How Can I prevent My Child
from Drinking?
Alcohol use by underage drinkers is a persistent public health
problem in the United States, and alcohol is the most commonly
used drug among adolescents. Accordingly, numerous approaches
have been developed and studied that aim to prevent underage
drinking. Some approaches are school based, involving curricula
targeted at preventing alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana use. Other
approaches are extracurricular, offering activities outside of
school in the form of social or life skills training or
alternative activities. Other strategies strive to involve the
adolescents' families in the prevention programs. Policy
strategies also have been implemented that have increased the
minimum legal drinking age, reduced the commercial and social
access of adolescents to alcohol, and reduced the economic
availability of alcohol. Approaches involving the entire
community also have been employed. Several programs (e.g., the
Midwestern Prevention Project and Project Northland) have
combined many of these strategies.
Key words: underage drinking; prevention strategy;
school-based prevention; curriculum; prevention through
alternative activities; skills building; family focused
prevention; alcohol or other drug (AOD) public policy strategy;
minimum drinking age; availability or accessibility to minors;
community-based prevention
|
Call For Free
Consultation - 800 539-6474 |
Underage drinking is a persistent public
health problem in the United States.
Alcohol use initiation rates for
children rise quickly from age 10 up to
about age 13, when they reach more than
50 percent. Subsequently, initiation
rates begin to slow again (Kosterman et
al. 2000). Moreover, alcohol is the most
commonly used drug among adolescents.
For example, among eighth-grade students
(who are ages 13 to 14) surveyed in the
1999 national representative sample of
the Monitoring the Future study, 52
percent reported having consumed alcohol
in their lifetime, and 25 percent
reported having been drunk in their
lifetime. In addition, 24 percent of the
eighth graders reported having used
alcohol in the past month and 9 percent
reported having been drunk in the past
month (Johnston et al. 2000). These
rates are higher than those for use of
tobacco or any illegal drug (Johnston et
al. 2000).
A strong relationship appears to exist between alcohol use among
youth and many social, emotional, and behavioral problems, such
as using illegal drugs, fighting, stealing, driving under the
influence of alcohol and/or other drugs, skipping school,
feeling depressed, and deliberately trying to hurt or kill
themselves. In addition to the problems that occur during
adolescence, early initiation of alcohol consumption is related
to alcohol-related problems later in life. One study found that
early onset of alcohol use (i.e., by age 12) was associated with
subsequent alcohol abuse and related problem behaviors in later
adolescence, including alcohol-related violence, injuries,
drinking and driving, absenteeism from school or work, and
increased risk for using other drugs (Gruber et al. 1996).
Another study found that people who begin drinking before age 15
are 4 times more likely to develop alcohol dependence during
their lifetime than are people who begin drinking at age 21
(Grant and Dawson 1997). Therefore, it is clearly an important
public health goal to delay the initiation of alcohol use among
young adolescents for the benefit of their current and long-term
health.
Call For Free
Consultation - 800 539-6474
To develop effective programs to prevent alcohol use among young
adolescents, it is necessary to first identify the causes of
use. The identification of those causes involves a combination
of theory and research. According to the theory of triadic
influence (TTI), which integrates many behavioral theories into
a comprehensive "mega-theory" of health behavior, all behaviors
have roots in three domains: the person's personal
characteristics, current social situation, and cultural
environment (Flay and Petraitis 1994). The TTI also specifies
different levels of influence on behavior for various factors.
For example, proximal factors directly pertain to the drinker
(e.g., attitudes and perceived norms around alcohol) and more
distal factors pertain to the drinker's environment (e.g.,
parental practices or laws and policies influencing access to
alcohol).
Consistent with the TTI, personal, social, and environmental
factors repeatedly have been found to be associated with alcohol
use among adolescents (Hawkins et al. 1992; Komro et al. 1997).
Personal influences promoting alcohol use include
rebelliousness, tolerance of deviance, a high value on
independence and nonconformance, low school commitment and
achievement, positive beliefs and attitudes toward alcohol use,
and lack of self-efficacy to refuse offers of alcohol. Social
influences favoring adolescent alcohol use include low
socioeconomic status and minimal parental education, family
disruption and conflict, weak family bonds, low parental
supervision, parental permissiveness and lack of rules about
alcohol use, family history of alcoholism, peer alcohol use,
perceived adult approval of use, and perceived peer approval of
use. Important environmental influences on youth alcohol use
include the legal, economic, and physical availability of
alcohol as well as cultural norms around use.
