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