America's school-based drug prevention program gives in to critics' pressure.
Jump to full article: Salon Magazine, 2001-02-16
Author: Dawn MacKeen
Intro: Joan McCord, co-chairwoman of the National Academy of Sciences panel that issued a stinging report on DARE this week, is one of the people who is concerned about the program hurting the children who participate.
"It's a mistake to assume that you can simply design a program and know in advance whether it will be harmful," says McCord. "I think of those who created thalidomide. They had good intentions, and look what happened. The harm comes from the failure of programs and programs must be evaluated for safety."
She and others assert that politics is what has kept the much-criticized program around for so many years, despite a mountain of evidence contesting its efficacy.
Don Lynam, who issued a report two years ago questioning the effectiveness of DARE, feels vindicated after Thursday's announcement. . .
I think it's a good step, but I'm waiting to see what the details look like. DARE has supposedly gone through changes before. The big difference between what's happening now and what has happened in the past is there's an evaluation component tagged onto this curriculum change -- to see whether or not it is effective. Because one of the things that DARE people say in response to my study is, "Well, that was the old version of DARE. We're using a new and improved version of DARE."
In other words, curriculum changes are a nice way of getting around the fact that your old program didn't work. You just promise that the new one will.
Jump to full article » |