This theoretical framework, which is supported by research on
risk and protective factors (i.e., etiological research),
provides a comprehensive understanding of the factors that
influence the onset of alcohol use among adolescents.
Furthermore, the framework offers practical guidance on
developing strategies to prevent adolescent alcohol use. Indeed,
the enhanced understanding of the interrelatedness of personal,
social, and environmental factors in determining behavior has
influenced prevention efforts considerably. Thus, the focus of
prevention approaches has broadened from individual personality
characteristics to the social world of the adolescent (e.g.,
family and peers) and to macrolevel environmental factors (e.g.,
community and societal messages, norms, and availability) (Perry
et al. 1993a; Wagenaar and Perry 1994).
As researchers and clinicians develop comprehensive approaches
to the prevention of adolescent alcohol use, they must continue
to identify the most important characteristics of different
intervention strategies that contribute to the strategies'
effectiveness. The following sections and the table summarize
current knowledge regarding the most promising components of the
whole spectrum of prevention approaches, including school,
extracurricular, family, policy, and community strategies.
Key
Components of Strategies to Prevent Underage Drinking
|
Type of Strategy |
Key Components |
|
School Strategiesa |
-
Based on behavioral theory and knowledge of
risk and protective factors
-
Developmentally appropriate information
about alcohol and other drugs
-
Development of personal, social, and
resistance skills
-
Emphasis on normative education
-
Structured, broader-based skills training
-
Interactive teaching techniques
-
Multiple sessions over multiple years
-
Teacher training and support
-
Active family and community involvement
-
Cultural sensitivity
|
|
Extracurricular Strategiesb |
-
Supervision by positive adult role models
-
Youth leadership
-
Intensive programs
-
Incorporation of skills building
-
Part of a comprehensive prevention plan
|
|
Family Strategiesc |
-
Improvement of parent-child relations using
positive reinforcement, listening and
communication skills, and problem solving
-
Provision of consistent discipline and
rulemaking
-
Monitoring of children’s activities during
adolescence
-
Strengthening of family bonding
-
Development of skills
-
Involvement of child and parents
|
|
Policy/Community Strategiesd |
-
Excise taxes
-
Minimum legal drinking age of 21
-
Citizen action to reduce commercial and
social availability of alcohol
|
SOURCE:
aDusenbury and Falco 1995
bCarmona and Stewart 1996
cAshery et al. 1998; Etz et al. 1998;
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) 1997
dGrossman et al. 1994; Holder et al. 1997;
Lockhart et al. 1993; Perry et al. in press; Wagenaar et
al. 2000a,b; Wagenaar and Toomey 2000 |
SCHOOL STRATEGIES
The goal of many school-based programs is to reduce the onset
and prevalence of adolescent alcohol use by decreasing personal
and social risk factors and strengthening personal and social
protective factors. Several successful tobacco, alcohol, and
marijuana prevention curricula exist, including Life Skills
Training (Botvin et al. 1995), Project Northland (Perry et al.
1996), the Midwestern Prevention Project (Pentz et al. 1989),
Project SMART (Hansen and Graham 1991), and Project ALERT (Ellickson
et al. 1993). These programs have given researchers a better
understanding of important components for classroom-based
programs. Both meta-analyses (e.g., Tobler 1992; Tobler et al.
2000) and reviews of effective programs (Drug Strategies 1996;
Dusenbury and Falco 1995) have identified the following factors
as critical components of successful curricula:
·
Program development based on behavioral theory and knowledge of
risk and protective factors
·
Developmentally appropriate information about drugs, including
information on the short-term effects and long-term consequences
of their use
·
The development of personal, social, and resistance skills to
help students identify internal pressures (e.g., anxiety and
stress) and external pressures (e.g., peer pressure and
advertising) to use drugs and to give students the skills to
resist these pressures while maintaining friendships
·
An emphasis on normative education that reinforces the awareness
that most adolescents do not use alcohol, tobacco, or other
drugs
·
Structured, broad-based skills training, such as goal setting,
stress management, communication skills, general social skills,
and assertiveness skills
·
Interactive teaching techniques, such as role playing,
discussions, and small-group activities to promote active
student participation
·
Multiple sessions over several years, particularly during middle
school
·
Teacher training and support from program developers or
prevention experts
·
Active family and community involvement
·
Cultural sensitivity-for example, by including activities that
require teacher and student input and which can be tailored to
the cultural experience of the classroom.
