The Ineffectiveness of DARE and Its Implications for CJ Policy

(The article below is the op-ed I mentioned in my previous post. It is reprinted with permission from the Daily Record, 1/11/08. Links have been added to this blog post that did not appear in the original piece.)

I read with interest the article about Denville township’s decision to cut funding for the DARE program. While I no longer live in New Jersey, I attended school in Denville from kindergarten through high school, and I like to keep informed on the goings-on in my former hometown.

While it may not be a popular decision among parents in the district, the decision to cut funding for DARE programming was a correct one. A large body of research on this topic indicates that the DARE program is not effective. Even the federal government has acknowledged this fact. In 2003 the Government Accountability Office reviewed several long-term studies of the DARE program and reported that DARE neither reduces drug use among juveniles nor changes their attitudes about drugs. These studies compared students in schools with DARE programs to schools without DARE programs, and found no meaningful differences in drug use, attitudes, or in susceptibility to peer pressure.

While it does not reduce drug use, DARE may have some positive effects—it improves community perceptions of the police. This is certainly a benefit IF the district believes improving police/community relations is something needed and worthy of funding. If so, there are other programs that are actually designed to improve police/community and police/youth relationships that may have lower costs. If not, the program is unnecessary.

So, if DARE doesn’t work, how do we reduce drug use among teenagers? Research has determined that parental involvement is a key factor in reducing the likelihood of drug use. Parents need to know where their children are, whom they are with, and what they are doing. They need to know the parents of their children’s friends and make sure that those parents are capable guardians. Difficult as it is to believe, there are parents who allow drinking and drug use in their homes or at least turn a blind eye to the behavior. As the saying goes, knowledge is power—and that seems to hold true for juvenile drug use, and juvenile delinquency more broadly.

Parents can also reduce the likelihood of drug use by their children by displaying a strong anti-drug philosophy. One might conclude that drug resistance education by parents has a greater effect on drug use than the education provided by police in the DARE program.

Another factor that can lower the risk of drug use among adolescents is the behavior of their peers. Children who have drug-using peers are significantly more likely to use drugs themselves. Here also, parental involvement is vitally important—the more involved parents are with their children and the more aware they are of their children’s activities, the less likely they are to come into contact with drug-using peers.

Finally, parents who use (or abuse) alcohol and drugs increase their children’s risk of illicit drug use, just as parents who smoke are more likely to have children who smoke. You may recall the public service announcement in the mid-1980’s, in which a young boy is caught using drugs by his father. After being confronted by his father, the boy responds “I learned it by watching you!” The tag line, “parents who use drugs have children who use drugs” has been supported in the academic literature.

One of the frustrations of criminal justice researchers is the common belief that a program that “sounds good” will work. Unfortunately, common sense does not always mean a program, no matter how well intended, will be effective. In fact, programs with positive goals can actually be harmful to participants. For example, the documentary “Scared Straight”, filmed in Rahway State Prison in New Jersey, led to programs in several states attempting to divert youth from a life of crime. A recent review of the studies in this area has indicated that Scared Straight programs actually makes high-risk youth WORSE than if they had not experienced the program at all. Like DARE, these programs are difficult to cut due to the public belief that the programs work. Unlike DARE, there are young men being harmed by participating in these programs by increasing their risk of future crime and incarceration.

One of the most difficult things for leaders to do is to cut popular programs that do not work. Like it or not, Denville has made the correct decision to cut DARE—something other districts should consider as well.

ShockProf is an Associate Professor of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. She graduated from Morris Knolls High School in 1986, and has focused her research on the effect of drug use on recidivism, violence against women, and police response to crime.