Children in homes where methamphetamine abuse has overtaken their parents are traumatized by the experience, many times left alone and hungry for days at a time, abused, forced to get high themselves, asked to steal and lie to authorities by the hyper and delusional adults in their lives.

In an effort to help kids forced into foster care by their parents’ meth abuse, researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign interviewed 18 children, ages 7-14, from 12 families who were involved with the child-welfare system. At the time of the interviews, they had been in foster care from five to 39 months, with 15.6 months the average.

“The aim of the study was to gather information that could help these children and others like them in the often-difficult adjustment to foster care and beyond,” said Wendy Haight, a professor of social work at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and the lead researcher.

“We want to help foster parents understand more about what the child has gone through,” said study co-author Teresa Ostler, a social work professor at Illinois who specializes in clinical psychology. “A lot of it involves experiences of trauma, where the child needs huge help in putting things together and in making sense, in knowing that their feelings have reasons.”

“Methamphetamine can have profound effects on the user,” Haight said, “Including extreme irritability, paranoia and heightened sexual arousal. Users can go on days-long highs, followed by days of sleep. “These are adults behaving in very unpredictable, dangerous ways, and the child is there too.”

“Meth has such a rapid effect that you see parenting just break down literally,” Ostler said. “Families change rapidly in that time and I think that’s very terrifying for children.”

Mostly, They Miss Their Parents
“Despite those conditions, when the children were asked about ’sad or scary times,’ they talked first or most often about the experience of losing their parents, even months later,” Haight said. “Most want desperately to be with their families and feel a great deal of pain and grief over being separated from their parents.”

“Another complication is that some of these children had taken on the role of caring for their parents, as well as younger siblings, when their parents were under the influence. One child asked who would watch over her mother when she was ’sick,’ ” Haight said. “They also experience emotional harm from the stigma of being the children of methamphetamine users, many of whom face years in prison.”

Regular Family Activities ‘Culture Shock’
“The children often also carry a strong distrust of authority figures, passed on from their parents as a result of the criminal activity involved, sometimes reinforced by a meth-induced paranoia. Some have been actively socialized into a rural drug culture. It becomes a huge blockage to intervention in some cases,” Ostler said.

“For children raised from an early age with their parents using methamphetamine, even routine aspects of family life, like regular meal and bed times, may represent ‘culture shock,’ ” the authors said in a news release.

Not Just Passive Victims
The researchers recommend that additional resources and services, in particular mental health services, need to be more accessible for these children and their foster parents.

“Even with what many of these children have dealt with,” Haight said “They are not just passive victims. Not only have they experienced these horrible situations, but they survived, and you can’t help having some respect for that. They responded in a variety of ways, and were often very resourceful in the process.”

Source: The study, “A Child’s-Eye View of Parent Methamphetamine Abuse: Implications for Helping Foster Families to Succeed,” will be published in the journal Children and Youth Services Review. See also the press release from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

From: http://alcoholism.about.com/od/meth/a/meth_kids.htm

Answer

If you have never learned to be accountable for your actions then you’re going to have a rough time out in this old world. Everyone makes mistakes or they may something in anger. Perhaps they have stolen for the first time for reasons of their own, or they have purposely hurt someone they shouldn’t have hurt. By being accountable and facing each person you’ve hurt and apologize or rectify the problem you build a good, strong character and eventually, in time, people will look up to you as being trustworthy, stern but kind, and someone they’d like to have as a partner in life, workplace, or a friend. Being accountable for your actions and not running from them is called ‘responsibility’ and once you face them head-on instead of making excuses and running the other way you simply become a more reassured and confident person.

From: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/%27%27what_are_the_benefits_of_displaying_accountability_behaviour%27%27

Dependency on alcohol and other drugs was once thought of as a moral problem. The addict was looked upon as a weak-willed individual who did not care about other people or even himself or herself. Today, of course, medical doctors, the clergy, and other professionals realize that chemical dependency is a disease which responds to treatment.

Addiction is a pathological relationship with a mood or mind-altering substance or behavior which renders one powerless and produces harmful consequences. The addicted person is often the last to accept the disease concept. But parents, spouses, and other people close to the addict are slow in identifying the disorder as an illness. This is because they, too, are simply too involved emotionally with the disease process. Addictions do not exist in a vacuum.