Several studies have compared the effectiveness of different
types of school-based programs. For example, two recent
meta-analyses compared interactive with noninteractive
curricula. Interactive curricula include the components
described above, with a substantial amount of time spent in
activities that foster the development of interpersonal skills.
Noninteractive curricula are more lecture oriented and stress
drug knowledge or affective development (i.e., personal insight,
self-awareness, and values). The analyses found that interactive
curricula were more effective than noninteractive curricula in
preventing alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use among youth (Tobler
and Stratton 1997; Tobler et al. 2000).
Interactive programs can be further divided into three
categories based on their focus on social influences,
comprehensive life skills, and system-wide change, respectively.
Of these three categories, the system-wide change programs were
most effective in preventing overall drug use (including alcohol
use), followed by comprehensive life skills and social
influences programs (Tobler et al. 2000). System-wide change
programs, in turn, are of two types: (1) school-based programs
that are actively supported by family and/or community (e.g.,
Project Northland, which is described below in the section "Multicomponent
Strategies") and (2) programs that provide a supportive school
environment but do not involve the family and/or community.
A more recent meta-analysis examined the relative effectiveness
of two types of interactive programs-comprehensive life skills
programs and social influences programs-and determined specific
drug use outcomes for both strategies (Roona et al. in press).
In contrast to the findings by Tobler and colleagues (2000), the
results indicated that the social influences programs were
significantly more effective than the comprehensive life skills
programs in reducing alcohol abuse, especially for youth in
middle school, where most prevention curricula are implemented.
The differences in findings probably stem from the fact that
Tobler and colleagues (2000) studied the effects of the programs
on overall drug use, whereas the study by Roona and colleagues
(in press) was specific to alcohol abuse. Overall, however, the
investigators concluded that neither program type significantly
reduced alcohol use prevalence and that comprehensive life
skills programs actually increased alcohol use. These findings
may be explained by the fact that alcohol use is highly
ingrained in U.S. culture and is the most difficult type of drug
to prevent among adolescents using classroom-based programs.
The study by Roona and colleagues (in press) included only
results on program effectiveness over the first year after the
intervention. It is also important, however, to consider more
long-term results when analyzing the effectiveness of prevention
programs. Such long-term analyses have been conducted for
several programs, demonstrating that some result in long-term
reductions of tobacco and marijuana use, but not alcohol use,
among adolescents (Ellickson et al. 1993; Pentz et al. 1989;
Johnson et al. 1990). This finding again supports the greater
resistance of alcohol use behavior to change.
The sole curricula-only prevention program that has reported
long-term effects on alcohol use is Life Skills Training (Botvin
et al. 1990, 1995). This program consists of 3 years of
prevention curricula for middle or junior-high school students
and includes 15 sessions during the first year, 10 sessions
during the second year, and 5 sessions during the third year.
The curricula cover drug information, drug-resistance skills,
self-management skills, and general social skills. A long-term
followup study indicated that this program had long-term effects
on tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use through grade 12 (Botvin
et al. 1995); however, no alcohol results were reported in the
article presenting results from 1 year past high school (Botvin
et al. 2000).
The Life Skills Training curricula focus on changes only at the
individual level. A recent etiological analysis, however,
indicates that individual-level variables only account for a
small percentage of the variance in alcohol use among
adolescents (Griffin et al. 2000). Accordingly, Griffin and
colleagues (2000) concluded that classroom-based prevention
efforts should be complemented with family, community, and
policy initiatives that facilitate change in the larger social
environment. Such approaches are reviewed in the following
sections.
