Graphic anti-drug message stirs up pupils and critics

Pat Buckley (centre) listens to feedback from (left to right) Tyler Faitau, Renee Atwell, Zoe Feau, Dean Lupton (back), Amy Worthington (back), Shannen O'Grady, Sophie Henderson and Holly Anderson. Photo / Dean Purcell

The first boy faints before Pat Buckley has even started to talk about drugs.

It's Wednesday afternoon at Rutherford College in Te Atatu, West Auckland.

Buckley, a heavily tattooed ex-heroin addict, is giving a graphic presentation on the dangers of bad life choices to about 200 Year 12 (sixth-form) students in the school hall.

About 10 minutes in, one boy turns pale and faints towards the end of a gory video dramatisation about a texting girl driver who causes a multiple fatal car crash.

A second boy faints and is helped out of the hall as Buckley moves into his main theme - the dangers of methamphetamine or P.

"How many of you know someone who has used the drug?" he asks. About a dozen hands go up.

Buckley hammers the danger of even trying P, using a couple of shock American TV ads with the theme "not even once".

He talks of a P-using friend who died of a heart attack in his 30s and shows a video of a psychotic female addict who gouged huge holes in her arm looking for imaginary bugs under her skin.

Some of the girls grimace.

As he moves on to a series of before-and-after portrait photos of P users, the students laugh nervously, then gasp in horror. Two girls start crying and have to be taken outside for some fresh air.

Buckley is into his main message now. He tells his stunned teenage audience that he spent 16 years as a drug addict and saw his best friends die because of their drug use.

"I've committed the rest of my life to helping young people to make good choices rather than bad choices."

When he finishes after an hour up on stage, there is loud, spontaneous applause and rave reviews from some of the students.

Renee Atwell says Buckley needed to be graphic to get his point across. Like others, she's impressed by his personal credibility as a former addict.

None of the eight students say they know anyone who has tried P but they think they're ready to hear the message.

"At this age you start going out and going to parties and stuff and you come across things like that," says Sophie Henderson. "It's good to know what can happen to you if you take it."

"I'll never take it because I never want to look ugly like them," adds Polly Anderson.

But will they remember when the time comes? Zoe Feau is not sure.

"It's real strong at the moment because we've just seen it but next week if we go to a party we're probably going to forget it."

Her response sums up one of the dilemmas surrounding this "shock and awe" approach to drug education, which effectively tries to scare teenagers off trying P and other illegal substances.

The technique has many influential supporters, including broadcaster Paul Holmes whose daughter Millie has struggled with P addiction for years.

Holmes' written endorsement says Buckley's programme is so good it should be compulsory for every student. He suggested it to the Stellar Trust, an anti-P organisation which now employs Buckley to visit schools.

Chief executive and former Labour Party president Mike Williams says Buckley has visited about 30 schools since March and a further 20 are interested in hearing from him.

The trust is optimistic about expanding the programme as it has just confirmed another $70,000 a year in sponsorship from the local branch of the multinational pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline. (News of the deal raised eyebrows in February because the company's Chinese factory makes the cold medicine Contac NT, the source of most of the pseudoephedrine smuggled into New Zealand to make P.)

But despite the enthusiastic reception from many schools, the official response to all anti-drug programmes in schools ranges from wary to dismissive.

When the Herald ran a week-long series on the dangers of P last year, drug and alcohol expert Professor Sally Casswell of Massey University said that if she was on a school board she would not support bringing educators to talk to classes. "It's just a complete waste of money. Why would you do it?"

The Government was also sceptical. Last October it acted on many of the issues identified by the Herald campaign - banning pseudoephedrine from cold and flu medications, increasing treatment for addicts and pushing more police and customs officers into the fight against the drug - but was conspicuously silent on the Stellar Trust's appeal for more school and community-based drug education programmes.

Drug researcher Chris Wilkins says there are several good reasons to be cautious about such programmes.

For instance, a study found the shock TV ads which Pat Buckley used in his talk had no effect in their home state of Montana. In some cases they even had a negative effect. Wilkins also questions introducing the topic of P to a general audience of 16 and 17-year-olds.

"That age group probably aren't going to come across hard drugs like that for maybe five years. The main drugs they're using at that age are alcohol and possibly cannabis."

Wilkins says most students listening to the talk will probably not go on to use illegal drugs anyway, except for a hard core group of risk-takers who could be attracted by hearing about it.

The other risk, he says, is credibility. Most young people trying drugs are low-level or occasional users, who enjoy the highs and have not yet experienced the lows.

If drug educators emphasise the worst scenario - which only becomes clear later - it clashes with their friends' experience and young people will tend to believe their own peer group first.

He also feels targeted intervention works better than a blanket approach.

"Generally the teachers will know the type of people who are susceptible to hard drugs and it's not all the class. It's often the kids who've got problems."

Williams knows the criticisms but says he's convinced the programme works. He points to the growing number of schools signing up as the best evidence that it meets a need.

Buckley makes no apology for his no-holds-barred approach, even if it does leave some students shell-shocked and some experts unconvinced.

"I want to talk about real life. Because the truth is offensive."

HARSH LESSONS

Should drug educators go into school to warn students about P and other drugs?

Supporters say
* It increases awareness of the dangers.
* Students get reliable information, which they may not get from friends and relatives.
* It's worth it just to stop one person becoming an addict.

Opponents say
* The message can't compete with what their friends say.
* Risk-takers may even be attracted to try drugs.
* Schools should target the anti-drugs message to these at-risk students instead.