Let’s teach how to take drugs

People need to be educated about safer drug using practices because it’s pretty apparent they’re not going to stop taking drugs anytime soon. The UN’s 2014 World Drug Report found Australians to be the highest ecstasy users in the world, with internationally high and increasing usage levels of most illegal substances. When governments, festivals and venues refuse to acknowledge this social trend, people are left ignorant when taking drugs.

Last year Major Lazer member Jillionaire commented to US Rolling Stone, ‘It’s going to sound weird, but we need to teach kids how to do drugs, the same way we teach them about drinking responsibly and having safe sex.’

He was quick to point out that, while he didn’t condone drug use, the countless drug-induced accidents and overdoses he’s seen in crowds has led to him to call for a change needed in drug awareness.

In the British Journal of Criminology, Caitlin Hughes and Alex Stevens look at Portugal’s experience seven years after it legalised illicit drugs in 2001. They argue:

Portuguese decriminalisation did not lead to major increases in drug use. Indeed, evidence indicates reductions in problematic use, drug-related harms and criminal justice overcrowding.

In their paper ‘Drug policy and the public good: evidence for effective interventions’, a group of doctors including Professor John Strang of Kind College and the National Addiction Centre of London emphasises the value of education programs in schools and mass media, but believe they should focus solely on the dangers of drug use. They do acknowledge, however, that not all prevention messages work:

Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) is a school-based preventive intervention widely adopted in the USA in which police officers provide classroom advice on the dangers of drug use. In many studies it has been shown to neither prevent nor delay drug use.

Changes in policy including diminished penalties for possession may be implemented in the future, but changes to education strategies are happening now. What’s important is whether these evidence-based strategies are reaching students. The Department of Education, Training and Employment in South Australia advocates for teachers of years 10–12 to teach such specifics as:

Ecstasy users at dance parties should sip water at the rate of 600 mL per hour to replace lost fluids and rest frequently in cool places.

The current harm reduction strategies widely used in schools tell kids that drugs unequivocally equal social destruction at best and death at worse. You don’t need a PhD to see that this approach alienates its audience because it’s untrue.

The natural parallel to be made is sex education. Abstinence education has failed because its message is that sex before marriage leads to STDs and pregnancies – an obviously flawed argument. Safe sex education has been more successful. So why couldn’t a similar approach work for drugs?

A common argument against teaching safe drug taking education is that it’s dangerous as drugs are unregulated. But the reality is that people will take drugs whether they know what’s in them or not. Over 80,000 people participated in the 2014 Global Drugs Survey – 20 percent said they snorted mystery powders bought from someone they didn’t know.

Knowing what’s in every pill or powder is impossible; educating people about safe drug-taking strategies could reduce overall harm.

If the mass media acknowledged the social trend of recreational drug use rather than depicting all drug users as addicts, that would be more effective in decreasing harm too. Dr Adam Winstock, the founder of The Global Drug Survey 2014, says:

The first step is to treat people who take drugs as rational adults who wish to be informed.

He devised risk reduction guidelines: the ‘Highway Code’. Its fourteen guidelines for MDMA use, for example, include test dosing a new batch of drugs, avoiding drug use depressed, eating properly when taking drugs, and avoiding the drug for four weeks between sessions. They’re logical, realistic tips that should be readily accessible to young people and the public.

Teaching the public that drugs affect everyone differently, and are more addictive for certain personalities is important too. Labelling weed as a gateway drug is ludicrous to the twice-a-year joint smoker, but frighteningly true when applied to the daily breakfast bong smoker who finds their way to oxycodone. Blanket messages don’t work, and the public is far too smart for them.

The public, both young and old, can make decisions for themselves, but these decisions should always be well informed. Safer drug taking practices reduce harm. It’s time to stop ignoring this.

Caitlin Reid

Caitlin Reid is is a freelance journalist for magazines and the web.

More by Caitlin Reid ›

Overland is a not-for-profit magazine with a proud history of supporting writers, and publishing ideas and voices often excluded from other places.

If you like this piece, or support Overland’s work in general, please subscribe or donate.

Related articles & Essays

Contribute to the conversation

  1. Interestingly, one thing that has always turned me away from drugs is not knowing what to do (and therefore not knowing how to use safely). The ‘war’ is over. I agree with Jillionaire’s perception.

  2. I wholeheartedly agree, Caitlin. The parallel with sex education makes sense. There will always be a subset of any student group who push back against the abstinence of both drugs and sex. Why not teach them safe practices, rather than forcing them to learn through trial and error?

  3. The pedagogical imperative vis-à-vis drugs applies to both legal and illegal substances, one would think. Principally because the good reason principle applies to both drug classifications.

  4. This article has a few valid points, but is mainly a mixture of wishful thinking and bullshit.
    The modern neo-Darwinian reality is that mind-altering drugs are a powerful selection agent. A significant percentage of those who ‘experiment’ with them get more and more dependent on them, thus keeping the dealers and illegal laboratories in business. Those habitual clients all too often finish up literally with ruined lives, addicted, living in poverty, and most importantly, out of the breeding population.
    There are some people who can use even ‘hard’ drugs like heroin and not become such casualties. They are the ones who pass their genes on. The rest don’t.

    1. I doubt sperm and ovum care whether their producers can or can’t handle mind-altering drugs. Are you saying that those living in poverty aren’t up for a tango or two if on mind-altering drugs? I wonder what the writer of this piece thinks?

  5. @O. Puhleeze:
    Do you have any actual studies to back up your claims? What is a “significant percentage” who go on to become hopeless addicts, and where did you get that number? From actual scientists, or DARE propaganda?
    That’s all your argument is, an unsupported regurgitation of incorrect DARE propaganda.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.