EXTRACURRICULAR STRATEGIES
About 40 percent of adolescents' waking hours are
discretionary-not committed to such activities as eating,
school, homework, chores, or working for pay-and many young
adolescents spend virtually all of this time without
companionship or supervision by responsible adults (Carnegie
Council on Adolescent Development 1992). Discretionary time
outside of school represents an enormous potential for either
desirable or undesirable behaviors, such as alcohol and other
drug use. Several studies have found that young adolescents who
are more likely to be without adult supervision after school
have significantly higher rates of alcohol, tobacco, and
marijuana use than do adolescents receiving more adult
supervision (Mulhall et al. 1996; Richardson et al. 1993).
Scales and Leffert (1999) conducted a comprehensive literature
review on the effects of involvement in youth programs (e.g.,
sports, recreation, camps, mentoring, and drop-in centers) on
adolescent development. They found that involvement in youth
programs is associated with the following outcomes:
·
Better development of life skills
·
Greater communication skills
·
Fewer psychosocial problems
·
Decreased involvement in risky behaviors, such as drug use
·
Decreased juvenile delinquency and violence
·
Decreased risk of dropping out of school
·
Increased academic achievement
·
Increased safety.
Another study also found involvement in extracurricular
activities to be related significantly to reduced adolescent
alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and other drug use (Jenkins 1996).
Widely cited meta-analyses (e.g., Tobler 1992) compared the
effectiveness of two types of extracurricular programs: peer
programs and alternative programs. Peer programs were defined as
interventions that included social and life skills training,
including refusal skills. Alternative programs were defined as
interventions that included the provision of positive activities
more appealing than drug use (e.g., sports activities). The
meta-analyses found that alternative programs overall were less
effective than peer programs. Among the alternative programs,
those that involved high-risk youth and that involved many hours
of activities were most effective.
Similar findings were reported in a review of alternative
programs published by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention
(CSAP) (Carmona and Stewart 1996). That report concluded that
there was no strong research support for the alternative
approach. The review offered the following conclusions based on
the available research:
·
Alternative approaches seem to be most effective with high-risk
youth who may not have adequate adult supervision and a variety
of activities available to them in their daily life.
·
Youth involvement in the planning and implementation of
alternatives may enhance participation and effectiveness.
·
More intensive programs seem to be most effective.
·
Alternative programs should incorporate skills-building
components into their design.
·
Alternative programs should be one part of a comprehensive
prevention plan serving to establish strong community norms
against alcohol use.
As noted by Carmona and Stewart (1996), an important component
of extracurricular activities appears to be active youth
leadership. This conclusion was supported by a study by Komro
and colleagues (1996), who reported that youth who participated
in planning alcohol-free activities for their peers
significantly reduced their alcohol use. However, more research
using rigorous controlled designs is needed to understand the
effects of involvement in extracurricular activities and youth
leadership on early onset of alcohol use.
FAMILY STRATEGIES
Several sources have recommended family involvement as important
for the success of alcohol prevention strategies (Drug
Strategies 1996; Dusenbury and Falco 1995; National Institute on
Drug Abuse [NIDA] 1997). Family factors, such as parent-child
relationships, discipline methods, communication, monitoring and
supervision, and parental involvement, can significantly
influence alcohol use among youth (Bry et al. 1998). Because of
increasing demands on their time and attention, however, parents
are spending less time with their children and therefore need
strategies and ideas to help them effectively parent their
children (Kumpfer 2000).
Promising family strategies for preventing alcohol, tobacco, and
other drug use include structured, home-based parent-child
activities; family skills training; behavioral parent training;
and behavioral family therapy. Reviews of family skills training
indicate that enhancement of the following parenting skills is
important for the prevention of alcohol use (Ashery et al. 1998;
NIDA 1997):
·
Improving parent-child relations by using positive
reinforcement, listening and communication skills, and problem
solving
·
Providing consistent discipline and rulemaking
·
Monitoring children's activities during adolescence
·
Strengthening family bonding.
Various studies have identified several components that
contribute to the success of family based prevention
interventions. One major component is a focus on skill
development rather than on simple education about appropriate
parenting practices (Etz et al. 1998). Another important
component is the involvement of both parents and children in
individual and group training sessions (Etz et al. 1998).
Several studies have found that parent and family training
programs both improve parenting skills and reduce problem
behaviors among children (Ashery et al. 1998; NIDA 1997).