The American Medical Association has given formal recognition to the disease concept since 1956. Their recognizing alcoholism and other drug addiction as an illness implies several things:

The illness can be described.
The course of the illness is predictable and progressive.
The disease is primary – that is, it is not just a symptom of some other underlying disorder.
It is permanent.
It is terminal. If left untreated, it results in insanity or premature death.

from: http://www.sosdallas.com/addiction.htm

1. Alcohol kills 6.5 times more youth than all other illicit drugs combined.
2. Traffic crashes are the greatest single cause of death for all persons age 6–33. About 45% of these fatalities are alcohol-related crashes.
3. More than 60% of teens said that drugs were sold, used, or kept at their school.
4. Crystal Meth has become the most dangerous drug problem of small town America. Kids between 12 and 14 that live in smaller towns are 104% more likely to use meth than those who live in larger cities.
5. Youth who drink alcohol are 50 times more likely to use cocaine than young people who never drink alcohol.
6. About 64% of teens (12-17) who have abused pain relievers say they got them from friends or relatives, often without their knowledge.
7. While rates of illicit drug use are declining, the rate of prescription drug use remains high. 15.4% of HS seniors reported non-medical use of at least one prescription medication within the past year.
8. In 2006, more than 2.1 million teens abused prescription drugs.
9. Around 28% of teens know a friend or classmate who has used ecstasy, with 17% knowing more than one user.
10. By the 8th grade, 52% of adolescents have consumed alcohol, 41% have smoked cigarettes, and 20% have used marijuana.
11. Teenagers whose parents talk to them regularly about the dangers of drugs are 42% less likely to use drugs than those whose parents don’t, yet only a quarter of teens report having these conversations.

Sources:
US Dept. of Justice Statistics
National Institute on Drug Abuse
Greater Dallas Council on Alcohol & Drug Abuse
Adolescent Substance Abuse Knowledge Base Prescription for Danger

posted from: http://www.dosomething.org/tipsandtools/11-shocking-facts-about-teens-and-drug-use

July 2006

Grant Results
National Program

Substance Abuse Policy Research Program

SUMMARY

From December 2000 through November 2004, Kathryn E. McCollister, Ph.D., and researchers from the University of Miami compared the costs of in-prison and aftercare substance abuse treatment services for criminal offenders with the savings resulting from fewer days of reincarceration to determine whether such programs are cost effective.

McCollister also worked with colleagues at the University of California at Los Angeles and National Development and Research Institutes.

The project was part of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s (RWJF) national Substance Abuse Policy Research Program (SAPRP) (for more information see Grant Results).

Key Findings
Researchers reported the following findings in a chapter of the book Treatment of Drug Offenders: Policies and Issues and in articles published in Law & Policy, Justice Quarterly and Journal of Quantitative Criminology. See the Bibliography.

* Substance abuse treatment services delivered in criminal justice settings are less expensive than treatment provided in standard, community-based residential settings.
* Participation by criminal offenders in programs that combine in-prison and aftercare substance abuse treatment reduced days of reincarceration and resulted, in most cases, in cost savings.
* Aftercare programs are critical to the success of treatment programs for offenders.

For detailed findings see Findings.

Funding
RWJF supported the project with a grant of $189,133.

See Grant Detail & Contact Information
Back to the Table of Contents
THE PROBLEM

More than 80 percent of state and 70 percent of federal inmates reported drug use, not including alcohol, according to a 1999 report by the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics.

While public recognition of the need for substance abuse treatment in correctional institutions has grown, often such programs are poorly implemented and not adequate for addressing the host of problems experienced by substance abusing inmates.

The U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy estimated that while some form of treatment was available in 90 percent of the correctional facilities examined, only 10 to 20 percent of inmates used these programs.

According to researchers at the University of Miami, a number of studies concluded that providing substance abuse treatment to offenders only while they are incarcerated is not effective in rehabilitating them. These studies showed that offenders receiving in-prison treatment without formal aftercare (continuing treatment after they leave prison) had recidivism and drug relapse rates similar to offenders who did not receive any treatment.

Back to the Table of Contents
THE PROJECT

McCollister and colleagues at the University of Miami, the University of California at Los Angeles and National Development and Research Institutes (a New York-based research and educational organization) examined the costs and savings associated with in-prison and aftercare substance abuse treatment.

