Document text
--> --> June 13: Anti-drinking campaign strikes out By David Morrill The effort to persuade high school and college students not to drink has become almost as popular as strapping American flags to car antennas. Ironically, the campaign is attracting record amounts of money at a time when funding to teach students to read and write is taking a beating at budget committee meetings. With the support of civic organizations, colleges, school boards and elected officials, the campaign boasts an impressive array of consortia and partnerships designed to reach the youth culture. The bandwagon veritably wobbles under the weight of mayors, city councilmen, businessmen, college presidents, school superintendents and law enforcement officers who have clambered aboard. Who, after all, objects to protecting young lives and stopping the tragedy of alcoholism? Equally enthusiastic about the cause are universities and public health organizations that share in the billion dollar-plus research bonanza, the results of which have become common fare on the evening news. Despite its "mom and apple pie" trappings and the good intentions of many of its supporters, I think the effort is largely an exercise in futility. Surely the stench of opportunism can be detected on the breeze. The evidence of failure is overwhelming. Virtually all studies on the subject, including several released this year, report that there has been no appreciable overall decline in high school and college drinking over the past decade. For their part, the researchers do what research-ers always do, suggest that further study is needed. A case in point is a recent Harvard study that concludes: "Our understanding of college drinking can be improved by expanding the scope of issues studied and choosing appropriate research designs." Reading through the entire study is enough to drive anyone to drink. At the root of the movement is an appalling misreading of the target audience. What makes it inexcusable is that the campaign cheerleaders were once young themselves. They should remember how they felt when adults told them how to behave. They should recall the contempt they felt for the legions of Goody-Two-Shoes who prescribed a moral agenda. In particular, they should remember how little credibility the warnings that a thing is dangerous or bad for your health carry with teenagers. For youth, danger is the elixir of life. Health, on the other hand, is an abstraction. It is almost impossible for the young to see beyond the age of 30 or 40. Beyond that lies the vast downhill slope of turtle-skin, acid reflux, leaking bladders, mutual funds and extended care insurance policies. The anti-drinking crowd, which is to say the residents of that downhill slope, should try to remember the view from the other side of the hill. Kids will always drink and smoke and take drugs. They will do this for, among other reasons, the fact that adults say they shouldn't. All the adult world can do is provide a decent education and a decent upbringing and hope for the best. Those who believe they can defy the natural order and get through where others have failed should study the lyrics of Eminem and Mystikal and attend one of the "pimps and whores" costume parties that are all the rage on college campuses. The generation gap is a glandular imperative, as wide today as it was 25, 50 and 100 years ago. Like everyone else, kids learn the most by direct observation of the effects of dangerous practices. They see friends and acquaintances injured or killed in car wrecks and watch alcoholic relatives wither away with liver failure and dementia. From the school of hard knocks they learn that if you drink too much you get sick and throw up and have a headache afterward. Some, unfortunately, will not learn quickly enough. The consortia and partnerships that would change the drinking habits of the young lack the moral foundation of the Temperance movement of a century ago and the Mothers Against Drunk Drivers movement that began in the 1980s. Carrie Nation and her fellow crusaders were on a mission from God and didn't give a hoot about making points with the fellows down at the chamber of commerce. Many of the MADD members were driven by personal loss. Both groups understood the limitations of persuasion. So where should the money and energy go? How about sports, recreation and cultural programs? How about schools? Maybe those who so sanctimoniously thump the lectern would find their time better spent at home with their families. David Morrill is a Florida journalist and Northern California native. Email your... Technical questions & comments to: WebMaster Daily Tidings editorial comments & questions to: Editor Visit our other Oregon Newspapers... | Albany Democrat-Herald | Ashland Daily Tidings | Corvallis Gazette-Times | | Lebanon Express | Newport News-Times | Springfield News | Cottage Grove Sentinel | Ashland Daily Tidings 1661 Siskiyou Blvd. Ashland, OR 97520 Telephone 541-482-3456 © Copyright 2001 Lee Northwest Publishing