Examples of successful parenting programs include the Preparing
for the Drug-Free Years (PDFY) program and the Iowa
Strengthening Families Program (ISFP) (Kumpfer et al. 1996; NIDA
1997; Spoth et al. 1999a,b). The PDFY program consists of
five competency-training sessions for parents, with young
adolescents attending one of those sessions together with their
parents. The ISFP comprises seven sessions, each attended
jointly by youth and their parents. Comparisons of both
interventions with control families found positive effects on
parents' child management practices and parent-child relations,
improved youth resistance to peer pressure toward alcohol use,
reduced affiliation with antisocial peers, reduced levels of
problem behaviors, and delayed substance use initiation (Kumpfer
et al. 1996; Spoth et al. 1999a,b).
A less intense family involvement approach is based on including
parents in homework assignments around issues of alcohol use,
thereby increasing the likelihood that alcohol, tobacco, and
other drug use is discussed at home, and potentially enhancing
parenting skills by increasing communication between parent and
child and providing behavioral tips to parents. For example,
Project Northland, which is described later in this article,
used homework assignments to engage families and provide
behavioral tips.
POLICY STRATEGIES
Adolescent alcohol use also is determined by important
environmental influences, such as the legal, economic, physical,
and social availability of alcohol (Wagenaar and Perry 1994).
Accordingly, lawmakers have implemented several policy
strategies targeting these influences to reduce the availability
of alcohol to youth. These strategies include raising the
minimum legal drinking age (MLDA), curtailing commercial access,
limiting social access, and reducing economic availability.
Increasing the MLDA
The effectiveness of alcohol policies in significantly reducing
alcohol-related problems has been well demonstrated by changes
in the MLDA and the resulting consequences. During the early
1970s, 29 States lowered their MLDA, typically from age 21 to
ages 18, 19, or 20. As concern about increasing rates of
alcohol-related traffic crashes among young people grew,
however, a grassroots movement developed in many States, putting
pressure on State governments to raise the MLDA back to age 21.
In 1984, the Federal government passed the Uniform Drinking Age
Act, which provided for a reduction in Federal funds to States
that did not raise their MLDA to age 21, and by 1988, all States
again had a MLDA of 21.
The MLDA is the most-studied alcohol policy, with 132 published
studies (Wagenaar and Toomey 2001). Included in these are
well-controlled investigations providing clear evidence that a
higher MLDA can effectively reduce drinking as well as
alcohol-related car crashes and other injuries among teenagers.
Though effective, the increase in MLDA to age 21 has had only
modest enforcement1 (1The little
enforcement that occurred in the late 1980s and early 1990s
primarily involved citing underage drinkers rather than the
adults who were illegally selling or providing alcohol to
underage youth.) (Wagenaar and Wolfson 1994). For example, youth
report that they have easy access to alcohol from both licensed
establishments and social sources (e.g., friends or
acquaintances) (Wagenaar et al. 1996). These reports are
substantiated by purchase-attempt studies, which directly test
the propensity of establishments to sell alcohol to youth
without requiring identification. In the early 1990s, such
studies found that young buyers could purchase alcohol with no
age identification in approximately 50 percent of the purchase
attempts (Forster et al. 1995). In addition, youth frequently
receive alcohol from social providers, including parents,
friends, coworkers, and even strangers (Wagenaar et al. 1996).
Accordingly, public health professionals and activists in many
communities are working to reduce youth access to alcohol from
both commercial and social providers using public and
institutional policy changes, such as the ones described in the
following sections.
Policies to Reduce Commercial Access
To address the problem of alcohol availability from commercial
providers, communities have conducted enforcement campaigns
using compliance checks. During these checks, law enforcement
officers supervise attempts by underage youth to purchase
alcohol from licensed establishments. When an illegal sale is
made, penalties are applied to the license holder and/or the
clerk or server who made the sale. Such compliance checks can
significantly reduce sales to minors (Preusser et al. 1994;
Grube 1997). State and local laws providing for graduated
administrative (as opposed to criminal) fine and license
suspension penalties for establishments that sell to minors may
improve the effectiveness of these enforcement efforts because
the increased certainty of penalties is a key component of
deterrence-based approaches (Ross 1992).