Two in-prison therapeutic communities and their affiliated aftercare programs served as the study sites. Therapeutic communities are separate settings within prisons where inmates live, work and receive treatment services. The therapeutic process involves using the activities and interactions among residents to create socially positive lifestyles. The study sites were:

* Amity in-prison therapeutic community and Vista aftercare treatment program in California. Researchers analyzed data at one and five years post-release.
* CREST Outreach Center work release therapeutic community and aftercare program for criminal offenders in Delaware. CREST work release included substance abuse treatment services. Researchers analyzed data at 18 months post-release.

See the Appendix for details on study samples and the costs of incarceration used for comparison.

Researchers presented findings at six meetings (including three annual meetings of the American Public Health Association) and at a teleconference organized by RWJF and the Office of State Legislatures entitled Substance Abuse Treatment and Corrections: Prison-Based Treatment and Aftercare. See the Bibliography for details.

Back to the Table of Contents
FINDINGS

Researchers reported the following findings in a chapter of the book Treatment of Drug Offenders: Policies and Issues and in articles published in Law & Policy, Justice Quarterly and Journal of Quantitative Criminology (see the Bibliography for details):

* Substance abuse treatment services delivered in criminal justice settings are less expensive than treatment provided in standard, community-based residential settings:
o In-prison treatment programs (including the Amity program in California) cost between $37 and $68 per offender per week.
o Vista aftercare services in California cost $181 per offender per week.
o A modified therapeutic community for mentally ill substance abusers in New York had a weekly cost of $554 (according to a previous study by McCollister and colleagues). (Treatment of Drug Offenders: Policies and Issues)
* Participation by criminal offenders in programs that combine in-prison and aftercare substance abuse treatment reduced days of reincarceration and, in most cases, resulted in cost savings. Participation in aftercare treatment was particularly important in reducing days of reincarceration:
o In California at one year (daily cost of incarceration = $59):
+ The cost per average participant in the California substance abuse treatment program was $4,112, and the average participant had 51 fewer days of reincarceration than those in the control group, resulting in a cost per avoided incarceration day of $81.
+ Participants who attended the Vista aftercare program had 84 fewer days of incarceration than those who only attended in-prison treatment. Since the incremental cost of the aftercare treatment over in-prison treatment was $4,277, each additional avoided incarceration day cost $51.
+ In comparison to people in the control group, participants who attended both in-prison and aftercare treatment programs had 108 fewer incarceration days at a cost of $65 per day. (Law & Policy)
o In California at five years (daily cost of incarceration = $72):
+ The average cost for all participants of the California substance abuse treatment program was $5,311 over the cost for those in the control group (many of whom attended other programs). The average participant had 81 fewer days of incarceration over five years, at a cost of $65 per avoided day of incarceration.
+ Participants who attended the Vista aftercare program had 291 fewer days of incarceration over five years than those who only attended in-prison treatment. Since the five-year incremental cost of the aftercare treatment over in-prison treatment was $11,969, each additional avoided incarceration day cost $41.
+ In comparison to people in the control group, participants who attended both in-prison and aftercare treatment programs had 283 fewer incarceration days over five years at a cost of $48 per day. (Justice Quarterly)
o In Delaware at 18 months (daily cost of incarceration = $57):
+ The average cost for the CREST program was $1,937 and the average participant had 30 fewer days of incarceration than those in the comparison group, with a cost per avoided day of incarceration of $65.
+ Participants who attended the aftercare portion of the program had 49 fewer days of incarceration than those who attended only CREST work release. Since the incremental cost of the aftercare treatment over work release alone was $935, each additional avoided incarceration day cost $19.
+ In contrast to people in the comparison group, the participants who attended both CREST work release and aftercare programs had 62 fewer incarceration days over 18 months at a cost of $41 per day. (Journal of Quantitative Criminology)

More at: http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/041070.htm

Alcohol and Drug Abuse Hurts Everyone in the Family

Dependence on alcohol and drugs is our most serious national public health problem. It is prevalent among rich and poor, in all regions of the country, and all ethnic and social groups.

Millions of Americans misuse or are dependent on alcohol or drugs. Most of them have families who suffer the consequences, often serious, of living with this illness. If there is alcohol or drug dependence in your family, remember you are not alone.

