 |
 |
|
|
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign
Phase 1 (Report No. 1)
3.3.1.1 Nature and Extent of Community Drug Problems
At almost every site, community members said that there was a serious youth drug problem and that they were concerned about it. This was true in the inner cities as well as in non-urban and rural areas. Community informants in both target and comparison sites reported that alcohol and marijuana were readily available to youth.
Nature and extent of drug problems -- Alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana were the drugs cited as those most frequently used by youth in all sites. Alcohol use among teens in Atlanta was described as "rampant" and "socially acceptable." Teenage drinking parties in the fields (e.g., where youth drink beer from kegs) were common at a number of sites. Sioux City, among other sites, had experienced an increase in youths' use of methamphetamines or "garbage canning," while Portland experienced a growing problem of crystal methamphetamine and heroin use among youth.
Many described Sioux City (located on a major interstate highway [the "meth pipeline"]) as a popular destination for drugs being trafficked through the Midwest. Its location was considered one of the main reasons for the increase of methamphetamine use in the area. In other sites, crank, cocaine, and hallucinogen use was becoming more common among older youth. Younger youth in poorer neighborhoods of a Southwestern site were reported to be using inhalants, especially liquid paper (White Out) and octane booster. The availability and use of high-quality, low-cost heroin was increasing throughout the Washington, D.C., area. Informants in San Diego talked about the large drug cartels selling drugs in Tijuana and how youth who travel across the border to Mexico were able to buy drugs for small amounts of money.
A pattern emerged in which there were urban/non-urban differences in the kinds of drugs used by youth. For example, LSD and crystal methamphetamines were becoming more common in the suburbs of Tucson but not in the city neighborhoods. In other sites, crack-cocaine, inhalants, and marijuana were perceived as prevalent in the inner city, while LSD, heroin, powder cocaine, and designer drugs were more common in the non-urban areas. An increase in the use of prescription drugs (e.g., sniffing crushed Ritalin) or over-the-counter drugs (e.g., Coricidin-D) was reported among non-urban youth in Washington, D.C.
In terms of level of use, respondents in several sites perceived that actual drug use among youth is more widespread in non-urban, higher SES communities, whereas trafficking and drug-related crime is predominantly found among youth living in depressed urban communities. For example, informants said that inner-city youth in Atlanta who were associated with drugs were more likely to be drug dealers than drug consumers.
An alarming trend that emerged in almost all sites is that youth are engaging in drug and alcohol use at younger ages. In one site, youth were reported to be starting drug use as young as 10 years of age. Many believe that the pattern of frequent alcohol use among younger youth stems in part from youths' easy access to alcohol in their own homes.
Drug dealing in communities also was reported to be a major concern at many sites. Open drug markets were reported to be operating in public housing projects in one site. The financial gain from drug dealing in depressed urban areas was a recurring theme of informants in many of the sites. In some locations like Baltimore, parents in low-income urban areas were described as "looking the other way" if their children were involved in drug trafficking because they came back with money for rent, food, clothing, and even new appliances. Some teenagers involved in selling drugs in San Diego were reported to be working for Tijuana cartels because it was a quick way to make money.
Informants in several sites discussed parental tolerance of youths' use of "safe" drugs like alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana and the parents' belief that these substances would not have a major effect on youth and may, in fact, deter them from experimenting with more hard-core drugs. Many informants believed that marijuana is not perceived as dangerous because it is so prevalent. A community informant stated "acceptance of marijuana is so high that many kids don't realize it is illegal."
One of the sites in a western State holds a "hemp festival" and a fair, where many people are observed using drugs in public. Informants in another western site frequently talked about adults who live outside the city and grow their own marijuana crops in the forests. The attitude of some baby boomer parents (i.e., those who were coming of age in the 1960s) toward marijuana, as reported by an informant, was "if you are going to do it, then do it at home."
Differences in how adults recognize and deal with drug problems -- A recurring theme in Houston, Sioux City, Washington, D.C., Milwaukee, Portland, San Diego, and Tucson (and many of the comparison sites as well) was that adults tended to minimize the drug problem. Adults were perceived as denying that drugs were in their neighborhoods, that their children could be using drugs, or that their children might have a problem with alcohol or drugs. Informants in Milwaukee stated "as long as their child is not on drugs, alcohol is viewed by many parents as a rite of passage." At other sites like Tucson, where marijuana has been legalized for medicinal purposes, marijuana use among youth also was seen as a rite of passage.
A community service provider in San Diego described a father who learned that his 14-year-old son was an alcoholic and said "thank God it wasn't drugs!" implying that alcohol was not considered a substance that posed serious concern. Informants in many sites noted that parents frequently have no idea that their children are using alcohol and drugs until serious problems occur. For example, a number of prevention specialists say the majority of parents did not confront the issue of youth drug use until their child became involved in criminal activity.
Urban/non-urban differences were evident in terms of adult community members' awareness of a youth drug problem in their local areas. At almost all sites, adults in urban areas and inner cities were much more aware of drug use and less tolerant of their teenagers' using drugs. Key informants perceived that this level of awareness and consequent attitude are a result of inner-city residents' being exposed to drugs on a regular basis so that the problem has become part of their daily lives.
Adults in non-urban areas of Atlanta, Boise, Denver, and Houston often thought youth drug use was a fad or phase and they expected teenagers to experiment with drugs. They tended to be less cognizant of the current youth drug problem, less concerned about it, more in denial, and frequently unable to discuss the topic of drugs with their children because of personal conflicts over their own past or current use.
At almost every site, community informants talked about how parents seemed to fit in one of the following groups: those who were aware of the drug problem and talked with their children about drugs; those who were generally naive about drug use and abuse, lacked information, and thus avoided the subject; and those who had used or were currently using drugs and thus had more permissive attitudes about their children's drug use or were in denial when there was a problem.
Informants at many sites talked about how parents who had been involved with illegal drugs, without detrimental effects, had a more lenient attitude toward drug use and greater acceptance of their children's own experimentation with drugs. Many stated that parents were more tolerant of their children's drinking and smoking if they themselves drank or smoked. An informant in Tucson described some parents as "leftover hippies" who did not see marijuana and alcohol as harmful and who possibly shared them with their older children. Informants noted how some parents espoused the view that "marijuana is not a hard drug, it is natural, from mother earth, and is nonviolent."
Other informants described parents as often being away from home for significant periods of time, and thus "the parents just don't see the kids getting stoned." Acceptance of alcohol use among teens by non-urban parents was exemplified by a service provider's description of parents in the Atlanta suburbs. These parents reportedly underwrote keg parties in their homes for teenagers in order to provide a supervised environment and to minimize the potential dangers of drinking and driving.