Other policy tools to reduce youth access to alcohol from
commercial sources include requiring servers of alcohol to be
trained to detect false age identification, designing drivers'
licenses to clearly indicate whether someone is underage, and
banning or regulating home deliveries of alcohol. Studies
evaluating server-training programs show that such programs by
themselves are unlikely to reduce sales to underage youth
(Howard-Pitney et al. 1991; Toomey et al. 2001). Training
programs may be useful, however, for creating a political
climate that decreases resistance to enforcement campaigns that
can effectively reduce sales to minors.
Home deliveries of alcohol may make it even easier for youth to
obtain alcohol from a retail establishment because the
transaction occurs in completely unmonitored settings.
Approximately one-half of the States in the United States allow
alcohol delivery from retail establishments to private
residences. The only published study of teen use of home
delivery found that 10 percent of the 12th graders
and 7 percent of the 18- to 20-year-olds reported consuming
home-delivered alcohol (Fletcher et al. 2000). A limitation of
this study is that it did not ask whether it was the underage
youth or an adult who had ordered the delivery of alcohol.
Recently, State and national policymakers have proposed
restrictions on home delivery of alcohol ordered from Internet
sites. Although debates over these controversial proposals
involve apparent concern for reducing youth access to alcohol,
home delivery from local retail outlets is a more likely source
of alcohol than Internet orders, at least in part because it
provides more immediate access to alcohol. Internet sales
require youth to plan weeks in advance to purchase alcohol for a
drinking event, require a credit card, involve careful planning
when and where the alcohol will be delivered, and potentially
require storage until the drinking event occurs. Restrictions on
retail home deliveries of alcohol, however, are not included in
the policy debates on Internet sales; therefore, it appears that
policy attention to alcohol Internet sales may have more to do
with the varying economic interests of local versus national
alcohol distributors and retailers. The effects of restrictions
on Internet or retail home deliveries on youth alcohol use have
not been studied.
Policies to Reduce Social Access
Policy tools for limiting youth access to alcohol from social
providers attempt to reduce the frequencies of underage drinking
parties and of adults illegally providing alcohol to youth. Some
of these prevention approaches are being implemented at the
community level. For example, communities may address underage
drinking parties by creating enforcement mechanisms, such as
noisy assembly ordinances, that allow law enforcement officers
to enter private residences where underage drinking is
occurring.2 (2An example of such an
ordinance can be found on the Internet at www.epi.umn.edu/alcohol.)
Communities can also require beer kegs to be registered at the
time of retail sale. Using a keg's unique identification number
and the registration information, police officers can identify
and penalize adult purchasers of kegs used at parties where
underage guests are caught drinking. To deter adults from
illegally giving alcohol to youth, some States have enacted
social host laws that allow third parties to sue social
providers when provision of alcohol to youth results in a death
or injury. Although many possible policy strategies have been
identified that may help reduce social access to alcohol, little
research has been done to evaluate the specific effects of these
strategies.
Policies to Reduce Economic Availability
Policies also can help reduce the economic availability of
alcohol. A large number of econometric studies have clearly
demonstrated an inverse relationship between price and
consumption of alcohol-that is, higher prices result in reduced
consumption. (For more information on the effects of price on
alcohol consumption, see the article in this issue by Chaloupka
and colleagues, pp. 22–34.) Policy simulation studies suggest
that this relationship exists among the general population as
well as among adolescents. Thus, higher alcohol prices may
substantially reduce both the frequency and the amount of teen
drinking, even among youth who are already heavy alcohol
consumers (Laixuthai and Chaloupka 1993). In fact, price
increases may be particularly effective in reducing youth
drinking, because heavy drinkers in young populations are more
affected by price than are heavy drinkers in the general
population (Godfrey 1997; Chaloupka and Wechsler 1996).
One policy that has been used to raise the price of alcohol is
to increase the excise tax on alcohol. Although alcohol excise
taxes are often raised for revenue-generating reasons, several
studies suggest that higher excise taxes may affect youth
consumption and its consequences. Higher taxes on alcohol are
associated with less drinking among 16- to 21-year olds
(Grossman et al. 1994) and high school students (Lockhart et al.
1993). Higher taxes are also associated with fewer traffic
fatalities among youth (Saffer and Grossman 1987), higher
graduation rates from college (Cook and Moore 1993), and less
violence among college students.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIES
Community participation is critical for creating comprehensive
changes in institutional policies (e.g., of alcohol
establishments, media outlets, and schools) and public policies
aimed at reducing youth access to alcohol. Several community
trials have included community-organizing components to mobilize
and successfully change policies addressing public health issues
(Wagenaar et al. 2000a; Holder et al. 1997).