Most individuals who abuse alcohol or drugs have jobs and are productive members of society creating a false hope in the family that “it’s not that bad.”

The problem is that addiction tends to worsen over time, hurting both the addicted person and all the family members. It is especially damaging to young children and adolescents.

People with this illness really may believe that they drink normally or that “everyone” takes drugs. These false beliefs are called denial; this denial is a part of the illness.
Back to Top
It Doesn’t Have to be That Way
Drug or alcohol dependence disorders are medical conditions that can be effectively treated. Millions of Americans and their families are in healthy recovery from this disease.

If someone close to you misuses alcohol or drugs, the first step is to be honest about the problem and to seek help for yourself, your family, and your loved one.

Treatment can occur in a variety of settings, in many different forms, and for different lengths of time. Stopping the alcohol or drug use is the first step to recovery, and most people need help to stop. Often a person with alcohol or drug dependence will need treatment provided by professionals just as with other diseases. Your doctor may be able to guide you.

best families “What is Substance Abuse Treatment? A Booklet for Families” – was written especially for family members and is available through SAMHSA’s National Helpline 1-800-662-HELP.
Back to Top
Family Intervention Can Start the Healing
Getting a loved one to agree to accept help, and finding support services for all family members are the first steps toward healing for the addicted person and the entire family.

When an addicted person is reluctant to seek help, sometimes family members, friends, and associates come together out of concern and love, to confront the problem drinker. They strongly urge the person to enter treatment and list the serious consequences of not doing so, such as family breakup or job loss.

This is called “intervention.” When carefully prepared and done with the guidance of a competent, trained specialist, the family, friends and associates are usually able to convince their loved one – in a firm and loving manner – that the only choice is to accept help and begin the road to recovery.

People with alcohol or drug dependence problems can and do recover. Intervention is often the first step.
best families
Back to Top

Children Need Help Too! best families
Children in families experiencing alcohol or drug abuse need attention, guidance and support. They may be growing up in homes in which the problems are either denied or covered up.

These children need to have their experiences validated. They also need safe, reliable adults in whom to confide and who will support them, reassure them, and provide them with appropriate help for their age. They need to have fun and just be kids.

Families with alcohol and drug problems usually have high levels of stress and confusion. High stress family environments are a risk factor for early and dangerous substance use, as well as mental and physical health problems.

It is important to talk honestly with children about what is happening in the family and to help them express their concerns and feelings. Children need to trust the adults in their lives and to believe that they will support them.

Children living with alcohol or drug abuse in the family can benefit from participating in educational support groups in their school student assistance programs. Those age 11 and older can join Alateen groups, which meet in community settings and provide healthy connections with others coping with similar issues. Being associated with the activities of a faith community can also help.

Any relationship involves a certain degree of codependency. Here is a quiz designed to find out if you are codependent to a problematic degree. The terms enabler and codependent arise when speaking of the partner involved in a relationship with an addicted person, but the addict may also be codependent.

Any relationship that involves addiction sledom has moderation as a foundation, it usually involves extremes such as one partner being the giver and one the taker. Here is the quiz:

By Royane Real, Are You Codependent?

Do you feel like you give and give in your relationships but you get very little back? Are you always trying to save somebody or rescue somebody that doesn’t have their life together?

You may be co-dependent.

Take the quiz in this article and find out. In a relationship between two emotionally healthy adults, the roles of giving and receiving help are balanced. Both people offer help and receive help from each other in approximately equal amounts.However, there are some people who always take on the role of being the helper, no matter what relationship they are in. These people give, and give, and they always seem to get involved with people who have very serious emotional problems, such as addiction.And they exhaust themselves trying desperately to save the other person, even at tremendous cost to their own health. These people have friendships that focus exclusively on trying to solve the problems of their friends.

We sometimes call this quality “codependency“, and we may label people who are obsessed with helping others “co-dependent”. A person who is co-dependent will tend to have relationships with people who have a lot of problems emotional, social, familial and financial. The co-dependent person may spend much of their own time, money, and energy helping other people who have problems, while ignoring the problems in their own life.Why would somebody be co-dependent?A person who is co-dependent often suffers from a deep sense of worthlessness and anxiety, and tries to derive a sense of self-worth by helping or rescuing others. A person who is co-dependent may not know how to relax and feel comfortable in a friendship where both people are equals and the relationship is based on enjoying each other’s company.

