PDF (Lessons learned in drug abuse prevention: a global review)

A CASE FOR DRUG
ABUSE PREVENTION
“Prevention and health
promotion are two
related and inter-linked
strategies aiming at
protecting and promoting
the health of people,
and imply slightly
different interventions.”
“Different approaches
are required for different
groups in addressing
different needs and
situations.”
The link between drug and crime is another growing concern. Drug-related crime can
range from acts committed under the pharmacological effect of the drug, actions
carried out to support drug abusing habits, actual possession of illicit substances, and
the criminal activities associated with drug supply, such as murder, drug gang warfare,
and other crimes. At least half the adults arrested for major crimes in the USA – including
homicide, theft and assault – tested positive for drugs at the time of their arrest.
Among those convicted of violent crimes, approximately half of state prison inmates
and 40 % of federal prisoners had been drinking or taking drugs at the time of their
offence. 12
2.2 Demand Reduction Strategies
Prevention and health promotion are two related and inter-linked strategies aiming at
protecting and promoting the health of people, and imply slightly different interventions.
2.2.1 Prevention
Prevention initiatives aim to avoid drug abuse and drug-related harm and are often
associated with the process of reducing existing risk factors and increasing protective
factors for an individual, in high-risk groups, in a given community, or in society as
a whole.
Drug abuse prevention in its earliest form was essentially based on opinion rather than
theory or science. The dominant approach was information dissemination, based on
the assumption that once people knew the negative consequences of drug use, they
would choose not to use drugs. Scare tactics were sometimes used to reinforce the
message that drugs were dangerous.
Evaluations have shown that information dissemination approaches can increase
knowledge of the adverse consequences of using drugs and also increase anti-drug
attitudes. However, there still remains a lack of long-term studies showing a
pronounced impact on future behaviour of prevention approaches based only on
information dissemination. It should be noted that designing studies to show behavioural
impact over time is likely to be expensive and both methodologically and
practically challenging. As such, work in this area has been limited. Historically, it has
also been suggested that many prevention initiatives have over-emphasised or
exaggerated the negative consequences of consumption, thus making the information
less trustworthy to the target population. The wisdom of prevention campaigns which
concentrate more on scaring individuals than on providing sound facts has therefore
been questioned. However, this remains a complicated area that requires further
investigation.
Another weakness of many past prevention efforts was the way in which the prevention
practitioner or agency worked with the 'target group' and the community. There
was a tendency for the prevention agency to play a central role in defining problems
and organising solutions for the target group. More recently, and based on the results
of evaluations, the active role of the community and the 'target group' in defining the
problem and finding its solution has been emphasised. The target group is also a key
element in deciding on the appropriate prevention response. Different approaches are
required for different groups in addressing different needs and situations.
12
12 The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. February 2001. Substance Abuse: The Nation’s Number One Health
Problem. USA.