Only one community trial-Communities Mobilizing for Change on
Alcohol (CMCA)-has focused solely on policy changes to reduce
youth access to commercial and social sources of alcohol. CMCA
tested a community-organizing intervention in a trial involving
15 communities that were randomly assigned to receive the
intervention or to serve as control communities. The goal of the
community-organizing intervention was to reduce the
accessibility of alcoholic beverages to youth under age 21.
Through the organizing effort, diverse groups of people across
the intervention communities developed and implemented strategic
action plans to influence a wide array of institutional policies
(Wagenaar et al. 1999). The intervention was successful in
several respects. For example, it changed alcohol merchant
practices around selling to underage youth and reduced the
propensity of 18- to 20-year olds to buy alcohol in a bar,
provide alcohol to other teens, or consume alcohol (Wagenaar et
al. 2000a). Furthermore, following the intervention,
arrests for driving under the influence among 18- to 20-year
olds were significantly lower in the intervention communities
than in the control communities (Wagenaar et al. 2000b).
Two other community trials-the Community Trials Project (CTP)
and the Saving Lives Program-have also addressed underage
drinking, although the focus of these studies expanded beyond
the underage population. The goal of the CTP was to reduce
injury and deaths related to alcohol use among all age groups
(Holder et al. 1997). The intervention included the following
components:
·
Involvement of the media to increase awareness
·
Training of alcohol-retail establishments, including information
on preventing sales to underage patrons
·
Compliance checks conducted by law enforcement to reduce illegal
alcohol sales to underage patrons
·
Increased enforcement of drunk-driving laws
·
Reduction of alcohol availability through regulation of alcohol
outlets.
Following the intervention, sales rates to buyers who appeared
to be under age 21 were lower in the three intervention
communities than in the three comparison communities (Grube
1997). The intervention communities also showed reductions in
self-reported drinking-and-driving rates, nighttime injury
crashes, alcohol-related crashes, and assault injuries among the
general population (Holder et al. 2000).
The Saving Lives program, which was conducted in six communities
in Massachusetts, also involved community mobilization to
address drinking and driving among all age groups (Hingson et
al. 1996). The intervention included multiple strategies that
addressed alcohol-impaired driving as well as other traffic
problems, such as speeding, other moving violations, and seat
belt use. Following the intervention, the relative decrease in
alcohol-involved fatal traffic crashes was 42 percent in the
intervention communities compared with the rest of the State
(the absolute change was from 69 crashes to 36 crashes in the
intervention communities). Furthermore, self-reported
drinking-and-driving among 16- to 19-year-olds was reduced by 40
percent in the intervention communities compared with the rest
of Massachusetts.
MULTICOMPONENT STRATEGIES
Although various individual strategies have been successful in
preventing youth alcohol use, a more comprehensive approach
combining several of the intervention strategies described above
might be even more effective. Two studies-the Midwestern
Prevention Project and Project Northland-have combined school,
family, and community strategies to prevent alcohol use among
adolescents; their results are described in the following
sections.
Midwestern Prevention Project
The Midwestern Prevention Project, which was not specific to
alcohol use but addressed all types of drug use, consisted of
the following four components:
·
A 10-session school program emphasizing drug-use-resistance
skills training, delivered in grade 6 or 7; this component also
included homework sessions involving active interviews and role
plays with parents and family members
·
A parent organizations program for reviewing school prevention
policy and training parents in positive parent- child
communication skills
·
Initial training of community leaders in the organization of a
drug abuse prevention task force
·
Mass media coverage of the program.
The study was composed of eight representative Kansas City
communities that were randomly assigned either to the full
program including all four components or to a control program
including only the community organization and mass media
components. After 3 years, students in the communities
implementing the full program had lower rates of tobacco and
marijuana use, but not alcohol use; this follows the previously
described findings that alcohol use patterns appear to be the
most difficult to change.