Co-dependent people may even feel anxious if someone they have been helping gets their life in order and no longer wants their help. The co-dependent person may immediately look around for someone else they can “save”. If you frequently take on the role of helping the people who are your friends, how can you tell if you are acting out of genuine kindness and concern, or whether your behavior is in fact co-dependency? When is it healthy to put the needs of other people first, and when is it unhealthy?There aren’t really any hard and fast lines between the two.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself to see whether your “helping” behavior may actually be co-dependency:

1. Do you have a hard time saying no to others, even when you are very busy, financially broke, or completely exhausted?
2. Are you always sacrificing your own needs for everyone else?
3. Do you feel more worthy as a human being because you have taken on a helping role?
4. If you stopped helping your friends, would you feel guilty or worthless?
5. Would you know how to be in a friendship that doesn’t revolve around you being the “helper”?
6. If your friends eventually didn’t need your help, would you still be friends with them? Or would you look around for someone else to help?
7. Do you feel resentful when others are not grateful enough to you for your efforts at rescuing them or fixing their lives?
8. Do you sometimes feel like more of a social worker than a friend in your relationships?
9. Do you feel uncomfortable receiving help from other people? Is the role of helping others a much more natural role for you to play in your relationships?
10. Does it seem as if many of your friends have particularly chaotic lives, with one crisis after another?
11. Did you grow up in a family that had a lot of emotional chaos or addiction problems?
12. Are many of your friends addicts, or do they have serious emotional and social problems?
13. As you were growing up, did you think it was up to you to keep the family functioning?
14. As an adult, is it important for you to be thought of as the “dependable one”?

If you answered “yes” to a lot of these questions, you may indeed have a problem with co-dependency. This does not mean that you are a flawed person. It means that you are spending a lot of energy on other people and very little on yourself. If it seems that a lot of your friendships are based on co-dependent rescuing behaviors, rather than on mutual liking and respect between equals, you may wish to step back and rethink your role in relationships.If you suspect that your helping behavior is a form of co-dependency, a good therapist or counselor can help you gain perspective on your actions and learn a more balanced way of relating to others.

There are many excellent books available on the subject of co-dependency, such as “Codependent No More” by Melody Beattie. Attending support groups such as Al-Anon can also help you reduce the stress of codependent relationships, and get you to focus on your own life instead of endlessly trying to rescue all those around you.

This article was written by self help author Royane Real. For more information about how you can have more friendships and better relationships, get her new book “How You Can Have All the Friends You Want” Download it today at>http://www.royanereal.comCopyright Royane Real http://www.royanereal.com

Posted September 3, 2009

Original article by Royane Real

From:

http://addictionrecoverybasics.com/2008/05/27/are-you-codependent-quick-quiz-reveals-codependency/

What is Drugged Driving?

“Have one [drink] for the road” was, until recently, a commonly used phrase in American culture. It has only been within the past 20 years that as a Nation, we have begun to recognize the dangers associated with drunk driving. Through a multipronged and concerted effort involving many stakeholders, including educators, media, legislators, law enforcement, and community organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the Nation has seen a decline in the numbers of people killed or injured as a result of drunk driving. It is now time that we recognize and address the similar dangers that can occur with drugged driving.

In 15 states (Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin), it is illegal to operate a motor vehicle if there is any detectable level of a prohibited drug, or its metabolites, in the driver’s blood. Other state laws define “drugged driving” as driving when a drug “renders the driver incapable of driving safely” or “causes the driver to be impaired.”

The principal concern regarding drugged driving is that driving under the influence of any drug that acts on the brain could impair one’s motor skills, reaction time, and judgment. Drugged driving is a public health concern because it puts not only the driver at risk, but also passengers and others who share the road.
How Many People Take Drugs and Drive?

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that more than 17,000 people were killed in alcohol-related crashes in 2006.1 Studies also have found that drugs are used by 10 to 22 percent of drivers involved in crashes, often in combination with alcohol.

