Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Survey of teenage drinking patterns in school district #36 (Surrey), British Columbia Cleathero, Bernard Stuart 1982

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A8 C54.pdf [ 4.12MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054463.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054463-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054463-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054463-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054463-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054463-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054463-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054463-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054463.ris

Full Text

SURVEY  OF  TEENAGE  DISTRICT  #36  DRINKING PATTERNS  (SURREY),  BRITISH  IN  SCHOOL  COLUMBIA  by BERNARD STUART CLEATHERO B.A., Y o r k U n i v e r s i t y , 1977 B.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y  o f T o r o n t o , 1978  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT 'OF THE  REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  in  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f S p e c i a l  We a c c e p t t h i s  thesis  Education)  as c o n f o r m i n g  t o t h e above r e q u i r e d  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA April  ©Bernard S t u a r t  198*2  C l e a t h e r o , 1982  In p r e s e n t i n g  this  thesis i n partial  f u l f i l m e n t of the  r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that it  freely  the L i b r a r y s h a l l  a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .  agree that p e r m i s s i o n f o r extensive for  University  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may  for  financial  shall  of  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5 Date  DE-6  (2/79)  Columbia  my  It is thesis  n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my  permission.  Department  thesis  be g r a n t e d by t h e h e a d o f  copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of this  gain  further  copying of t h i s  d e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s o r h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . understood that  I  make  written  Abstract  Many p a r e n t s  and t e a c h e r s a r e e x p r e s s i n g c o n c e r n  the d r i n k i n g h a b i t s o f our teenage p o p u l a t i o n . time  there i s l i t t l e  information available  d r i n k i n g , frequency  of d r i n k i n g  The p u r p o s e o f t h i s  s t u d y was  At the p r e s e n t  on t h e amount o f  and w i t h whom t e e n a g e r s  p a t t e r n s of Surrey  students.  The s t u d y information.  utilized  the s i n g l e  s u r v e y method t o o b t a i n  A random s a m p l e o f s t u d e n t s was  drawn f r o m  J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y , S e c o n d a r y and S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y w i t h i n school d i s t r i c t  #36  (Surrey), B r i t i s h  o f the students surveyed  i n t h e i r l i v e s , w i t h beer  consumed a l c o h o l i c 27.8% 32.4%  their source  1013 s t u d e n t s  being  had used a l c o h o l a t some t h e most  regularly  beverage.  o f s t u d e n t s drank t o the p o i n t of being  d r a n k once o r t w i c e a month and a f u r t h e r  weekend.  schools  the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s .  90.9% time  15  Columbia.  2485 l e t t e r s were s e n t o u t and c o n s e q u e n t l y completed  drink.  t o o b t a i n as much i n f o r m a t i o n as  was p r a c t i c a l l y p o s s i b l e a b o u t t h e d r i n k i n g high school  about  Parents played a role  first  drink.  of supply.  drunk,  30.3% e v e r y  i n introducing students to  They a l s o d r a n k w i t h them and a c t e d as a 70.4% o f s t u d e n t s  p r a c t i c e s had no e f f e c t on t h e i r  felt  lives.  their  drinking  Crosstabulations ent  demonstrated there  were c e r t a i n  differ-  d r i n k i n g p r a c t i c e s among s t u d e n t s when a g e , s e x , t y p e o f  school  and d e m o g r a p h i c  Finally, regarding population  a r e a were t a k e n i n t o  conclusions  society's  consideration.  were drawn and s u g g e s t i o n s were mad  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s towards o u r teenage  and t h e i r a l c o h o l c o n s u m p t i o n  habits.  iv  Acknowledgements  I thesis the  wish  to  committee,  statistical  willingness is  express  also  project  offer  whose to  also  to  of  of  survey  the  and  thesis  like  Dr.  the  Ratzlaff Barbara  committee  members  Holmes  for  my with  her  Appreciation  chairman,  greatly  of  for his help  a l l times.  assisted  the  to  help  thank  Surrey the  would  principals  I would and  Mr.  School  Surrey  not  have  and  cooperation  Ultimately, consistent  my  approach  project  assistance and  to  Harold  assistance at  enthusiasm  Superintendant  This  Dr.  to  Dr.  Ron  in bringing  the  fruition.  would  permission  namely  s i n c e r e thanks  methodology  extended  Neufeld,  I  to  my  of  like  Terry  McBurney,  Board,  school been  teachers  encouragement  thank  granted  me  principals.  possible without  the  in administering  the  a l l students to  who  Assistant  my  who wife,  i n a l l stages  participated. Jenny, of  for  her  this  project.  B.  Stuart  Cleathero  V  Table of Contents Page Abstract  i i  Acknowledgements  iv  L i s t of Tables  v i i  L i s t of Figures  viii  1. THE PROBLEM  1  Introduction  .  P u r p o s e o f S t u d y . ..  3  2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Comparison o f the three i n B.C  1  6 s t u d i e s conducted 8  P o s s i b l e comparisons w i t h other s t u d i e s c o n d u c t e d o u t s i d e B.C. m a t e r i a l s  10  Problems r e l a t e d t o the r e l i a b i l i t y o f questionnaires  11  Conclusions  and i n f e r e n c e s b a s e d on t h e  B.C. S t u d i e s Factors  14  r e l a t e d t o a l c o h o l use  3. METHODOLOGY  16 18  Sample S e l e c t i o n s i)  Selection of Schools  ii)  S e l e c t i o n of Students  18 18 . . .  19  Consent Procedure  20  D e s c r i p t i o n o f the Survey Instrument  20  Data C o l l e c t i o n  22  Data P r e p a r a t i o n  23  Data A n a l y s i s  23  vi Table  of Contents Page  4. RESULTS  24  Frequencies  24  Crosstabulations  29  Summary o f F i n d i n g s  68  5. DISCUSSION  73  Conclusions  79  W e a k n e s s e s t o be c o n s i d e r e d  82  Possibilities  84  f o r future research  References  86  A p p e n d i x 1: S u r v e y o f Teenage D r i n k i n g P a t t e r n s Appendix  2: L e t t e r t o S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y  Appendix  3: I n s t r u c t i o n s t o P r i n c i p a l s  Appendix  4:  Letter of  Consent  Principals  vii  List  of  Tables  Table  Page  1.  Frequency  2.  Age  3.  Amount  of  4.  Effect  of  5.  Frequency  6.  Drinking  7.  When a l c o h o l  8.  Gender  of  last  of  drinking  by  drink  type  of  school  alcohol  consumed  by  type  alcohol  by  first  of  age  type  drinking  every  by  by  by  weekend  last  used  for  type  of  of  school  30 35  of  school  school  39  age  41  by  sex  by  age  subjects  37  and  age  43 45  consuming  alcohol  week  47  9.  Gender  by  age  for  subjects  consuming  beer  10.  Gender  by  age  for  subjects  consuming  hard  11.  Age  by  age  12.  Age  of  first  13.  Age  by  gender  for  drunk  14.  Age  by  gender  for  curiosity  59  15.  Age  by  gender  for  amount  61  16.  Amount  consumed  17.  Age  gender  by  their 18.  Age  by  own  of  first drink  by  for  liquor  drink by  or  "high"  Surrey  55  feeling  57  consumed  age those  51 53  North/South  age  effect  49  63 who  drink  with  friends 65  of  alcohol  67  vii i  L i s t of Figures  Table  Page  1.  F r e q u e n c y o f d r i n k i n g by S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y  2.  F r e q u e n c y o f d r i n k i n g by S e c o n d a r y  3.  F r e q u e n c y o f d r i n k i n g by J u n i o r  students  students  Secondary  students  31 32 33  1  Chapter The  1  Problem  Introduction There teenagers  is  evidence  are  frequently  consuming  and  Between  at  of  Alcohol  to  over  drinking 1,403,600  total  of  At  from  &  the  of  age.  2.14  for  population  B.C.  same  which  made  up  consumed  in  Canada.  In  there  were  84,158  541  were  and  50%  implies  fatal. of  the  that  It fatal  is  considered  accidents  29,455 n o n - f a t a l  and  of  the  period  by  95%  capita  the  total 1955-76  from  Statistics,  9.3%  of  720,075  Canada  Se  consumption  had  the  10.9% of  that  35%  in  of  country's of  the  accidents  were  Ministry  gallons.  12.2%  car  The  Columbia  estimated  the  per  period  consumed  alcohol 1976  the  generations.  British  75%  increased  3.75  which  be  Commission  same  of  that  more  other  (1976)  to  to  this  have  During  time  society  2,466,608.  gallons  Columbia,  population  drinking  years  in  beverages,  population  province  Drug  by  British  the  (Alcohol  rose  75%  of  of  1955-76).  than  Commission  population  B.C.  age  the  Drug  concern  alcoholic  1,342,000 t o  and  15  growing  more  1976  from  population  population the  85%  a  earlier  and  by  drinking  an  1955  increased Health  of  its  total  amount  B.C.,  of  the  non-fatal  alcohol-related  271  fatal  which  which  accidents  were  2  connected  with  the  convictions,  not  alcohol.  