Drug Control and Use Surveys: A Potential Tool for Developing State Drug Control Strategies

• NCJ Number: 124542
• Author(s): K J Dressler; J R Coldren Jr; H B Salzow
• Date Published: 1990
• Length: 57 pages
• Contract Number(s): 87-DD-CX-K049
• Sponsoring Agency: Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA)
• Corporate Author: Justice Research and Statistics Association
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/; Justice Research and Statistics Association; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Publication Type: Survey
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Special analysis report of the Consortium for Drug Strategy Impact Assessment

Annotation

This survey was conducted in five states and the District of Columbia to gauge the nature and extent of the drug problem among youth and the impact of drug control policies.

Abstract

The five states were Arizona, Massachusetts, Ohio, Texas, and Utah. Respondents answered questions on the seriousness of youth-related problems (illiteracy, crime, alcohol use, unemployment, and drug use), appropriate responses for students caught selling drugs to other students, effective drug abuse prevention methods, and knowledge of individuals who regularly abuse alcohol or illegal drugs. In Arizona and Ohio, respondents expressed more concern about drug use as a problem troubling youth than about crime, alcohol use, illiteracy, or unemployment. In the District of Columbia and Massachusetts, respondents consistently ranked drug trafficking as one of the chief concerns. With regard to students caught selling drugs in school, few respondents felt the problem should be turned over to parents; rather, they indicated support for other options such as counseling, expulsion, or letting the criminal justice system handle the problem. Overall, most respondents believe the drug problem will not abate in the next 20 to 25 years, and about half feel it will worsen. They support both drug interdiction and drug education policies. Appendixes contain the survey questions, a review of State survey methodologies, and a list of State survey representatives. 10 tables, 15 figures.