According to the 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, an estimated 10.2 million people age 12 and older reported driving under the influence of illicit drugs during the year prior to being surveyed.2 This corresponds to 4.2 percent of the population age 12 and older, similar to the rate in 2005 (4.3 percent), but lower than the rate in 2002 (4.7 percent). In 2006, the rate was highest among young adults age 18 to 25 (13.0 percent).2 In addition:

* In 2006, an estimated 13.3 percent of persons age 12 and older drove under the influence of an illicit drug or alcohol at least once in the past year. This percentage has dropped since 2005, when it was 14.1 percent. The 2006 estimate corresponds to 32.8 million persons.2
* Driving under the influence of an illicit drug or alcohol was associated with age. In 2006, an estimated 7.3 percent of youth age 16 drove under the influence. This percentage steadily increased with age to reach a peak of 31.8 percent among young adults age 22. Beyond the age of 22, these rates showed a general decline with increasing age.2
* Also in 2006, among persons age 12 and older, males were nearly twice as likely as females (17.6 percent versus 9.3 percent) to drive under the influence of an illicit drug or alcohol in the past year.2

In recent years, drugs other than alcohol that act on the brain have increasingly been recognized as hazards to road traffic safety. Some of this research has been done in other countries or in specific regions within the United States, and the prevalence rates for different drugs vary accordingly. Overall, the research indicates that marijuana is the most prevalent illegal drug detected in impaired drivers, fatally injured drivers, and motor vehicle crash victims. Other drugs also implicated include benzodiazepines, cocaine, opiates, and amphetamines.3

A number of studies have examined illicit drug use in drivers involved in motor vehicle crashes, reckless driving, or fatal accidents. For example:

* One study found that about 34 percent of motor vehicle crash victims admitted to a Maryland trauma center tested positive for “drugs only”; about 16 percent tested positive for “alcohol only.” Approximately 9.9 percent (or 1 in 10) tested positive for alcohol and drugs, and within this group, 50 percent were younger than age 18.4 Although it is interesting that more people in this study tested positive for “drugs only” compared with “alcohol only,” it should be noted that this represents one geographic location, so findings cannot be generalized. In fact, many studies among similar populations have found higher prevalence rates of alcohol compared with drug use.5
* Studies conducted in several localities have found that approximately 4 to 14 percent of drivers who sustained injury or died in traffic accidents tested positive for delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active ingredient in marijuana.6
* In a large study of almost 3,400 fatally injured drivers from three Australian states (Victoria, New South Wales, and Western Australia) between 1990 and 1999, drugs other than alcohol were present in 26.7 percent of the cases.7 These included cannabis (13.5 percent), opioids (4.9 percent), stimulants (4.1 percent), benzodiazepines (4.1 percent), and other psychotropic drugs (2.7 percent). Almost 10 percent of the cases involved both alcohol and drugs.

Teens and Drugged Driving

* According to the NHTSA, vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death among young people age 16 to 20.1 It is generally accepted that because teens are the least experienced drivers as a group, they have a higher risk of being involved in an accident compared with more experienced drivers. When this lack of experience is combined with the use of marijuana or other substances that impact cognitive and motor abilities, the results can be tragic.
* Results from NIDA’s Monitoring the Future survey indicate that, in 2006, more than 13 percent of high school seniors admitted to driving under the influence of marijuana in the 2 weeks prior to the survey.8
* The 2004 State of Maryland Adolescent Survey indicates that 13.5 percent of the State’s licensed adolescent drivers reported driving under the influence of marijuana on three or more occasions.9

Why is Drugged Driving Hazardous?

Drugs act on the brain and can alter perception, cognition, attention, balance, coordination, reaction time, and other faculties required for safe driving. The effects of specific drugs of abuse differ depending on their mechanisms of action, the amount consumed, the history of the user, and other factors.

Marijuana

THC affects areas of the brain that control the body’s movements, balance, coordination, memory, and judgment, as well as sensations. Because these effects are multifaceted, more research is required to understand marijuana’s impact on the ability of drivers to react to complex and unpredictable situations. However, we do know that:

* A meta-analysis of approximately 60 experimental studies, including laboratory, driving simulator, and on-road experiments, found that behavioral and cognitive skills related to driving performance were impaired in a dose-dependent fashion with increasing THC blood levels.10
* Evidence from both real and simulated driving studies indicates that marijuana can negatively affect a driver’s attentiveness, perception of time and speed, and the ability to draw on information obtained from past experiences.
* Research shows that impairment increases significantly when marijuana use is combined with alcohol.11
* Studies have found that many drivers who test positive for alcohol also test positive for THC, making it clear that drinking and drugged driving are often linked behaviors.1

Other Drugs

* Prescription drugs: Many medications (e.g., benzodiazepines and opiate analgesics) act on systems in the brain that could impair driving ability. In fact, many prescription drugs come with warnings against the operation of machinery—including motor vehicles—for a specified period of time after use. When prescription drugs are taken without medical supervision (i.e., when abused), impaired driving and other harmful reactions can also result.