Project Northland
Project Northland was designed to prevent or reduce alcohol use
among young adolescents using a comprehensive, multicomponent
intervention that targeted both the supply of and demand for
alcohol. Project Northland was evaluated using 20 school
districts from northeastern Minnesota that were randomly
assigned either to the treatment or control condition. The
students participating in the study were surveyed from grades 6
through 12. The intervention was conducted in three stages: a
first intervention phase, an interim phase, and a second
intervention phase. The first intervention phase, which was
conducted when the students were in grades six through eight,
included: (1) social behavioral curricula, (2) peer leadership
and extracurricular social opportunities, (3) parental
involvement and education, and (4) community-wide task forces
(Perry et al. 1993b). At the end of 3 years, a smaller
percentage of students in the intervention communities reported
drinking or beginning to drink compared with students in the
control communities. Furthermore, among students in all
districts who at the beginning of sixth grade reported never
having consumed alcohol, those in the intervention communities
were not only less likely to drink 3 years later but also had
lower rates of cigarette and marijuana use (Perry et al. 1996).
The interim phase of the study occurred when the students were
in grades 9 and 10. During those years, only minimal
intervention (i.e., a five-session classroom program) took
place, and drinking rates between the treatment and control
groups began to converge. In fact, by the end of grade 10, no
significant differences existed between the two groups (Williams
and Perry 1998).
In the second intervention phase, when the students were in
grades 11 and 12, they were exposed to various interventions,
including an 11th grade classroom curriculum, parent
postcards, mass media involvement, youth development activities,
and community organizing (Perry et al. 2000). As a result of the
intensified intervention, the alcohol use patterns of the
treatment and control groups began to diverge again by the end
of the 11th grade, and the differences between groups
were marginally significant for those students who had not used
alcohol at the beginning of 6th grade (Williams et
al. 1999).
An analysis comparing the trajectories of alcohol use between
the treatment and control groups (i.e., a growth curve analysis)
was conducted for all three phases of Project Northland. During
the first intervention phase, the increase in alcohol use was
significantly greater in the control group than in the
intervention group. Conversely, the increase in alcohol use was
significantly greater in the intervention group than in the
control group during the interim phase, when there were minimal
program efforts. Thus, the students in the intervention group
seemed to return to the level of drinking that was normative in
their communities. Fortunately, that trend was reversed again
during the second intervention phase. During that period, the
increase in alcohol use was again greater in the control group
than in the intervention group (p<0.02), demonstrating
the positive and significant impact of the second intervention
phase (Perry et al. in press). In addition, the
community-organizing intervention component during the second
intervention phase, which focused on community action
team-initiated compliance checks of alcohol outlets,
successfully reduced the ability of youthful-appearing
21-year-olds to purchase alcohol without age identification (p=0.05)
(Perry et al. in press).
CONCLUSION
Adolescent alcohol use is one of the most difficult behaviors to
change because alcohol use is so ingrained in the U.S. culture.
Adolescents choose to consume alcohol, not just because of
personal characteristics, such as personality type or level of
social skills, but also because it is a part of daily life in
their communities and, for many youth, in their homes (Wagenaar
and Perry 1994). As Wagenaar and Perry indicate in their
theoretical model (1994), numerous social and environmental
influences affect adolescents, including messages they receive
from advertisements, community practices, adults, and friends
about alcohol. Comprehensive interventions targeting underage
drinking may need to counter or change all of these messages to
motivate individual adolescents to choose not to consume
alcohol.
Researchers' knowledge about effective interventions to reduce
underage drinking-particularly about school-based programs
targeting individual-level factors-has grown substantially
during the past decade, and investigators have identified key
components of state-of-the-art school-based programs. By
themselves, however, these programs are unlikely to create
sustained reductions in underage drinking. Instead, school-based
programs may need to be combined with extracurricular, family,
and policy strategies that help change the overall social and
cultural environment in which young people live to create
sustained decreases in consumption and alcohol-related problems
among youth.
Although key components of non-school-based strategies have been
identified, further research is needed in many of these areas to
understand fully what factors must be targeted and what methods
can best achieve those targets and reduce underage drinking. As
researchers, clinicians, and policymakers learn more about each
strategy, they need to synthesize this knowledge to develop
multicomponent projects consisting of high-quality and
complementary components that together create interventions
strong enough to overcome the drinking culture found throughout
U.S. communities.
Resources
The Manor House Rehab Center
http://www.manorhouserehab.com
1-800-396-5534