February 15, 2001 16:30: MOST parents probably assume that the aim of drug education in schools is to keep children away from drugs.

This is seldom the case.

For the last 15 years the prevailing philosophy has been Harm Reduction, the idea being that children "have a right to make informed choices about using drugs" and "we must teach them the best and safest way to do it".

Anyone advocating informed choices for other illegal activities like speeding or petty pilfering would be severely censured. Why is it different with drugs?

Harm Reduction has its legitimate place in dealing with known users, no-one else. Heroin injectors can be taught not to share equipment, avoiding blood borne diseases like septicaemia, hepatitis and AIDS.

But all this is a world away from the life of the schoolchild. Yes, perhaps as many as 30 to 50 per cent of children may explore drugs but the majority give up after one or two tentative tries. The figure for regular users in the UK of about seven to eight per cent is still mercifully low. There is no absolutely safe way to take any drug. It is a sad and a little-known fact that it was the consequences of Harm Reduction advice that killed teenager Leah Betts.

We now know that if young people get all the details and dispassionate, but full, descriptions of how drugs affect the body especially the brain cells the message begins to hit home. Also as they come to recognise the family, social, emotional, employment and economic consequences of being involved in the misuse of drugs they begin to appreciate the futility of that lifestyle.

In an American survey into cannabis use during the time of 'Just Say No', the single most important reason cited for abstaining from use of the drug was concern over possible psychological damage (73.8 per cent) closely followed by concern over possible physical damage (71.6 per cent). Parental disapproval (60.3 per cent) and the potential for one drug to lead to another (52.5 per cent) were also strong deterrents.

Recently some Year 10 pupils in my school confirmed these findings in an English essay.

The one thing almost all harm reductionists have in common is their dismissal of cannabis as a significantly harmful drug.

Lifeline, a Manchester-based charity, produces a cannabis booklet with diagrams showing how a joint is made. Its director of research Mark Gilman has been quoted as saying "Drugs are here to stay and there is nothing anyone can do about it.....Taking good drugs with good friends and dancing to good music in good clubs is good fun".

Lifeline may seem to have an extreme viewpoint but other more subtle materials are to be found in schools. One of the most widely used has the curiously ambiguous title "Taking Drugs Seriously". One of its authors, Julian Cohen, told the Third International Conference on Drug Related Harm in Melbourne: "The (prevention) approach ignores the fun, the pleasure, and benefits of drug use" and went on to say, "Drug use is a normal human activity and there is nothing abnormal about it".

Whatever happened to the age-old saying prevention is better than cure? When a toddler runs towards the fire we place ourselves between the child and the danger. Why don't we do the same with drugs? When English parents in a recent study confirmed that they wanted drug education to discourage drug use the researcher concluded that the parents needed re-educating.

Our National Strategy is stated not in terms of accommodating drugs but of "Tackling Drugs" with prevention at the core. At present this does not appear to be happening.

By.Mary Brett