In short, drugged driving is a dangerous activity that puts us all at risk.

1. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Traffic Safety Facts Research Note. Washington, DC, 2007. U.S. Department of Transportation Report No. DOT HS 810 821.

2. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Rockville, MD, 2007.

3. Soderstrom CA, Dischinger PC, Kerns TJ, Kufera JA, Scalea TM. Epidemic increases in cocaine and opiate use by trauma center patients: Documentation with a large clinical toxicology database. J Trauma 51:557–564, 2001.

4. Walsh JM, Flegel R, Cangianelli LA, Atkins R, Soderstrom CA, Kerns TJ. Epidemiology of alcohol and other drug use among motor vehicle crash victims admitted to a trauma center. Traffic Inj Prev 5(3):254–260, 2004.

5. Kelly E, Darke S, Ross J. A review of drug use and driving: Epidemiology, impairment, risk factors, and risk perceptions. Drug Alcohol Rev 23(3):319–344, 2004.

6. Ramaekers JG, Berghaus G, van Laar M, Drummer OH. Dose related risk of motor vehicle crashes after cannabis use. Drug Alcohol Depend 73(2):109–119, 2004.

7. Drummer OH, Gerostamoulos J, Batziris H, et al. The incidence of drugs in drivers killed in Australian road traffic crashes. Forensic Sci Int 134:154–162, 2003.

8. O’Malley PM, Johnston LD. Drugs and driving by American high school seniors, 2001–2006. J Studies Alcohol Drugs 68(6):834–842, 2007.

9. Maryland State Department of Education. 2004 Maryland Adolescent Survey. Available at: http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/NR/rdonlyres/852505C8-7FDB-4E4E-B34E-
448A5E2BE8BC/10500/2004_MAS.pdf.

10. Berghaus G, Sheer N, Schmidt P. Effects of Cannabis on Psychomotor Skills and Driving Performance–A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies. In: Kloeden CN and McLean AJ, eds. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety. Adelaide, Australia: The University of Adelaide, NHMRC Road Accident Research Unit, pp. 403–409, 1995.

11. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Marijuana and alcohol combined severely impede driving performance. Ann Emer Med 35(4):398–399, 2000.

Posted August 26, 2009

From:

http://www.drugabuse.gov/infofacts/driving.html

A number of information sources are used to quantify America’s drug problem and to monitor drug abuse trends. Foremost among these sources are the Monitoring the Future survey (MTF) and the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Since 1975, the MTF survey has measured drug, alcohol, and cigarette use as well as related attitudes among adolescent students nationwide. For the 2007 survey, 48,025 students in 8th, 10th, and 12th grades from 403 public and private schools participated. Funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the MTF survey is conducted by investigators at the University of Michigan.

The NSDUH is an annual survey on the nationwide prevalence and incidence of illicit drug, alcohol, and tobacco use among Americans aged 12 years and older conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Approximately 67,500 people are included in this survey.

In MTF and NSDUH, there are three primary prevalence periods for which data are reported: lifetime, past year, and past month (also referred to as “current”). It is generally believed that past year and past month are the better indicators of actual use. However, some analyses are done for only one specific prevalence period; therefore, data for both past year and past month are reported here.

Additional sources of information are provided at the end of this fact sheet.
Trends of Abuse

Alcohol
Overall, the prevalence of underage (ages 12–20) past-month alcohol use and binge drinking has been unchanged since 2002. In 2006, about 10.8 million persons (28.3 percent) in this age group reported drinking in the past month. However, there has been a long-term decline in past-year alcohol use among 8th-graders (persons aged 12 to 13 years), from 46.8 percent in 1994 to 31.8 percent in 2007.

In 2006, an estimated 30.5 million people (12.4 percent) aged 12 or older reported driving under the influence of alcohol at least once in the past year. Although this reflects a downward trend from 14.2 percent in 2002, it remains cause for concern.

Tobacco
According to NIDA’s MTF survey, smoking rates are at their lowest point in the history of the survey. In the past year, smoking prevalence among 8th-graders—13- to 14-year olds, the youngest age group surveyed—dropped in all prevalence categories: lifetime, past-month, and daily use. Daily smoking rates dropped to 3 percent in 2007, down from a peak of 10.4 percent in 1996. The NSDUH survey found that between 2002 and 2006, the rate of past-month cigarette use by 12- to17-year olds declined from 13 percent to 10.4 percent. Another encouraging trend is the decrease in cigarette use by young adults aged 18 to 25 years: Use decreased from 40.8 percent in 2002 to 38.4 percent in 2006.

Illicit Drugs
Illicit drug use by the Nation’s adolescents is declining for almost all specific types of drugs. When data for 8th-, 10th-, and 12th-graders are combined, they show that overall, past-month illicit drug use declined by 24 percent between 2001 and 2007, dropping from 19.4 percent to 14.8 percent. The downward trend in illicit drug use has been driven largely by declines in marijuana smoking.

* Past-year marijuana use among 10th-graders dropped from a peak of 34.8 percent in 1997 to 24.6 percent in 2007.
* Among 12th-graders, use declined from a peak of 38.5 percent in 1997 to 31.7 percent in 2007.
* Annual prevalence of marijuana use by 8th-graders is down to 10.3 percent in 2007, from a 1996 peak of 18.3 percent.
* In the 5 years between 2002 and 2006, the level of current marijuana use among persons aged 12 to 17 years declined from 8.2 percent in 2002 to 6.7 percent in 2006.
* The trend was also seen among older groups. From 2002 to 2006, the rate of current use of marijuana among 18- to 25-year olds dropped from 17.3 to 16.3 percent.

Current cocaine use has remained stable between 2002 and 2006 (there were 2.4 million users in 2006 aged 12 or older); however, a positive trend is the decline in use of crack cocaine, particularly among younger age groups. From 2001 to 2007, the percentage of 10th-graders reporting past-month use of crack declined from 0.7 percent to 0.5 percent.

Despite these downward trends, the MTF survey data highlight some problem areas. For example, there has been a drop in perceived harmfulness of hallucinogens. For the third year in a row, there was a drop in perceived harmfulness of MDMA (ecstasy) among 8th-graders. Tenth-graders reported a decrease in perceived harmfulness of LSD and MDMA, and a decrease in disapproval of LSD. This change in attitude is reflected in an increase in past-year use of MDMA by both 10th- and 12th-graders over the past 2 years.

Prescription Drugs
Also of concern is the increase in past-month nonmedical use of prescription drugs among young adults aged 18 to 25, from 5.4 percent in 2002 to 6.4 percent in 2006. The increase is being driven largely by the use of pain relievers such as OxyContin and Vicodin. Furthermore, in 2006, the number of new initiates in the nonmedical use of prescription pain relievers was roughly even with that of marijuana among persons aged 12 or older.

The complete NSDUH survey findings are available at http://oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUHLatest.htm.
The complete MTF survey findings are available at http://www.monitoringthefuture.org.

Posted August 6, 2009

From:

http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/nationtrends.html

July 17, 2009

Local news media in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, estimate that more and more of the nearly 700 people killed so far this year, were people with addictions seeking treatment at local centers, the Washington Post reported June 14.

Some local officials and addiction counselors said that they believed patients in the treatment centers may owe local drug dealers money, work for competing gangs, or have stolen drugs — or that the high rate of unsolved murders in the border town may have contributed.

“Many people sell drugs during the day and sleep at the centers during the night. That’s the problem. Their troubles come home with them,” said Victor Silerio, who runs a treatment center that — unlike most in the vicinity — restricts patients’ access to leave and re-enter the facility.

At least seven treatment centers have closed since receiving threats from local drug gangs, said Silerio.

Local officials said that when about 10,000 soldiers policed Ciudad Juarez for a few months earlier in the year, the number of murders per day decreased.

Posted July 21, 2009

From

http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2009/drugs-murder-inundate-border.html