greater risk of drug abuse and addiction than the general population.

Children's earliest interactions within the family are crucial to their healthy development and risk for drug abuse.

What other factors increase the risk of addiction?

  • Early Use. Although taking drugs at any age can lead to addiction, research shows that the earlier a person begins to use drugs, the more likely he or she is to develop serious problems.8 This may reflect the harmful effect that drugs can have on the developing brain; it also may result from a mix of early social and biological vulnerability factors, including unstable family relationships, exposure to physical or sexual abuse, genetic susceptibility, or mental illness. Still, the fact remains that early use is a strong indicator of problems ahead, including addiction.
  • Method of Administration. Smoking a drug or injecting it into a vein increases its addictive potential.9,10 Both smoked and injected drugs enter the brain within seconds, producing a powerful rush of pleasure. However, this intense “high” can fade within a few minutes, taking the abuser down to lower, more normal levels. Scientists believe this starkly felt contrast drives some people to repeated drug taking in an attempt to recapture the fleeting pleasurable state.

Addiction is a developmental disease—it typically begins in childhood or adolescence.

The brain continues to develop into adulthood and undergoes dramatic changes during adolescence.

One of the brain areas still maturing during adolescence is the prefrontal cortex—the part of the brain that enables us to assess situations, make sound decisions, and keep our emotions and desires under control.11 The fact that this critical part of an adolescent’s brain is still a work in progress puts them at increased risk for making poor decisions (such as trying drugs or continuing to take them). Also, introducing drugs during this period of development may cause brain changes that have profound and long-lasting consequences.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *