Ecstasy dilemma
Ecstasy dilemma
From Suara Karya
We should regard the widespread use of drugs such as Ecstasy as a national danger rather than an international threat. Youngsters are the biggest consumers of drugs. We should also appreciate the efforts of the law enforcers who repeatedly foiled the distribution of Ecstasy among teenagers in quite effective ways.
However, law enforcement actions come in sporadic bursts, effective for only brief periods. With "sporadic bursts", we mean to say that the law decides to act only when drug use has claimed a life. For example, there is the case of Aldi, who succumbed to an overdose of Ecstasy in the home of a friend, Ria Irawan.
Shortness of time does not allow a probe into the cause of the problem.
To be quite honest, the family should first and foremost be held responsible in this case. The family is an essential source in extending moral education to a child. From the family, its parents in particular, a child learns how to give love, attention and understanding. They will become the child's yardstick of good and polite behavior.
However, the era of emancipation and globalization has, little by little, decreased family influence. Parents have become too busy, bringing a total change in the parental role.
If parents before assumed a respectable image, today it is an entirely different matter. Parents no longer give attention and love; they bombard their children with material objects. Therefore, children search for attention and love outside their homes. They seek to release their frustrations.
If matters have reached such a stage, a family is doomed. In the end, a change of outlook about the parental role and a revival of the true function and role of parents might make children want to stay at home. This would keep them away from negative influences and the use of drugs.
Creating an alcohol and drug-free nation is the main function of a family, while school education and public influence would only be complementary to a child's development.
SUBAGIYO
Jember, East Java