Zimpapers Logo

Zimbabwe’s battle against drug abuse is heating up as a range of action is taken, but in the end, as President Mnangagwa has noted, success only really comes when people do not want to buy drugs although temptation can be reduced if drug peddlers are off the streets and drugs are harder to find.

When we want our young people to stay clear of illegal drugs, or for that matter make sure that they do not become alcohol addicts or even go beyond the lower moderate levels of alcohol consumption, a lot does depend on upbringing and the values that parents and schools and churches manage to get through to children before they go out and experiment.

One major approach is that of the President, that with their whole adult life ahead of them, and the opportunities being opened up, it is such a waste to throw all that away for brief periods of chemically-induced euphoria, and the high risks of addiction.

This positive approach is probably the best way forward, since simply telling young adults that something is wrong is never really going to work, it simply encourages rebellion.

There are limits to just how much parents and schools can do. Teenagers generally do not have access to large sums of money, the sort of money that can attract even a down-market drug dealer, and by the time a young person can afford drugs they are usually outside parental and school control and are legally adults.

This does not mean parents have to give up. So much of raising children is trying to instil values so that as your children drift away from coercion and control they have the knowledge and background to do what is right, or at least not wreck their lives.

This places a lot of burden on parents. It is not much use lecturing a child about the evil of illegal drugs if the parent is half drunk or totally drunk every evening.

The child will just label the lecture as total hypocrisy, although some in that situation will become more determined not to repeat the mistakes of their parents.

Many children of alcoholics are among the most drug-free groups, since a bad example can be effective, but there are better ways forward. One major trend in the last few decades has been the dramatic fall in tobacco smoking among young people. Fifty years ago cigarette smoking was exceptionally high.

Now it is often quite difficult to find someone under 30 or 40 puffing away. There are still a number of young smokers, but their proportion is low compared to the rest of their generation.

Now nicotine is about the one drug that does not impair performance. A 40-a-day smoker can operate complex machinery and perform complex calculations for example; the main downside to tobacco is that a smoker definitely has at least a one-in-three chance of a significantly-reduced lifespan, and when you include those who suffer a range of serious if less lethal ailments you are in serious tobacco-induced health problems for a majority, at some stage of their life.

When you ask young people why they do not smoke you get sensible answers. They see it as “stupid” to spend a lot of money to kill themselves, so the health warnings and the rising taxation that pushes up prices to deter first-time smokers have worked.

Perhaps these are approaches that we need to take with other drugs. People talk a lot about how wrong drug taking is, and even about the risks of throwing away opportunities in life.

But perhaps we also need to talk about the health risks as well and the lower life expectancy.

In other words concentrate more on the “stupidity” of drug users, which would include the risks of throwing your life away, than on the “wrongness” of drug abuse.

Intensifying the operation against drug suppliers and interdicting more of the distribution chain, along with higher penalties for drug sellers and suppliers, will not in themselves end the availability of drugs.

Even countries that impose the death penalty for drug suppliers and those transporting drugs still have people taking the risk.

But what does happen when you make it a lot riskier and longer jail sentences more likely for selling or supplying drugs is that fewer take the risks and market forces ensure that prices go up.

So you still get drugs, you still get roughly the same amount of money spent on drugs, but the volumes sold and consumed go down significantly.

And you get fewer young people taking their first fix, just like you get fewer smoking their first cigarette. So combining the health issues, the dangers of a wasted life and the rising prices we can make drug abuse ever more “stupid”.

We might still have middle-aged addicts and even the few elderly survivors of drug abuse around for a while, but at least we can sharply reduce the number of young addicts. One extra point in the education and upbringing of young people is the need to talk in generalities, as well as specifics. New drugs are developed every year to add to the old organic ones derived from alcohol, marijuana, the opium poppy and the coca plant.

Crystal meth, for example, was not a danger even 40 years ago, but is now widely available.

On the other hand other drugs go out of fashion; lsd was once reasonably available in Zimbabwe, but as more people saw the serious psychiatric damage of many users it lost its appeal. That sort of serious health problem can deter.

Other new drugs become available well before any government can add them to the lists of dangerous drugs, so people need to be aware of the need to be able to “say no” to anyone who offers something that will make you feel wonderful.

There will always be glib salespeople trying to part the “stupid” from their money, but we can teach young people to resist. We need just the right approach.

Stressing the positive alternatives, showing the dangers and health risks, showing the people whose lives have been wrecked, and taking action which will push up costs at the very least and may even stop at least some drugs from being sold, we can then probably persuade most young people that the smart thing to do is actually the right thing to do, just give drugs a miss.