While the official data sleeps, the reality in the therapeutic trench is undeniable: substance consumption, abuse or dependence has become the main reason for consultation among young people. The Youth Integration Centers (CIJ) warn that “crystal” is the drug with the greatest impact.
We live in an epidemic in fact that, in these last ten years, we prefer to intuit rather than measure. This lack of knowledge not only generates chaos in public policy, it also causes “reactive parenting.” Instead of a proactive approach, in homes, parents are torn between applying iron discipline (from panic) and a falsely empathetic and overprotective approach, normalizing risks (from guilt), both from ignorance.
It is a psychological trap: in a failed attempt to apply “positive regard” (Carl Rogers), they fall into permissiveness. They fail, in Freudian terms, in the essential task of parenting: establishment of the Reality Principle. This principle, which Freud defined as the ability to postpone gratification y negotiate with the worldis the one who must dominate the Pleasure Principlethat blind force that only seeks immediate satisfaction without measuring consequences.
The bleak outlook is the result of systemic failure. We have fallen into the trap of treating children and youth as “little adults”, ignoring what neuroscience has proven. As explained by Dr. Laurence Steinbergauthor of Age of Opportunitythe adolescent brain experiences a “maturation gap”: the limbic system (impulses and gratification) exerts pressure on behavior, while the prefrontal cortex (control, self-regulation, judgment and long-term planning) does not finish maturing until the age of 25.
To this neurological gap, families offer consumption shaped by good intentions and profound ignorance. The psychologist Albert Bandura He demonstrated with his theory of social learning that imitation is the most powerful form of education. And the model we offer is clear: teaching to drink alcohol as a social ritual, allowing drugs under the argument of “it is better that you not lie to me” and normalizing risks under their own misnamed “playful”, “recreational” and “experimental” consumption.
The second line of defense, training specialists, face widespread burnout. It’s not just “tiredness”; It is the syndrome described by the psychologist Christina Maslachcharacterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization (a cynical or dehumanized treatment of the patient) and professional ineffectiveness. When addressing a disorder with a reserved prognosis, without State resources and with absent or poorly committed families, swimming against the current causes a drain of trained professionals that no one is measuring.
But the most profound failure is that of public policy. We have replaced scientific evidence with ideological “fads.” As you warned Hannah Arendtideology is dangerous because it “precedes experience, rather than learning from it.” It is governed and educated by ideas, populist “remedies” and media pressure, while science is the only one absent from the debate. Just like parents who give in to tantrums, public policy has opted for Pleasure Principle (the immediate popularity, the easy applause of ‘fashion’) instead of the Reality Principle (the hard, unpopular but necessary work of applying science).
The clearest example is the obsession with cannabis. It is legislated from a false progressivism of “rights,” deliberately ignoring evidence of failure. In Colorado and Washington, after legalization, various reports have indicated increases in youth consumption, hospitalizations due to cannabis psychosis, and traffic accidents. We are eager to import mistakes that others have already paid dearly for. Worse still, instances that should prevent, promote. Quite a few youth institutes have been active promoters of cannabis, and today, some instances aimed at prevention claim “user rights” above public health.
While we play at being Amsterdam, we ignore the “Best Buys” of the World Health Organization: policies tested for their cost-effectiveness. The WHO is clear: 1) Increase taxes on alcohol, 2) Restrict availability (points of sale and hours), and 3) Ban advertising. We do the opposite: we are lax with sales to minors and, as a brutal irony, we see alcohol advertisements in sports stadiums, automobile competitions and even on children’s race track games.
They sell us the legalization of marijuana as an economic panacea. It is a fiscal mirage. The evidence from several US states is clear: for every dollar collected in cannabis taxes, several more are spent on social costs: treatment of addictionsmedical expenses, work absenteeism and criminal justice. We will add thousands of new problem consumers to an already collapsed health system.
Anyone who believes that this will eradicate drug trafficking is being logically naive. The main market for illegal drugs is minors. A formal market, by definition, cannot (or should not) supply that age group. Therefore, the black market will continue to exist; will have a monopoly on that group, whether supplied by traditional drug trafficking or by diversion from the new formal market. Furthermore, the incorporation of taxes will raise the legal price, leaving illicit markets intact, but generating new consumers who, as it is legal, will give themselves the opportunity to try it.
And while the public debate becomes obsessed with cannabis, another epidemic is growing in communities. “Crystal” (methamphetamine) has become the main drug. Added to this are new risks: vapers, which are linked to severe lung injuries; choco-mushroomsrelated to false suicides resulting from psychotic outbreaks and not depression; and fentanyl, which, while its production is denied in Mexico, is classified by the DEA as the main threat and cause of death in adults between 18 and 49 years of age in the United States.
We fail because we have forgotten the basics. Preventing drug use is a strategic investment. He National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) of the US has calculated it: For every dollar invested in evidence-based prevention, between $4 and $10 are saved in future treatment and criminal justice costs.
These “evidence-based prevention” programs are not a mystery. He icelandic model transformed that society by attacking the context and massively strengthening protective factors. Implement annual surveys to measure the phenomenon; incorporated public investment (ensuring that every young person had access to sport, art or music); and, crucially, encouraged parental commitments (community agreements to monitor schedules, reinforced with sanctions for parents). This last point is key. Sleep is necessary for the adolescent brain, but we normalize parties that do not end because there are “pre-cops” and “afters.” The Icelandic model reminds us that returning childhood to children and adolescence to minors—including their hours of sleep—is a prevention policy. Waiting is also preventing. The goal was simple: replace drug chemistry with belonging, challenge, and purpose. The results—the most drastic drop in youth consumption recorded in the world—were not magic, they were applied social science and the common sense to accept it.
True “Prevention 2.0” is not a fashionable slogan; It is the return to responsibility. This requires:
- Let parents assume their role: applying zero tolerance to the consumption of alcohol, tobacco and other drugs by minors; that encourage affection, since love is the greatest prevention tool; that they establish reasonable limits as a show of affection and genuine concern, and that the hours of sleep be restored to minors.
- That therapists have resources: continuous training, supervision, exchange of experiences and supporting technology.
- That the State stops governing by intuition and begins to govern by evidence: where schools are a space for early detection and timely channeling (and not for ideological and political indoctrination); local care systems are articulated in a reference network; and technology is incorporated to accelerate clinical processes.
Failing in this responsibility is raising with fear and governing with your eyes closed hoping not to be attacked by reality. It is, quite simply, abandoning youth to their fate.
About the author:
*Edgar Alonso Angulo Rosas He is a clinical psychologist and addictions expert with extensive experience in prevention and care of violence, addictions, mental health and human rights. He has held management positions in NGOs, public and private sectors.
Email: (email protected)
The opinions expressed are solely the responsibility of their authors and are completely independent of the position and editorial line of Forbes Mexico.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel and don’t miss our content