1976  In  use  the  d r i n k e r s were  It  been  B.C. for  1979  Canada  was  cerned  today's  steadily he  sees  increases  the  most  high  of a  week.  secondary  are  were  &  of  Drug  a l l minor  use  of  considered  11%  amounts  alcohol.  89,781  since  of  of  alcoholics  1955.  The  Commission  to  doubt  used  78.1%.  Smart  of  in  estimate Statistics,  prior  to  raised  in a  (1976)  among 1978  found  a  to  Hollander  (1974)  their  using  used  alcohol  to  is and  of  be  most  the  (1978) alcohol 73% at  be  Studies  sample  alcohol,  alcohol  study.  which  further  During  estimated  used  suggests  alcohol  people.  10%  alcohol  students  had  of  con-  problems.  young  on  He  society  consumption  c r e a t e more  students  students  t o be  drinkers.  i t s students.  and  Fejer  reason  supposition that  found  among  school  and  school  s i x months  and  Macurdy  high  the  drug  also  percentage  young  Canada  1975,  drug  to  capita  will  Welfare,  i s good  being  i t s per  students  Vancouver  the  teenagers  i n 1970,  1970-78 t h e to  related  f r e q u e n t l y used  frequently  60.6%  problems  and  school  Health  384%  (Alcohol  i n consumption  conducted  there  15%  i n v o l v e d the  hazardous  believes there  reason  Health  1973,  1955-76).  increasing no  that  increase of  (1976)  about  of  consuming  115,035.  & B.C.  Smart  that  an  In  assaults,  Ministry  estimated  i n 1976,  alcohol.  including  B.C.'s has  of  the  Vancouver  period  rose  from  noted  that  more  than  of  14.3% once  Toronto  least  once  in  3  The for  a  available  variety  teenagers a  direct  literature  of reasons.  drank  when  result  of peer  that  students  alienated  from  their  drinkers they  had  consumed were behaviours.  Purpose  of the  i n Surrey  s c h o o l s were  available  literature  the  rate  Senior The  drunk likely  controlling t o be  found  t h e amount  that  and/or  and became more  drink  noted  & Thorn  (1976) a l s o  Secondary  suggested,  as  (1973) were  often  t o be that of  alcohol  involved i n a variety  questions age  and  of alcohol  as  and  of  whether  Senior  early any  consumption  3) t o i n v e s t i g a t e  as t h e demographic within the  differences  among J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y  are addressed  o f t e n do t e e n a g e r s  3) How  much  4) Why  do  begin  i n this  study:  to drink?  drink?  do t h e y  consume  when  they  drink?  drink?  are the consequences  when  students  drink?  in  and  students.  2) How  students  1) t o d e t e r m i n e  alcohol  do t e e n a g e r s  alcohol  were  2) t o e x p l o r e  consumption  School  1) A t w h a t  study  consuming  District,  of alcohol  5) W h a t  (1973)  Wechsler  J u n i o r Secondary  i n the patterns  following  and Storm  and were  likely  of this  Secondary  School  teenagers  Study  not students  Surrey  drank  families  more  objectives  differences  who  difficulty  deviant  or  pressure.  Donovan and J e s s e r  who  The  Cutler  that  on h o l i d a y , o u t o f c u r i o s i t y ,  concluded  anti-social.  suggests  4  In  a single  identified  survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e  i n order  non-involvement determining  to  determine  with the  use o f  rate  age o f  for  the  the  staff  trists. their  Mayer  validity  & Filstead  prepared to  In  administer  due t o  time  these  factors  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s was  principals  all  and/or  questionnaire.  from each s c h o o l ,  this  for  not  research  to  provide  teachers  selected  u s i n g a random numbers letters before  of  consent  order  to  approximately  twice  as many s t u d e n t s  conduct the  the  which  being allowed  In  On a day and t i m e to  for  r e s p o n d e n t s were r a n d o m l y  s e l e c t e d as deemed n e c e s s a r y f o r  trations  established  overcome any i n c l i n a t i o n  S e l e c t e d s t u d e n t s were g i v e n  the  was  including  psychia-  i n S u r r e y were  trial  h a d t o be s i g n e d by p a r e n t / g u a r d i a n complete  verified  experts  and t e n  reliability  a similar  information  by s c h o o l p r i n c i p a l s table.  S c a l e by Mayer &  constraints.  an a t t e m p t t o  inaccurate  time  identifying  s t u d y by a p a n e l o f  school  last  1). the  Although t e s t - r e t e s t  the  in  first  f r o m an a l c o h o l t r e a t m e n t u n i t  study groups,  project  of  drinking,  or  their  A d o l e s c e n t A l c o h o l Involvement  The c o n t e n t  involvement  at  was t h e  (see A p p e n d i x  must be  Factors involved  students  The i n s t r u m e n t  (1980)  choice in  of  drink.  Filstead  of  factors  a respondent's alcohol.  such usage i n c l u d e  a l c o h o l was c o n s u m e d . a n d t h e  certain  obtain  to  a 10% sample were  study.  c h o s e n by i n d i v i d u a l survey only those  school  adminis-  s t u d e n t s who h a d  5  returned to  t h e l e t t e r s o f p e r m i s s i o n were g i v e n q u e s t i o n n a i r e s  complete.  R e a s o n s f o r t h e s t u d y were e x p l a i n e d and b e f o r e  proceeding with to  t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e a l l r e s p o n d e n t s were  read the i n t r o d u c t o r y statement which guaranteed  anonymity.  asked  total  6 Chapter Review Vancouver Hollander  in  frequently  high school  1970,  1974  population.  rose  had i n c r e a s e d t o Similarly  students  from 60.6%  During  used the  79.4%  the  drug,  78.1%  of  1974  and i n  of  the  15-16  compared t o over  year  85.7%  i n 1978.  16 age g r o u p were  student of  students the  all 14  figure  in  1974  Comparative  84.3%  in  1974  and  1978. of  alcohol  more  than  once a week compared w i t h  An i n c r e a s e  the  c a n be n o t e d  point  of  remained  Cutler  s t u d e n t s were e s t i m a t e d  for  both s e x e s .  intoxication  relatively  sample h a v i n g been d r u n k and S t o r m  three  B.C. cities  Their  investigation  enrolled  based  o l d age g r o u p  9.4%  have  most  period  students  1978  1970  the  the  the  69.8%  In  to  be the  using a l c o h o l ,  to  In  to  74.6%  .had used a l c o h o l  in  of  found a l c o h o l  students.  using a l c o h o l .  o l d and u n d e r  92.4%  s u r v e y s c o n d u c t e d by Macurdy and  The same s t u d y a l s o noted more  a g e - g r o u p s were  for  Literature  and 1978  percentage  on a 10% s a m p l e ,  figures  the  used drug among i t s  1970-78 the  years  of  2  i n grades  for  stable at  was,  The  period  once i n  in  however,  restricted  used  1978. alcohol  1974-78 a p p e a r s  their  Rivertown  have  use o f  conducted a s i m i l a r  Laketown,  11 and 12.  14.3%  with approximately  least  (1973)  namely  the  to  and to  They d e d u c e d t h a t  50% o f  to  the  lifetime. study  in  Twintown. students 8.0%  of  then  7 their  sample  never  occasionally noted  that  alcohol  drank,  and 22.9%  at  least  more  than  that  75% o f  males at  Laketown, sizes,  the  some  -  (i.e.  Laketown  (29%  to  In North  -  was they  ages  consumed.  it  of  in  are  sample  cities  1971  being  non-drinkers than  to  namely  had used  the  While  this  of  study 12-18  drinking  years.  age  Their  results of  a l s o able  12 and 17 y e a r s  or  of  regular in may be  suggest there  two  other  schools in  are  declared  drank  Seymour. 8-11  intention  and how much  suggest  deduce  in  in grades  15 and 61.6% to  Rivertown  highest  included students  tabulated  by the  & 12th  patterns.  how many young p e o p l e Their  among 11th  observation  may a l s o b e g i n t o in  differing 26,188  percentage the  of  9,400,  i n Twintown  i n C a p i l a n o and the  They were  between a week.  the  and R i v e r t o w n  24%).  the  alcohol  12-14.  sample times  range  were a b l e  females  Similarly  one  of  consumed  consumption,  K i t c h e n and R o b i n s o n s e l e c t e d  ascertain  experienced  interviewed  in  drank  s h o u l d a l s o be  p a t t e r n of  Laketown  17% -  Vancouver,  to  the  sample  The r e s e a r c h e r s  populations  differences  1977,  an age  those  It  once a week o r more) was  The p o p u l a t i o n with  in  sample e r r o r ,  demographic  their  time.  Twintown  36%).  drinkers  due  of  The p r o p o r t i o n  39% -  of  regularly.  and 55% o f  g r a d e r s was l o w e r (22%  in  respective  and 3 3 , 1 0 1 .  43.1%  once a week.  a sex d i f f e r e n c e  beverage  drank  15.3%  note  the  that  that  consumed a l c o h o l  that  91% had  between 27% o f once o r  the their more  8 Comparison of It  is  the  three  difficult  comparing  the  ducted  different  at  studies  to  three  make  All  and d i f f e r e n t  these  the  suggestions In  all  drinking to  the  for  habits  North  their  before  and V a n c o u v e r s t u d i e s and 70.6% before  of  the  their  age  of  that our d r i n k i n g Because North  of  the  subject In  it to  is  Cities  comparable of  their  the  61.6%  All  of  for  possible  still  sample  spite  and  of  provides  is  to  investigate  areas.  their  in  study group  approximately  may  onset  39.6%  indicate  getting  in percentages,  the  Cities  had consumed a l c o h o l  figures fact  had  The T h r e e  V a n c o u v e r and 39.6%  that  According  of  younger. (61.6% for  drinking  for  the  Three  may be  variation. 76.8%  using a l c o h o l ,  population.  figures.  In  12 y e a r s .  these  variation  70.6%  con-  methodology  study of  age o f  Vancouver s c h o o l s  17 y e a r s were Three  designated  population  regional  the  aim was  suggested that  14.  s t u d i e s were  useful  groups r e s p e c t i v e l y  large  Vancouver,  Cities),  declared  Vancouver study  consumed a l c o h o l  is  when  study.  their  in  the  age g r o u p s .  information  further  cases  of  statements  using d i f f e r e n t  and q u e s t i o n n a i r e s differences,  in B.C.  any c o n c r e t e  studies. times  conducted  North  of  those  compared w i t h  Vancouver d i d  Nonetheless,  students  they  had consumed a l c o h o l  65% o f  not  do i n d i c a t e  prior  to  the  over the  supply that study.  94.1%  9 The  1978  Vancouver survey  o f m a l e s had  of  f e m a l e s and  u s e d a l c o h o l a t some t i m e d u r i n g  compared w i t h Cities  showed 85.1%  55%  of  f e m a l e s and  their  88.0%  lives  75% o f m a l e s i n t h e  Three  study.  B o t h t h e V a n c o u v e r and  Three C i t i e s  studies indicate  there  i s a tendancy f o r students  t o d r i n k t o the p o i n t  being  drunk.  o f the  I n V a n c o u v e r 20.7%  1978  of  population  had  been d r u n k s e v e n o r more t i m e s  i n the p r e c e d i n g  while  p o p u l a t i o n were d r u n k a t  7.4%  of  the Three C i t i e s  s i x months least  once a week. Ml  the  s t u d i e s examined, appear to i n d i c a t e t h a t  consumption of a l c o h o l start  t o d r i n k a t an e a r l y As  The  only s i m i l a r M a c u r d y and g r a d e 11 and handed o u t , survey  m e t h o d o l o g i e s used f o r c o l l e c t i n g i n t h a t each study  Hollander  not  returned  The  54%  i n f r o n t o f any  49%  students.  the  considerably. population  researchers  give  were  the  Cutler  f r o m L a k e t o w n , 35% The  of  i n g r a d e s 11 and  are  format.  questionnaires  teachers.  of the s t u d e n t  c o m p r i s e d o f 75%  Rivertown  the d a t a  i n the p r e s e n c e of  (1973) a l s o e x a m i n e d s t u d e n t s  s a m p l e s i z e was  treated with  (1978) s u r v e y e d a random 10%  c o m p l e t e d and  students  used a q u e s t i o n n a i r e  12 V a n c o u v e r s t u d e n t s .  team and  r a n d o m l y and and  that  age.  However, t h e i r s a m p l e s i z e s d i f f e r e d all  and  p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d a l l c o m p a r i s o n s must be  caution.  Storm  i n c r e a s e s w i t h age  the  and 12.  The  over-  selected f r o m Twintowm no  reason  10 for  the sample s i z e s o t h e r than  i n c r e a s i n g t h e Laketown sample  b e c a u s e i t was much t h e s m a l l e r o f t h e t h r e e student  cities.  The  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were w r i t t e n a n o n y m o u s l y b u t t h e f o r m s  were c o m p l e t e d i n f r o n t o f t e a c h e r s The  familiar  t o the s t u d e n t s .  N o r t h V a n c o u v e r s t u d y s h o u l d p e r h a p s be t r e a t e d w i t h  t h e most c a u t i o n .  The a u t h o r s  g i v e no i n d i c a t i o n as t o how o r  why t h e p a r t i c u l a r s c h o o l s were s e l e c t e d . surveyed  G r a d e s 8-11 were  and 354 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were a d m i n i s t e r e d .  Grade 12  s t u d e n t s w e r e o m i t t e d due t o end o f t e r m e x a m i n a t i o n s . not  c l e a r whether students  of t h e i r teachers All late  filled  out q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n f r o n t  or otherwise.  s t u d i e s used s i m i l a r s t a t i s t i c a l  methods t o accumu-  t h e i r d a t a , namely f r e q u e n c i e s o r p e r c e n t a g e s  e i t h e r age o r s e x .  study  related to  None o f t h e a n a l y s e s was s u b j e c t e d t o any  check f o r r e g i o n a l v a r i a t i o n a l t h o u g h , Cities  It is  by C u t l e r and S t o r m  i n the case  (1973),  o f the Three  t h i s may have been  possible. In  s h o r t , i t may be a r g u e d t h a t a l l t h r e e s t u d i e s  attempted  to find  t h e i n f o r m a t i o n s o u g h t i n t h a t t h e y gave some  measure o f t h e age and f r e q u e n c y  o f a l c o h o l use i n t h e i r  p a r t i c u l a r school population. Possible  comparisons w i t h other s t u d i e s conducted  Smart and F e j e r school  students  (1974) e s t i m a t e d  o u t s i d e B.C.  73% o f Toronto  had used a l c o h o l a t l e a s t  secondary  once i n t h e s i x  11 months p r i o r looked  t o t h e i r study.  a t two s c h o o l s  students  S m a r t , G r a y and B e n n e t t  i n a small Ontario  included  f r o m t h e town as w e l l as f r o m r u r a l and s e m i - r u r a l  s e t t i n g s and d e t e r m i n e d  t h a t 86% o f t h e i r  a l c o h o l a t some t i m e o r a n o t h e r . H a l i f a x and 4 3 % i n M o n t r e a l as  town w h i c h  (1976)  This  s a m p l e had u s e d  compares w i t h  57% i n  ( C u t l e r and S t o r m , 1 9 7 3 ) .  t h e c o m p a r i s o n s may be t h e r e may w e l l be some  Tenuous  cross-country  similarities. Problems r e l a t e d t o the r e l i a b i l i t y  of questionnaires.  T h e r e a r e a v a r i e t y o f f a c t o r s t o be c o n s i d e r e d making use o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e information.  questionnaire  by t h o s e  be as c l e a r , c o n c i s e  used  reliability i n Ontario.  questions i)  the information. the information  Also a  required,  and as s h o r t as p o s s i b l e  (1977) c o n d u c t e d  such a study  to estimate  o f a d r u g u s e q u e s t i o n n a i r e w h i c h was t o be The q u e s t i o n n a i r e  being  evaluated  included  related to:  Demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s education,  ii)  o f the  t o reduce p a r t i c i p a n t e r r o r .  S m a r t and B l a i r the  supplying  must s e e k t o p r o v i d e  thus i t should order  format f o r c o l l e c t i n g  Of p a r t i c u l a r c o n c e r n i s t h e v a l i d i t y  answers p r o v i d e d  in  when  urban/rural  s u c h as a g e , s e x ,  residence  Use o f t h e f o l l o w i n g d r u g s d u r i n g during  the past  and p a r e n t s ' a student's  12 months and d u r i n g  the past  education, lifetime, 30 d a y s  12 and when u s e d : t o b a c c o ,  alcohol,  cannabis,  amphetamines,  other stimulants, cocaine, e t c . iii)  Whether t h e s t u d e n t would answer t h e q u e s t i o n s a c c u r a t e l y if  iv)  they had used drugs  The E y s e n c k L i e S c a l e The  (e.g. cannabis,  opium,  heroin)  (9 i t e m s ) .  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w e r e a d m i n i s t e r e d i n c l a s s e s o f 50-60  on t w o s e p a r a t e  o c c a s i o n s , e i g h t weeks a p a r t .  Questionnaires  were g i v e n a name a n d number, t h e same on e a c h o c c a s i o n . r e c e i p t of the questionnaires students a l l o w i n g o n l y t h e numbers t o be m a t c h e d Smart and B l a i r b a s i s t h e percentage both  tests.  by  items  of students  later.  Secondly,  they 1  responding  identically  looked a t the r e l i a b i l i t y  responses  and t o l i e s c a l e i t e m s .  across  across  t o t h e a l c o h o l and drug The s c a l e s w e r e v a l i d a t e d  c a l c u l a t i n g t h e drug use s c o r e and l i e s c o r e and s u b j e c t i n g  the r e s u l t s t o a Pearson's c o r r e l a t i o n at  t o r e o f f t h e names  (1977) c a l c u l a t e d on a n i t e m b y i t e m  the t e s t i n g s o f students use  On  coefficient  computation  r<0.001. l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e . None o f t h e s t u d i e s e x a m i n e d b y t h e w r i t e r a p p e a r t o  have been s u b j e c t e d t o t h i s  o r any s i m i l a r t e s t .  t h e r e f o r e a r g u e t h a t any f i n d i n g s made b y t h e s e suspect. apparent such  One may studies are  However, one must a l s o t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e r e l u c t a n c e o f s c h o o l boards i n g e n e r a l t o conduct  studies.  A telephone  survey  of a l l school boards i n the  13 Lower M a i n l a n d  found a g r e a t d e a l of r e s i s t a n c e to a l c o h o l  consumption surveys.  One  i s t h e r e f o r e f o r c e d to take  c o n s i d e r a t i o n the  l e v e l of c o o p e r a t i o n  to r e c e i v e during  any  short, while study  i n v e s t i g a t i o n from a s c h o o l  b o a r d s may  t h e y may  a researcher  respond p o s i t i v e l y  into  may  expect  board.  In  to a w e l l  designed  respond n e g a t i v e l y to m u l t i p l e  administrations. E x a m i n a t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and  Storm  designed of  (1973) and to o b t a i n  M a c u r d y and  administered  Hollander  information regarding  the d r i n k i n g p o p u l a t i o n a l t h o u g h  not  Cutler  ( 1 9 7 8 ) were  t h e age the  and  total  consumed.  The  questionnaire  u s e d by K i t c h e n  (1977) was  not  a v a i l a b l e and  can  not  by  and  frequency  amounts Robinson  t h e r e f o r e be  commented  upon. I n summary, a l l t h e s t u d i e s were c o n c e r n e d collecting  as much i n f o r m a t i o n as p o s s i b l e a b o u t  d r i n k i n g p r a c t i c e s although t h e s t u d i e s were a b l e consumed by  the  some q u e s t i o n  Storm  regarding  self-answering  be  noted  t h a t none o f alcohol  i t may  (1973).  While there w i l l  the v a l i d i t y  results.  caution.  student  although  questionnaires  f o r d i s r e g a r d i n g the interpreted with  i t should  t o a s c e r t a i n t h e amount o f  students  c a s e o f C u t l e r and  by  with  of  be p o s s i b l e i n  the  They s h o u l d  always  responses  t h e w r i t e r can be  see  read  the  no and  be  provided reason  14 Conclusions  and I n f e r e n c e s b a s e d on t h e B.C. S t u d i e s .  Mayer and F i l s t e a d  (1980) s u g g e s t t h a t any s e l f - r e p o r t i n g  method o f c o l l e c t i n g  information should  be s h o r t , t o t h e p o i n t  and n o t f o r m i d a b l e .  The V a n c o u v e r s u r v e y , w h i c h l o o k e d  v a r i e t y o f d r u g u s e s a l l o w e d one h o u r f o r s t u d e n t s the  information.  at a  to f i l l i n  The a l c o h o l s e c t i o n f o r 1978 i s made up o f  32 q u e s t i o n s on n i n e p a g e s .  I t should  be n o t e d t h e f o r m a t i s  c l e a r and u n c l u t t e r e d . The  study  c o n d u c t e d by C u t l e r and S t o r m  q u e s t i o n s on f i v e p a g e s . impression plete  (1973) h a s 91  The t y p i n g i s s m a l l and t h e g e n e r a l  i s t h a t a g r e a t d e a l o f work i s r e q u i r e d t o com-  the q u e s t i o n n a i r e .  The A d o l e s c e n t  S c a l e d e v i s e d by Mayer and F i l s t e a d q u e s t i o n s on two p a g e s  A l c o h o l Involvement  i s c o m p r i s e d o f 14  and i t w o u l d a p p e a r t o be c a p a b l e o f  g e n e r a t i n g much t h e same i n f o r m a t i o n s o u g h t i n t h e o t h e r stud i e s . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e s d e v i s e d by C u t l e r and S t o r m Macurdy  and H o l l a n d e r  frequency,  have  i s provided  together.  as t o why t h o s e  that there  students.  of drinking. should  No be  The a n s w e r s d e r i v e d f r o m t h e s t u d i e s  age l e v e l and more f r e q u e n t l y .  impression  e n q u i r i n g about  questions  been u s e d t o s u g g e s t t h a t a d o l e s c e n t s  lower  age  questions  d r u n k e n n e s s and t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s  explanation presented  (1978) u t i l i z e  (1973) and  are d r i n k i n g at a  The s t u d i e s l e a v e t h e  i s an a l c o h o l p r o b l e m among o u r s c h o o l  The and  Adolescent Alcohol  F i l s t e a d , 1980)  is specifically  m i s u s e o f a l c o h o l by m i s u s e as  "the  use  interferes with three  of a l c o h o l  any  one  r e l a t i o n s and  against  designed The  authors define  i n v e s t i g a t o r s as are  The  rated  questionnaire  Treatment U n i t  was  one  The  of  on  scale.  the  to f i v e .  How  the  author.  Finally  the  questionnaire  subjects  (an e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p o f  A A I S two  Ten  b e t w e e n the mental group  was  0.89  identi-  problems." Alcoholism  Questions  receiving  five point  c l e a r to  administered  rating they  The  by  to  178  giving  of the  correlation  between the  on  this  a c o n t r o l group  established  and  a  i n t e r v e n t i o n based  52 and  first testing.  c o n t r o l g r o u p was 0.91.  an  s c a l e works i s not  r e l i a b i l i t y was  weeks a f t e r the  by  p s y c h i a t r i s t s were  the  a d o l e s c e n t would r e q u i r e  Test-retest  for validation  t o i n d i c a t e a t what p o i n t  a l c o h o l misuse.  126).  alcohol  alcohol  areas."  identified  s t a f f of  same i n s t r u c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g  j u d g e d t h a t an  following  "highly sensitive in  were d r o p p e d .  They were a l s o t o l d  alcohol  AAIS measures  these three  experiencing  a s c a l e o f one  a r a t i n g below three the  being  by  the  functioning,  F i l s t e a d (1980) b a s e t h e i r c l a i m  f y i n g a d o l e s c e n t s who  given  the  psychological  t h e i r s e l e c t i o n of q u e s t i o n s which are  v a r i e t y of  (Mayer  t o measure  combination of  living.  i n any  (AAIS)  t o s u c h an e x t e n t t h a t i t  o r any  family  disruption  Mayer and on  adolescents.  areas of a d o l e s c e n t l i f e :  social use  Involvement Scale  experi-  The  tendency t o f a l s i f y  information  ways by t h e A A I S : i ) t h e s e r i o u s n e s s  i s dealt with  of the t o p i c i s  emphasized, i i ) the format i s uncomplicated iii)  discrepencies  and r e s p o n s e s a r e  not  rushed,  and  6 i n d i c a t e i n c o n s i s t e n t patterns of responses.  responses to questions give  i n responses t o questions  i v ) the information  answers.  r e l a t e d t o a l c o h o l use  C u t l e r and S t o r m  (1973) s o u g h t a n s w e r s t o q u e s t i o n s  t o why t e e n a g e r s d r i n k .  30% s a i d they  h o l i d a y s , 32% s a i d they  d r a n k due t o c u r i o s i t y  indicated  a t home.  i t was s e r v e d  drank because o f peer p r e s s u r e . appear d i f f e r e n t . of s t u d e n t s  d r a n k on and 2 1 %  O n l y 7.3% r e p o r t e d That i s , they  M a c u r d y and H o l l a n d e r  (1978) f o u n d t h a t 6 3 %  used a l c o h o l i n f r o n t o f t h e i r p a r e n t s  and 5 9 %  Kitchen  (1977) a l s o r e p o r t e d  s a m p l e were  first  initiated  t h a t 44.6% o f t h e i r  d r i n k by p a r e n t s  by t h e i r  friends.  to celebrate. felt  unhappy.  and R o b i n s o n given  w i t h a f u r t h e r 22.3% being Maddox and M c C o l l  t h a t 50% o f t h e i r sample drank because they w a n t e d t o be i n w i t h  they  d i d n o t want t o  made u s e o f a l c o h o l a t p r i v a t e p a r t i e s .  their  twelve  i scollected  anonymously, t o i n c r e a s e the p r o b a b i l i t y o f candid  related  1, 2  Different  1 and 2 a s o p p o s e d t o t h e o t h e r  t h e same i n d i c a t i o n ,  Factors  i n four  (1964)  liked  i t ,  t h e crowd and 2 0 % d r a n k when t h e y  reported 20% wanted  8% o f t h e s a m p l e r e s o r t e d t o d r i n k i n g when  they  W e c h s l e r and T h o r n  (1973) c o n c l u d e d  d r a n k and became d r u n k were o f t e n lies  and w e r e more l i k e l y  delinquent). drinkers value  Jesser  placed  that students  a l i e n a t e d from t h e i r  t o be a n t i - s o c i a l , ( i . e .  and J e s s e r  l e s s value  on i n d e p e n d e n c e and on i n d e p e n d e n c e r e l a t i v e  drinkers. less  They a l s o f u r n i s h e d  the p o s i t i v e r a t h e r  aspects of d r i n k i n g .  Problem d r i n k e r s  i n f l u e n c e on t h e i r h a b i t It  for  than the  there  achieve-  non-problem  negative  a t t r i b u t e d the g r e a t e s t than f r i e n d s .  t e e n a g e r s who consume a l c o h o l  become e i t h e r h e a v y o r p r o b l e m d r i n k e r s  Nevertheless  to  o r i e n t e d and  t o be p a r e n t s r a t h e r  c a n n o t be assumed t h a t  greater  e v i d e n c e t o s u g g e s t t h e y were  i n t o l e r a n t to deviance, less r e l i g i o u s l y  more c o n c e r n e d w i t h  will  problem  on a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t ,  than  fami-  c h e a t o r be  (1976) f o u n d t h a t  m e n t b u t had l o w e r a c h i e v e m e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s  who  in later  life.  a r e a number o f f a c t o r s w h i c h g i v e  cause  c o n c e r n now and o t h e r s  of t h e i r p o s s i b l e long  which should  term e f f e c t s .  be c o n s i d e r e d  I f there  i n view  i s or Is l i k e l y  t o be a t e e n a g e d r i n k i n g p r o b l e m t h e n i t i s a d v i s a b l e  that  s o c i e t y be made aware o f t h e s i t u a t i o n s and i m p l i c a t i o n s o f such a h a b i t .  18  Chapter 3 Methodology Sample S e l e c t i o n i ) S e l e c t i o n of Schools. school  Contact  b o a r d s i n t h e Lower M a i n l a n d ,  conducted research populations. superintendents studies  was made w i t h a l l  o n l y two o f whom had  i n t o the d r i n k i n g p a t t e r n s  T h e r e seemed t o be a g e n e r a l that although  there  of their  f e e l i n g among  may be a need f o r s u c h  none had been done s i n c e most r e s e a r c h  presented  school  designs  t o t h e b o a r d s had been p o o r l y c o n c e i v e d  and  developed . For  the purpose of t h i s  Superintendent a survey  f o r the Surrey  proposal.  Following  study  the A s s i s t a n t  School  B o a r d was a p p r o a c h e d  h i s i n s t r u c t i o n s the researcher  made a b r i e f p r e s e n t a t i o n t o t h e e i g h t J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y Principals  i n the d i s t r i c t .  Secondary and S e n i o r t a c t e d on an i n d i v i d u a l and  t h e n by p e r s o n a l  School  Principals,  Seven consented  t o take  School  part.  S e c o n d a r y p r i n c i p a l s were t h e n  basis f i r s t  contact.  a l l Senior  with  by l e t t e r  As a r e s u l t  con-  ( s e e A p p e n d i x 2)  a l l Secondary  Secondary School  P r i n c i p a l s and  s e v e n o u t o f e i g h t J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y P r i n c i p a l s gave  their  consent t o administer  number  of schools s ixteen.  the q u e s t i o n n a i r e .  s u r v e y e d was t h e r e f o r e  The t o t a l  f i f t e e n out of a p o s s i b l e  19 ii)  S e l e c t i o n of students.  from the t o t a l  student  S u r v e y s u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d  p o p u l a t i o n , male and f e m a l e ,  J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y , S e c o n d a r y and S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y w i t h i n School The  researcher  approximately (i.e.  District  #36  schools  (Surrey).  attempted  t o o b t a i n a random sample o f  10% o f the s t u d e n t s  e n r o l l e d i n t h e 15 s c h o o l s  an a n t i c i p a t e d 1025 r e s p o n s e s ) .  e a c h s c h o o l was a s k e d t o p r o v i d e student  attending  To o b t a i n t h i s  target  a 10% sample from i t s t o t a l  enrollment.  In order  t o accomodate i n d i v i d u a l  school  administrations  e a c h s c h o o l was p r o v i d e d w i t h a s e t o f i n s t r u c t i o n s t h r e e methods o f s e l e c t i n g  students  ( s e e a p p e n d i x 3 ) , a random  numbers t a b l e , 5% more q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t h a n more l e t t e r s  of consent then  detailing  r e q u i r e d and 250%  needed i n o r d e r  t o o b t a i n t h e 10%  sampl e. The  additional  was e s t i m a t e d  letters  t h a t o n l y a b o u t 40% o f t h e s t u d e n t s  would r e t u r n the l e t t e r additional  o f c o n s e n t were p r o v i d e d  of consent  than estimated  students.  The  so t h a t i n the e v e n t  returned  t h e r e w o u l d n o t need t o be a p r e d e t e r m i n e d consenting  selected  (see Appendix 4 ) .  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were p r o v i d e d  t h a t more s t u d e n t s  since i t  the consent  form  method o f e x c l u d i n g  20 Consent  Procedure  Following nated  methods  They were form  if  within forms  requested  to  have  their  they wished  to  take  part  three to  school days.  their  teachers (see  by name on the  their  identification  e a c h was g i v e n a l e t t e r  questionnaires to  student  age  and  D e s c r i p t i o n of  by any one o f  the  of  take  parents in  the  Only students  were p e r m i t t e d  appendix  1).  questionnaire  the  Survey  to  In  investigate Questions  determining  this  for  'never' every  ascertain should  day.  instance  were  not  signed  referred to  Scale.  state  to  screen possible  the  drinking  s c a l e was patterns  started  Filstead  in  a  Surrey,  Both q u e s t i o n s  drinking.  to It  for  vehicle B.C.  in  questions  response. only.  That  and when allowed  students  determine also  Mayer  problem  used.as  q u e s t i o n s were p r i m a r i l y  inconsistencies  and  c o n c e r n e d w i t h how o f t e n  Q u e s t i o n F sought  three  The A d o l e s c e n t  use by young p e o p l e .  consumed a l c o h o l .  The t h r e e  answer  the  Students  r e s p o n s e and b o t h p r o v i d e d  mate age s t u d e n t s response.  complete  but were a s k e d m e r e l y  alcohol  A and B were  individuals  drank  the  it  Instrument  scale  teenage  last, a  and r e t u r n  S c a l e was d e s i g n e d by Mayer  and F i l s t e a d .used the drinkers.  consent  returning  to  home.  sex.  Involvement  as a means o f  to  s i g n the  survey  The A d o l e s c e n t A l c o h o l I n v o l v e m e n t Alcohol  consent  desig-  the  who approxi-  contained designed is,  a  'no'  to  non-drinkers  Question C allowed  students t o i n d i c a t e why they s t a r t e d d r i n k i n g while D provided f o r a i n d i c a t i o n of d i f f e r e n t types of a l c o h o l that may be consumed.  Response 5 was the only s e c t i o n of the  q u e s t i o n n a i r e which r e c e i v e d any m o d i f i c a t i o n . was o r i g i n a l l y phrased  The response  "have a s u b s t i t u t e f o r a l c o h o l , p a i n t  t h i n n e r , s t e r n o , cough medicine, mouth wash, h a i r t o n i c e t c . " "Paint t h i n n e r , s t e r n o , cough medicine,  mouth wash, h a i r  t o n i c e t c . " were dropped at the request of s e v e r a l p r i n c i p a l s who expressed answer.  concern at the 'suggestive' nature of the  Questions  E, H and J d e a l t with how students  obtained  d r i n k s , why they took t h e i r f i r s t d r i n k and who they drank with r e s p e c t i v e l y .  A l l three questions provide f o r comparing  with parents and f r i e n d s who may i n f l u e n c e students while E and J make f u r t h e r p r o v i s i o n f o r comparing i n f l u e n c e on a l c o h o l consumption.  'brother or s i s t e r '  Queston G determined at  what time of day students drank and q u e s t i o n I e s t a b l i s h e d how many d r i n k s were consumed per s e s s i o n .  Questions K, L, M and  N were intended t o provide i n f o r m a t i o n on how the i n d i v i d u a l views h i s / h e r r e l a t i o n s h i p with a l c o h o l . q u e s t i o n K was concerned  Specifically  with the g r e a t e s t s i n g l e  a l c o h o l has had on an i n d i v i d u a l  at one time.  effect  I t i n turn i s  complemented by L which took a more g l o b a l l o o k at the e f f e c t a l c o h o l has had on respondents. probed  students  about d r i n k i n g drinking.  F i n a l l y questions M and N  f e e l i n g s about a l c o h o l , namely how they and how they p e r c e i v e d others f e l t about  feel their  The and  terms  'drink,  'moderate h i g h ' were n o t d e f i n e d on t h i s  Mayer and F i l s t e a d simple not  state that questionnaires  a n d u n c l u t t e r e d as p o s s i b l e .  t o increase  additional some  ' h i g h ' o r 'drunk,' l o o s e  feeling'  questionnaire. should  be as  I t was t h e r e f o r e  t h e w o r d i n g on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e  decided  by i n c l u d i n g  d e f i n i t i o n s w h i c h i n t h e m s e l v e s may have  confused  students The  Surrey  South Surrey variation.  School  D i s t r i c t was d i v i d e d i n t o N o r t h and  to facilitate North  Surrey  c r o s s t a b u l a t i o n b a s e d on r e g i o n a l  was c o m p r i s e d o f a l l s c h o o l s  G u i l d f o r d , Newton and W h a l l e y a r e a s . schools  i n Cloverdale  North some l i g h t  Surrey  and W h i t e  South Surrey  i n the  constituted  Rock.  i s an u r b a n a r e a w i t h  residential  i n d u s t r y whereas South S u r r e y  Cloverdale which and  easy  homes and  consists of  i s s e m i - r u r a l w i t h some r e s i d e n t i a l  housing  W h i t e Rock w h i c h i s p r i m a r i l y r e s i d e n t i a l .  Data C o l l e c t i o n All  d a t a were c o l l e c t e d i n s t u d e n t s '  home s c h o o l s  between  May 1 9 t h a n d J u n e 1 s t , 1 9 8 1 . S t u d e n t s c o m p l e t e d t h e questionnaire one  i n t h e i r home rooms, i n d i v i d u a l  area of the school  assigned  f o r the purpose.  were a s k e d t o s t r e s s t h e s e r i o u s n e s s to supply  accurate  information.  classes or i n Teachers  o f t h e t o p i c and t h e need  S t u d e n t s were  guaranteed  23 anonymity  f r o m the  names on the  questionnaire.  i n many c a s e s of  teachers  researcher  students  familiar  Although  it  to  answer  minutes  to  fill  the  out  main o f f i c e .  f r o m the  individual  p e r m i s s i o n to Data  not w r i t e  out  the  their  however,  questionnaeres  in  t a k e more  than  that front  15 t o  q u e s t i o n s , s t u d e n t s were g i v e n  the  The  did  s h o u l d be n o t e d ,  expected to  questionnaire.  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were g a t h e r e d the  they  them.  was not  minutes  It  filled  to  in that  by the  investigator  schools,  be r e t a i n e d  leaving  30  Completed  teacher then  20  and r e t u r n e d  c o l l e c t e d the  behind a l l  by s c h o o l  principals.  collection, all  information  to  data  letters  of  Preparation Following  data  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s was coded on c o d i n g s h e e t s by the and one a s s i s t a n t . "spot-checked"  for  Approximately coding errors  25% o f  the  from  the  investigator  coded d a t a  were  before keypunching.  Data A n a l y s i s Data were Social  a n a l y s e d u s i n g the  Sciences ( S . P . S . S . ) .  frequencies  A d i s c u s s i o n of  Package results  and c r o s s t a b u l a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s f o l l o w s .  be n o t e d t h a t statistical  Statistical  the  tests  critical was s e t  level at  5%  of  significance for  (p<0.05).  for from It all  should  24 Chapter 4 Resul t s In order total  t o o b t a i n as c l o s e t o a 1 0 % s a m p l e f r o m t h e  student  School  population  o f 10,250 w i t h i n t h e S u r r e y  S y s t e m 2500 l e t t e r s  the  15 s c h o o l s .  381  Senior  o f c o n s e n t were d i s t r i b u t e d  f o r m and t h e r e f o r e  were n o t c o d e d s i n c e  r e s p o n s e r a t e was t h e r e f o r e Secondary School  the  returned  overall  the signed  completed the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s .  as age and s e x had been o m i t t e d  An  among  1023 (381 J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y , 251 S e c o n d a r y and  Secondary) students  questionnaires  Secondary  crucial  consent Ten  information  by t h e r e s p o n d e n t .  such  The  9.88% (n = 1013) o f t h e S u r r e y  population. p i c t u r e of the r e s u l t i n g  data  i s presented  in  following discussion.  Frequencies Absolute  frequencies  a p p e a r i n a p p e n d i x 1.  and p e r c e n t a g e s  In question  f o r each  A (how o f t e n do y o u  d r i n k ? ) a n d B (when d i d y o u have y o u r l a s t of  the t o t a l  drink?)  s a m p l e s t a t e d t h e y had n e v e r consumed  whereas i n q u e s t i o n  F (when d i d y o u t a k e  your f i r s t  o r 7.5% o f r e s p o n d e n t s made t h e same d e c l a r a t i o n . proportion p e r month. basis  of students  question  67 o r 6.6% alcohol drink?) The  76  highest  ( 3 2 . 4 % ) consumed a l c o h o l once o r t w i c e  A l m o s t 1/3 ( 3 0 . 3 % ) r e p o r t e d  ( e v e r y weekend) w h i l e  d r i n k i n g on a r e g u l a r  a much s m a l l e r g r o u p  (5.2%) used  25 alcohol  s e v e r a l t i m e s p e r week.  12 s t u d e n t s of  (1.2%) i n d i c a t e d  t h e s a m p l e had i m b i b e d  I n b o t h q u e s t i o n s A and B  they drank every  the day b e f o r e  day.  14.5%  they completed  the  questionnaire. By their took  f a r the g r e a t e s t p r o p o r t i o n , 82.6% o f the sample,  first their  d r i n k at or before first  Parents i n promoting respondents Currently  drink before  t h e age o f 15.  18.8% s a i d  took they  t h e age o f 1 0 .  and r e l a t i v e s w o u l d seem t o p l a y a l a r g e p a r t t h e use o f a l c o h o l among s t u d e n t s . obtained t h e i r  first  d r i n k from  39.3% o f  this  source.  40.3% d r i n k w i t h p a r e n t s o r r e l a t i v e s w h i l e 41.7%  have o f t e n o b t a i n e d a l c o h o l f r o m t h i s s o u r c e  a t one t i m e o r  another. Curiosity first  ( 3 4 % ) was a l s o a m a j o r f a c t o r  d r i n k although  i t was c l o s e l y  get e i t h e r high or drunk to  have p l a y e d l i t t l e  first  drink.  Only  (27%).  f o l l o w e d by a d e s i r e t o  Peer  p r e s s u r e would  part i n introducing students  7.9% o f t h e s a m p l e f e l t  them w h i l e 1 0 . 6 % s a i d  i n taking a  they s t a r t e d  friends  appear  to their encouraged  i n o r d e r t o be l i k e  their  friends. By started  f a r the l a r g e s t group of students t o d r i n k because they l i k e d  problems caused further  (61.8%) u s u a l l y  the t a s t e .  Worries  and  9.6% o f s t u d e n t s t o b e g i n d r i n k i n g and a  3.5% b e c a u s e t h e y f e l t  sad or l o n e l y .  5.4% d r a n k  26 alone, possibly  as a d e r i v a t i v e o f t e n s i o n  a n d / o r s a d n e s s and  1oneliness. Although  the m a j o r i t y  unduly influenced and  o f s t u d e n t s d i d n o t seem t o be  by t h e i r p e e r s  starting to drink,  i n taking  the majority  f r i e n d s as a s o u r c e o f s u p p l y .  (49.2%  their first ) used t h e i r  S i m i l a r l y 60.4% drank  friends  t h e same age and 34% w i t h  sisters  a l s o a p p e a r e d t o have some i n f l u e n c e  habits. and  The  desire  influence  to 'feel  o r d e r t o 'be l i k e  on d r i n k i n g  t h e y were a l s o d r i n k i n g  i n this  without parents' with  companions. little  O n l y 1.6% t o o k t h e i r 3.3% u s u a l l y s t a r t e d i n  an a d u l t ' . removed l i q u o r f r o m t h e i r homes  k n o w l e d g e and a f u r t h e r 8.4% o b t a i n e d  some f o r m o f f a l s e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n .  asked f o r i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e they obtained  study.  a d u l t ' and o n l y  Only 12.3% o f s t u d e n t s  within  B r o t h e r s and  t o 'be a d u l t ' w o u l d a p p e a r t o have  on s t u d e n t s  drink  alcohol  friends.  13 s t u d e n t s  (0.1%)  t h e i r l i q u o r t h r o u g h some f o r m o f  their respective  indicated bootlegging  schools.  u s e d b e e r , 4 1 . 4 % h a r d l i q u o r and 6 2 . 9 % m i x e d d r i n k s . few, o n l y  3.5%, s a i d t h e y d r a n k w i n e .  used a s u b s t i t u t e . interpreting  this  6.7% s a i d  Some n o n - d r i n k e r s c h e c k e d t h i s option  their  Although not  S t u d e n t s consume a v a r i e t y o f t y p e s o f a l c o h o l .  ingly  with  I n 1 4 . 8 % o f c a s e s s i b l i n g s were a s o u r c e o f a l c o h o l  i n 14.6% o f i n c i d e n t s  first  older  drink  42.3% Surpristhey  answer,  as m e a n i n g t h e use o f non a l c o h o l i c  substances. and  may  Several  others  other  use  wrote  hand some d r i n k e r s a l s o c h e c k e d i t  a s u b s t i t u t e s u c h as 'pot'  alongside  m a j o r i t y of students  15.3%  with  the  therefore  The and  On  a t some t i m e  i n the  their  medicine.  answer.  drank d u r i n g  afternoon.  the  evenings  L e s s t h a n 20%  drank  meals. 0.9%  0.6%  of students  awoke d u r i n g  took a d r i n k during The  33.4% use  the  amount o f a l c o h o l  of students of a l c o h o l .  had 30.6%  s i n g l e percentage e i t h e r high  differing  or drunk.  had  15.1%  o r two  three  and  individual  i s not  students  to reach  opinion  The  22.4%  t h e y were  would  related to quantity.  or passed out  i n d i v i d u a l s who  require  a f f e c t s them i n d i d not  achieved  a  in their  of  the p e r c e n t a g e  the  1ives.  I f the  "no  "high".  27.8%  H o w e v e r , i f t h o s e who  also included  answer  "loose  g e t t i n g moderately  d r a n k , became i l l o r p a s s e d o u t  comparable t o t a l . t h e n 41.3%  are  indica-  state.  of students  those remaining, a f u r t h e r 7.7%  this  greatest  in itself  that alcohol  28.4%  up.  d r i n k s when t h e y made  s t a t e d t h e y became d r u n k i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e  question  and  considerably.  upwards.  However, t h i s  a number o f d i f f e r e n t w a y s .  easy f e e l i n g " w i t h  to drink  m o r n i n g o r when t h e y woke  e i t h e r one  S t u d e n t s were o f t h e  Of  night  consumed v a r i e d  amounts o f a l c o h o l  the q u e s t i o n .  the  ( 2 7 . 8 % ) consumed a l c o h o l u n t i l  t i v e of q u a n t i t y s i n c e  ill  (74%)  cough  in  the  became of  i s 29.1%, a  r e c a l l " s t u d e n t s are  added i n ,  s a m p l e have been i n t o x i c a t e d a t some s t a g e  28 Despite stage  41.3% o f t h e sample h a v i n g  i n their lives  their lives  70.4% f e l t  a l c o h o l has had no e f f e c t on  and 9 4 . 7 % c o n s i d e r e d  t h a t t h e y had t h e a b i l i t y c o n s i d e r s 9 4.4%  been d r u n k a t some  i t e i t h e r t o be no p r o b l e m o r  to control  their  drinking.  When one  o f t h e s a m p l e have consumed a l c o h o l w i t h  friends  i ti s interesting  t o note  friends  i n f l u e n c e d them.  While  d r i n k i n g o n l y 0.6% f e l t the sample) a d m i t t e d  they  t h a t o n l y 5.1% f e l t  2.1% f e l t  bad a b o u t  their  their  their  needed h e l p and o n l y one ( 0 . 1 % o f  t o having  had h e l p t o c o n t r o l  his/her  drinking. By  f a r the v a s t m a j o r i t y , 79.7% o f the sample,  c o u l d n ' t s a y how o t h e r s c o n s u m p t i o n was n o r m a l If  one a c c e p t s  saw t h e i r d r i n k i n g o r f e l t  felt  to  i t i s interesting  t o note  that only  t h a t c o m i n g u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f a l c o h o l had  prevented 2.8%  talking  t o someone and o n l y 2.6% f e l t i t  them f r o m h a v i n g  o f the sample f e l t  a good  b e e n i n some f o r m o f u n f o r t u n a t e their drinking.  time.  t h e y consumed s u f f i c i e n t a l c o h o l  i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e i r s c h o o l work.  17.7% o f s t u d e n t s  have  p r e d i c a m e n t as a r e s u l t o f  Of t h o s e , 9.5% g o t i n t o t r o u b l e a t home, 3,9%  were i n a f i g h t o r d e s t r o y e d  p r o p e r t y and 4.3% were i n v o l v e d  w i t h t h e l a w , had an a c c i d e n t o r i n j u r y o r were p u n i s h e d school.  their  t h e f i g u r e o f 2 7 . 8 % f o r s t u d e n t s who g e t  interfered with their had  that  f o r t h e i r age.  e i t h e r high o r drunk then 3.4%  either  at  29  Crosstabulations Frequency ary,  of d r i n k i n g by type of school  Secondary,  J u n i o r Secondary).  (Senior Second-  There would appear to be  a general trend towards the m a j o r i t y of students d r i n k i n g a f a i r l y regular basis, weekend.  33.2%  a month and  i.e.  students  of 64.3%).  A higher percentage  The  (62.1%) or Secondary  expected,  figures  (56.6%.)  Schools  This r e s u l t 1-3.  schools are  to c o n t a i n more non d r i n k e r s (11.5%) than  compared with Senior Secondary  J u n i o r Secondary expected.  students  Secondary  c r o s s t a b u l a t i o n a l s o suggests Secondary  a l s o more l i k e l y  of  (71.5%) use a l c o h o l e i t h e r once or  twice a month or every weekend, than do J u n i o r students  once or twice  r e p o r t e d they use a l c o h o l every weekend  ( g i v i n g a combined t o t a l Senior Secondary  once or twice a month or every  of a l l students consume a l c o h o l  31.1%  on  Schools  (4.0%) and  (6.5%) both of which have fewer  is further c l a r i f i e d  than  i n table 1 and  30  Table 1 Frequency of drinking by type of school  RATE COUNT 1 ROW PCT 1 COL PCT 1 TOT PCT 1 Never  Once/ Twice  . Once/ Twice Month  1 A Year  ROW TOTAL  Several Every 1 Weekend  Times A Week  Every Day  SCHOOL SENIOR SEC  SEC  JUNIOR SEC  OLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  1 1 1  139 37.1 45.3  27 7.2 51.9  2 0.5 16.7  1  14.1  2.7  0.2  82 33.6 1 25.0 8.3  1 1 1 1  56 23.0 18.2 5.7  1 1  117 31.7 35.7  1  11.8  1 1 1 1  15 4.0 22.4  1 1 1  63 16.8 28.4  1  129 34.4  1.5  1  6.4  1  39.3 13.1  28 11.5 41.8 2.8  1 1 1 1  67 27.5 30.2 6.8  1  24 6.5 35.8 2.4  1 1 1 1  92 24.9 41.4 9.3  67 6.8  38.96005 WITH  222 22.5  328 33.2  1 1  375 38.0  8 3.3 15.4 0.8  3 1 1.2 1 25.0 0.3;-•  244 24.7  112 30.4 36.5 11.3  17 4.6 32.7  369 37.3  1.7  7 1.9 58.3 0.7  307 31.1  52 5.3  12 1.2  10 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE =  1 1  0.0000  988 100.0  Figure  1  Frequency  of d r i n k i n g  by  Senior  Secondary  students  Key: ° Actual °  ^  Expected  Number of respondents  u > 2  u u cu o  0)  o c o  0)  o  u 0)  C  at x: rj 4J  V •H c o S  Frequency  c O  >  of a l c o h o l  <D  consumption  i-H  fO  -  >1 > £ <y -i-i  <U <u  Figure  2  F r e q u e n c y o f d r i n k i n g by S e c o n d a r y  students  Frequency of a l c o h o l  consumption  Figure 3  F r e q u e n c y o f d r i n k i n g by J u n i o r  Secondary  students  Frequency of a l c o h o l  consumption  34  Age  of f i r s t  d r i n k by t y p e o f s c h o o l ( S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y ,  Secondary, J u n i o r Secondary). t h e y had age  83.2%  consumed a l c o h o l a t some t i m e  o f 14 o r 15.  T h e r e was  had  o t h e r two  85.3%  school categories.  o f 14 o r 15.  (26.5%) s t a r t e d  l i v e s by  The  Fewer S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y S c h o o l  ( 4 5 . 1 % ) and  and  before students 10-13  Junior  (48.8%)  c r o s s t a b u l a t i o n suggests  which  s t u d e n t s a t t e n d may  their  first  not  drink appreciably.  S c h o o l s t u d e n t s , 19.9%  t h a t the type o f  i n f l u e n c e t h e age 18.6%  of Senior  of Secondary School  school  they  take  Secondary  s t u d e n t s and  J u n i o r Secondary students s t a r t e d d r i n k i n g 10.  i n the  of Secondary students  c o n s u m i n g a l c o h o l b e t w e e n t h e ages o f  Secondary students  the  (87.1%) of  consumed a l c o h o l t h a n  than e i t h e r Secondary School students  of  stated  of S e n i o r Secondary students reported d r i n k i n g  t h e age  of  in their  a higher percentage  J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y s t u d e n t s who  78.2%  of respondents  before  the  18.6% age  35  Table 2 Age of f i r s t drink by type of school  AGE FIRST COUNT 1 ROW PCT 1  ROW TOTAL  COL PCT 1  Age  TOT PCT 1 Never  1Recent 1y1  15+  Before  10 1 14-15  1 -  13  1  10  SCHOOL SENIOR SEC  SEC  JUNIOR SEC  OLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  14  1  9  1  60  1  126  1  101  1  71  381  3.7 18.4  1 1  2.4 50.0  1 1  15.7 81.1  1 1  33.1 50.4  1 1  26.5 25.5  1 1  18.6 37.4  37.9  1.4  1  0.9  1  6.0  1  12.5  1  10.1  1  7.1  30 12.2 39.5 3.0  1 1  1 1 0.4 1  1 1  50 20.3  1 1  111 45.1  1 1  49 19.9  1 1  5.6 0.1  1 1  5 2.0 6.8 0.5  1 1  20.0 5.0  1 1  28.0 11.1  I 1  25.8 4.9  32 8.5 42.1  1 1 1  3 2.1 44.4  1 1 1  9 2.4 12.2  1  74  184 48.8 46.5  1  0.8  1  0.9  19.6 29.6 7.4  1 1 1  3.2  1 1 1  1  18.3  1 1 1 1  70 18.6 36.8 7.0  76 7.6  120.26582 WITH  18 1.8  74 7.4  250 24.9  10 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  396 39.4  SIGNIFICANCE =  190 18.9 0.0000  246 24.5  377 37.5  1004 100.0  36  Amount o f a l c o h o l consumed by t y p e  of school  Secondary, Secondary, J u n i o r Secondary). p r o p o r t i o n , 30.3% o f s t u d e n t s , s t a t e d they of being likely  "high" or drunk.  to occur  The l a r g e s t drank t o the p o i n t  T h i s s t a t e o f a f f a i r s was  most  i n J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s where 3 7 . 1 % o f  respondents s t a t e d they Secondary students and  (Senior  had been " h i g h " o r d r u n k .  The  were t h e n e x t most f r e q u e n t w i t h  the Secondary schools  the l e a s t  likely  t o have  Senior  28.7%, students  drinking  t o the p o i n t o f drunkenness w i t h 22.2% o f r e s p o n d e n t s  reaching  this  state.  T h r e e t o s i x d r i n k s was t h e s e c o n d h i g h e s t c a t e g o r y consumption.  In t h i s  i n s t a n c e the Senior Secondary  showed t h e h i g h e s t t e n d e n c y 22.2%  Schools  ( 2 9 . 2 % ) t o consume a t t h i s  o f S e c o n d a r y and 20.0% J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y s c h o o l  a n s w e r e d i n t h e same f a s h i o n .  of  rate. students  Table 3 Amount of alcohol consumed by type of  SCHOOL COUNT 1 ROW PCT 1 COL PCT 1 Sen lor  school  ROW Junlor  TOT PCT 1  Sec  1  Sec  1  Sec  1  40 24.0 11.1  1 1 1  57 34.1  1  4.3  1  25.8 6.1  70 41.9 20.0  1  7.5  69 40.4 19.2 7.4  1 1 1 1  50 29.2 22.6 5.4  1  105 46.9 29.2 11.3  1 1 1 1  49 21.9 22.2 5.3  42 48.8 11.7 4.5  1  16 18.6 7.2 1.7  TOTAL  AMOUNT 1  2  CHI  SQUARE =  1  3-6  1  6+  1  1  1  1  1  1  167 18.0  52 30.4 14.9 5.6  1 1  171 18.4  70 31.3 20.0 7.5  1 1  224 24. 1  28 32.6 8.0 3.0  1 1  86 9.2  1 1  282 30.3  HIGH  1  103 36.5  1  49 17.4  130 46.1  OR DRUNK  1 1  28.7 11.1  1  22.2 5.3  37.1 14.0  COLUMN  359  221  350  TOTAL  38.6  23.8  37.6  43.46431 WITH  8 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  930 100.0 SIGNIFICANCE  38  E f f e c t o f a l c o h o l by t y p e o f s c h o o l Secondary, J u n i o r Secondary). question  (Senior  Secondary,  724 s t u d e n t s a n s w e r e d t h e  "What i s t h e g r e a t e s t e f f e c t y o u have had f r o m  alcohol?  Of t h e s e 3 1 . 4 % s t a t e d  feeling",  2 1 . 1 % became d r u n k , 8.6% p a s s e d o u t and a f u r t h e r  1 7 . 1 % were u n a b l e t o r e c a l l episode.  Senior Secondary  become i l l  they achieved a "loose  the events p r i o r  t o the d r i n k i n g  s c h o o l s t u d e n t s were more l i k e l y t o  from a l c o h o l consumption.  1 4 . 5 % o f them d i d s o  c o m p a r e d w i t h 9.4% o f S e c o n d a r y and 8.6% o f J u n i o r students. unlikely  S e n i o r Secondary  (15.6%). opposed  events p r i o r  to a drinking  bout  ( 1 3 . 1 % ) and J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y s t u d e n t s  I n c o n s t r a s t 3 8 . 7 % o f S e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s t u d e n t s as t o 2 5 . 2 % S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y and 32.9% J u n i o r  s c h o o l s t u d e n t s drank t o the p o i n t of f e e l i n g easy".  Secondary  s t u d e n t s ( 2 1 . 0 % ) were a l s o more  t o be a b l e t o r e c a l l  t h a n were S e c o n d a r y  easy  Secondary  " l o o s e and  39  Table 4 Effect of alcohol by type of school  Was Drinking Heavily &  EFFECT COUNT ROW PCT 1 Loose COL PCT 1 Easy Moderate Feeli ng High 1 Drunk TOT PCT 1 1 SENIOR SEC  1 1 1  The Next Day Coul dn't Reca11 Passed What ROW 1 Happened 1 TOTAL Out  Became I  II I  I I  42 14.5  25 8.6  1 I  51.9 5.8  40.3 3.5  73 25.2  31 10.7  1 I  32.2 10.1  40.3 4.3  I 1  58 20.0 37.9 8.0  74 38.7 32.6 10.2  15 7.9 19.5 2.1  I I 1 I  41 21.5 26.8 5.7  1 I I I  18 9.4 22.2 2.5  80 32.9 35.2 11 .0  31 12.8 40.3 4.3  1 1 1 1  54 22.2 35.3 7.5  I I I 1  21 8.6 25.9 2.9  227 31.4  77 10.6  '  '  1 1 1 1  61 21.0 49.2 8.4  1 1 1 I  290 40.1  18 9.4 29.0 2.5  1 1 1  25 13.1 20.2  1 1 1  191 26.4  1  3.5  1  19 7.8 30.6 2.6  1 1 1 1  38 15.6 30.6 5.2  1 1 1 1  _ 1 1  1 SEC  1 1 1  1  i 1  1 1 1 1  JUNIOR SEC  1  243 33.6  _ |  1  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  19.58800 WITH  153 21.1  10 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  81  62  124  11 .2  8.6  17.1  SIGNIFICANCE =  0.0334  724 100.0  40  F r e q u e n c y o f d r i n k i n g by age. rate  by age  c o n f i r m s the t r e n d  of  r a t e by s c h o o l  or  twice The  13 and  64.3%  revealed  crosstabulation i n the  of  crosstabulation  o f s t u d e n t s d r i n k e i t h e r once  p e r month o r e v e r y weekend. smallest  percentage  of r e g u l a r  u n d e r g r o u p where 37.7%  substance. 50.3%  i n that  The  The  percentages  o f 14 y e a r o l d s , 69.5%  y e a r o l d s , 74.0% group r e g i s t e r i n g  reported  regular  i s i n the use o f  the  show a s t e a d y r i s e w i t h  age  -  o f 15 y e a r o l d s , 70.2%  of  16  o f 17 y e a r o l d s w i t h a slight  drinkers  decline  t h e 18 and  t o 66.6%  of  over  age  respondents.  41  Table 5 Frequency of drinking by age  RATE ROW  COUNT ROW PCT 1 COL PCT TOT PCT 1 Never  Once/  Once/  Twice 1 A Year  Twice Month  Several Every 1 Weekend  TOTAL  Times A Week  Every Day  AGE (YRS)  14  15  16  17  18+  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  1  34  1  40.0  1  19 22.4  1.5  1 1  15.3 3.4  1 1  5.8 1.9  22 12.9 32.8  1 1 1  56 32.7 25.2  1  2.2  1  10 4.7 14.9 1.0  15 17.6 22.4  DER  1 1 1  13 15.3 4.2  1  1.3  42 24.6 1 12.8  1 1 1  44 25.7 14.3  5.7  1  4.3  1  4.5  1 1 1 1  44 20.7 19.8 4.5  1 1 1  80 37.6 24.4 8.1  1 1 1 1  68 31.9 22.1 6.9  8 3.2 11.9 0.8  1 1 1 1  45 18.1 20.3 4.6  1 1 1 1  87 34.9 26.5 8.8  1 1 1 1  88 35.3 28.7 8.9  9 4.8 •13.4 0.9  1 1 1 1  27 14.3 12.2 2.7  1 1 1  73 38.6 22.3 7.4  1 1 1 1  67 35.4 21.8 6.8  3 3.7 4.5  1 1 1  16 19.8 7.2  1 1 1  27 33.3 8.2  0.3  1  1.6  1  2.7  1 1 1 1  27 33.3 8.8 2.7  67 6.8  222 22.5  328 33.2  90.76387 WITH 25 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  307 31.1  1  1 1  3 3.5  1 1.2  5.8 0.3  8.3 0.1  5 2.9 9.6  2 1.2 16.7  0.5  0.2  8 3.8 15.4 0.8 17 6.8 32.7 1.7  1  11 5.8 21.2  1  1.1  1  8 9.9 15.4  1  1 1  85 8.6  1 1  171 17.3  3 1.4 25.0 0.3  1 1  213 21.6  4 1.6 33.3 0.4  1 1  249 25.2  2  1 1  189 19.1  1 1  81 8.2  1.1 16.7 0.2 1  0.8  0 0.0 0.0 0.0  52 5.3  12 1.2  SIGNIFICANCE =  0.0000  988 100.0  42  D r i n k i n g e v e r y weekend by g e n d e r and a g e .  Age and s e x  may be a c o n s i d e r a t i o n when d e t e r m i n i n g s t u d e n t s who a r e most likely  t o d r i n k e v e r y weekend.  y e a r s and u n d e r ,  5 8 . 3 % o f male and 77.7% o f f e m a l e  d e c l a r e d they drank  e v e r y weekend.  s t u d e n t s 17 y e a r s and o v e r students said  Of t h o s e s t u d e n t s aged 16  they drank  students  I n c o n t r a s t 41.6% o f male  compared w i t h 2 2 . 3 % o f  e v e r y weekend.  female  43  Table 6 Drinking every weekend by gender and age  SEX COUNT  I  ROW PCT COL PCT TOT PCT  13 AND UNDER  14  15  16  17  ROW TOTAL Male  1 Fema1e 1  5 38.5 3.8 1.6  1  8  1  13  1 1 1  61.5 4.6 2.6  1 1 1  4.2  13 29.5 9.8 4.2  1 1 1 1  31 70.5 17.7 10.1  1 1 I 1  24 35.3 18.2 7.8  1 1 1 1  44 64.7 25.1 14.3  1 1 1 1  68 22. 1  35 39.8 26.5 11.4  1 1 1 1  53 60.2 30.3 17.3  1 1 1 1  88 28.7  39 58.2  1 1 1 1  28 41.8 16.0 9.1  1 1 1 1  67 21.8  1 1  111 40.7 1  27 8.8  29.5 12.7 16 59.3 12.1  18+  5.2 COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  14.61594  132 43.0 WITH  1 1  6.3 3.6  44 14.3  1 1  175  307  57.0  100.0  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0121  44  When a l c o h o l A i s similar  last  used  by a g e .  I n many r e s p e c t s q u e s t i o n  t o q u e s t i o n B and f o r i t s p a r t i t h e l p s t o  demonstrate  the frequency of student d r i n k i n g .  respondents  said  t h e y had used  t o t h e i r being sampled.  40% o f a l l  a l c o h o l d u r i n g t h e week  prior  T h e r e w o u l d a p p e a r t o be a r e l a t i v e l y  c o n s i s t e n t p a t t e r n among t h e s e s t u d e n t s who had consumed a l c o h o l w i t h s t u d e n t s c o n s u m i n g more r e g u l a r l y as t h e y older.  I n t h e week p r i o r  t o the study fewer  ( 2 4 . 4 % ) and 14 y e a r o l d s ( 3 3 . 9 % ) h a d u s e d  13 y e a r o l d s  alcohol  t h a n had 15  y e a r o l d s ( 4 2 . 9 % ) , 16 y e a r o l d s ( 4 0 . 5 % ) , 17 y e a r o l d s and  s t u d e n t s 18 y e a r s and o v e r  (40.2%).  grow  (48.7%)  45  Table 7 When alcohol last used by age  WHEN LAST COUNT ROW PCT COL PCT TOT PCT  6 Months To Severa1 1 Year Weeks  Not For Over A  ROW TOTAL Last  Never  1  15 17.4 22.4  1  13  1  25  1 1  10.5 18.4  1 1  15.1 11.4  1 1  29.1 11.7  1.5  1  0.9  1  1.3  1  2.5  22  1  17  1  24  1  34  12.6 32.8 2.2  1 1 1  9.8 34.7 1.7  1 1 1  13.8 21.1 2.4  1  19.5  1  1 1  16.0 3.4  1  33.9 14.7 5.9  10 4.6 14.9  1 1 1  9 1 4. 1 1 18.4 1  22 10.0 19.3  1 1 1  53 24.2 24.9  1 1 1  1.0  1  0.9  1  2.2  1  5.3  8 3.2 11.9 0.8  1 1 1 1  7 2.8 14.3 0.7  1 1 1 1  25 9.9 21.9 2.5  1 1 1 1  58 23.0 27.2 5.8  9 4.7 13.4 0.9  1 1 1 1  3 1.6 6.1 0.3  1 1 1 1  20 10.5 17.5 2.0  1 1 1 1  26 13.6 12.2 2.6  3 3.7 4.5 0.3  1 1 1 1  4 1 4.9 1 8.2 1 0.4 1  10 12.2 8.8 1.0  1 1 1 1  17 20.7 8.0 1.7  49 4.9  114 11.4  Year  1  Ago  1  Ago  1  Yesterday 1 Today  Week  1  1  21  1  2  1  1  24.4 5.2 2.1  1 1  2.3 1.4  1 1  1  0.2  1  59  1 1  16 9.2  1 1  1 1  10.9 1.6  I 1  94 42.9 23.4  1 1 1  27 12.3 18.4  1 1 1  9.4  1  2.7  1  4 1.8 33.3 0.4  102 40.5 25.4 10.2  1 1 1 1  47 18.7 32.0 4.7  1 1 1 1  5 2.0 41.7 0.5  1 1  93 48.7 23.1 9.3  1 1 1 1  40 20.9 27.2 4.0  1 1 1 1  0 0.0 0.0 0.0  1 1 1  33 40.2 8.2 3.3  1 1 1 1  15 1 18.3 1 10.2 1 1.5 1  0 0.0 0.0 0.0  147 14.6  12 1.2  AGE (YRS) UNDER  14  15  16  17  18+  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  67 6.7  9 1  213 21.2  103.74153 WITH 30 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  1 1 1 1  402 40.0  SIGNIFICANCE =  0.0000  1 1.2 8.3 0.1 2 1.1 16.7 0.2  1004 100.0  46  G e n d e r by age f o r s u b j e c t s c o n s u m i n g a l c o h o l l a s t 40 2 s t u d e n t s had consumed survey. those  between likely  a l c o h o l d u r i n g t h e week p r i o r  The age and s e x p a t t e r n f o l l o w s a s i m i l a r  s t u d e n t s who  consume a l c o h o l e v e r y w e e k e n d .  t h e ages o f 13 and 16 y e a r s were t o have  consumed  after  trend to Females  a l c o h o l i n t h e week p r i o r  t o the s t u d y  respectively.  t h e age o f 17 a h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e o f boys  (39.0%) than g i r l s week.  t o the  f o u n d t o be more  t h a n boys o f t h e same a g e , 7 4 . 2 % and 6 0 . 0 % Conversely  week.  (25.8%) had used a l c o h o l the p r e v i o u s  47  Table 8 Gander by age for subjects consuming alcohol  SEX COUNT ROW PCT COL PCT TOT PCT 1 Male  last week  ROW TOTAL 1 Fema1e  AGE (YRS) 13 AND UNDER  14  15  16  17  18+  1 1 1  10 47.6 5.9  1 1 1  11 52.4 4.7  1  2.5  1  2.7  1  22  1 1 1  37.3 13.0 5.5  1 1 1 1  37 62.7 15.9 9.2  1 1 1 1  31 33.0 18.3 7.7  1 1 1 1  63 67.0 27.0 15.4  1 1 1  40 39.2 23.7 10.0  62 60.8 26.6 17.9  102 25.4  1  1 1 1 1  1 1 1 1  45 48.4 26.6 11.2  1 1 1 1  48 51.6 20.6 1 1.9  93 23. 1  1 1  21 63.6  1 1  12 36.4  33 8.2  1  12.4  1  5.2  1 1  5.2 3.0  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  12.17064  169 42.0 WITH  233 58.0  21 5.2  59 14.7  94 23.4  402 100.0  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0325  48  Gender by age consumption  of beer  s t u d e n t s who  drink  f o r s u b j e c t s consuming is related beer  t o both age  female  t o consume b e e r  79.6%  of females  as opposed  after  the age  drank  beer  i n contrast  sex.  of males).  are r e v e r s e d .  t o 20.3%  Of  the  under  t h a n male s t u d e n t s ( i . e .  t o 67.1%  the r o l e s  and  The  s t u d e n t s 16 y e a r s and  were more l i k e l y  o f 16  beer.  of  females.  33%  However, of males  49  Table 9 Gender by age for subjects consuming beer  SEX COUNT ROW PCT COL PCT TOT PCT  ROW TOTAL Male  FemaIe  AGE (YRS) 19 44.2 6.0 3.0  13 AND UNDER  14  15  16  17  18+  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  14.46812  24 55.8  43 6.8  7.5 3.8  47 42.0 14.8 7.4  65 58.0 20.4 10.2  67 46.5 21.1 10.5  77 53.5 24.1 12.1  144 22.6  80 47.6 25.2 12.6  88 52.4 27.6 13.8  168 26.4  72 60.0 22.6 11.3  48 40.0 15.0 7.5  120 18.8  33 66.0 10.4 5.2  17 34.0 5.3 2.7  50 7.8  318 49.9  319 50.1  WITH  112 17.6  637 100.0  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0129  50  G e n d e r by age f o r s u b j e c t s c o n s u m i n g h a r d l i q u o r . the case w i t h  beer the l i k e l i h o o d o f consuming hard  seems t o be l i n k e d  t o age and s e x .  u n d e r 17 i n d i c a t e d  t h e y used h a r d l i q u o r  62.7% said  o f males. t h e y used  80.5% o f female  As was  liquor students  i n comparison  with  From t h e age o f 17 and o v e r 3 7 . 4 % o f m a l e s hard l i q u o r  i n c o n t r a s t t o 19.4% o f f e m a l e s .  51  Table 10 Gender by age for subjects consuming heard liquor  SEX COUNT ROW PCT COL PCT TOT PCT 1  Male  1 Fema 1 e 1  1 1  8 44.4  1 1  10 55.6  1  1 1  5.6 2.7  1 1  6.5 3.4  1  1  14  1  26  1  1 1 1  35.0 9.9 4.7  1 1 1  65.0 16.9 8.8  1 1 1 1  26 40.0 18.3 8.8  1 1 1 1  39 60.0 25.3 13.2  1 1 1 1  41 45.6 28.9 13.9  1 1 1 1  49 54.4 31.8 16.6  90 30.4  1 1 1 1  40 65.6 28.2 13.5  1 1 1 1  21 34.4 13.6 7.1  61 20.6  1 I I 1  13 59.1 9.2 4.4  1 1  9 40.9  22 7.4  1 1  5.8 3.0  ROW TOTAL  AGE (YRS) 13 AND UNDER  14  15  16  17  18+  18 6. 1  40 13.5  1  1  65 22.0  COLUMN  142  154  296  TOTAL  48.0  52.0  100.0  CHI SQUARE =  13.31403  WITH  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0206  52  Age  by age  s t u d e n t s who  of students  a g e s o f 10 and As having  o f 14 o r 15.  group s t a r t e d  percentage  age  As p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d 83.2%  The  before  consumed a l c o h o l  m a j o r i t y of a l l students  t h e age  of  o f 14-15.  The  in  greatest  ( 6 4 . 3 % ) began usng a l c o h o l b e t w e e n  the  15.  i n c r e a s e s t h e n s o does t h e l i k e l i h o o d  consumed l i q u o r .  u n d e r had  drink.  r e s p o n d e d t o t h i s q u e s t i o n had  b e f o r e t h e age e a c h age  of f i r s t  student  19.3%  of those  s t u d e n t s 13  and  n o t u s e d a l c o h o l o n l y 2.4%  o f those  18 and  had  n o t made use  of i t .  While  of a  over  53 Table 11 Age by age of f i r s t  drink  AGE FIRST ROW  COUNT ROW PCT  TOTAL  COL PCT 1 TOT PCT 1 Never  IRecently1  15+  14 1 or 15  10-13  1  Before 10 1  AGE (YRS) UNDER  14  1  1  15  1  16  1  17 19.3 22.4  1 1  3 3.4  1 1  0 0.0  1 1 1  1 1.1 0.4  1 1  48 54.5  1 1  19 21.6  1 1  1  16.7  1  1.7  1  0.3  1  0.0 0.0  23 13.1 30.3  1 1 1  1  12.1  1  10.0  1  1  0.1  1  4.8  1  1.9  1  0 0.0 0.0  1 1  24 13.7  1 1  95 54.3  1 1  31 17.7  1 1  2.3  1  0.2  1  9.6  1  24.0  1  16.3  1  1  0.0  1  2.4  1  9.5  1  3.1  1  14 6.5 18.4 1.4  1 1 1 1  4 1.9 22.2 0.4  1 1 1 1  3 1.4 4.1 0.3  1 1 1 1  52 24.2 20.8 5.2  1 1 1 1  98 45.6 24.7 9.8  1  44  1  1 1 1  20.5 23.2 4.4  1 1 1  11 4.4  1 1 1 1  2 0.8 11.1 0.2  1 1 1 1  24 9.5 32.4 2.4  1 1 1 1  81 32.1 32.4 8.1  1 1 1 1  93 36.9 23.5 9.3  1 1 1 1  41 16.3 21.6 4.1  1 1 1 1  252 25.1  9 4.7 11.8 0.9  1 1 1  3 1.6 16.7  1 1 1  1 1 1  70 36.5 28.0  1 1 1  47 24.5 11.9  1 1 1  36 18.8 18.9  1 1 1  192 19.1  1  0.3  1  27 14.1 36.5 2.7  1  7.0  1  4.7  1  3.6  1  2 2.4  1 1 1 1  4 4.9 22.2 0.4  1 1 1 1  1  22  1 1 1  26.8 8.8 2.2  1 1 1 1  15 18.3 3.8 1.5  1 1 1 1  19 23.2 10.0 1.0  1 1 1 1  14.5 1.1  17  18+  1  1  2.6 0.2  2 1 1.11 11.1 1  20 24.4 27.0 2.0  COLUMN  76  18  74  250  TOTAL  7.6  1.8  7.4  24.9  CHI SQUARE =  .199.22768 WITH  25 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  396 39.4 SIGNIFICANCE =  88 8.8  175 17.4  215 21.4  82 8.2  190  1004  18.9  100.0  0.0  54  Age o f f i r s t students  drink  by N o r t h / S o u t h  Surrey.  i n N o r t h S u r r e y and 8 3 . 5 % i n S o u t h  t h e y had consumed a l c o h o l  S u r r e y , 37.4%, f e w e r  Surrey  declared  b e t w e e n t h e ages o f 10 and 1 5 .  However, t h e r e i s some r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e regional variation within  83.1% o f  t h e r e may be  t h o s e age r a n g e s .  slight  In the North of  than e x p e c t e d , s t a r t e d consuming  alcohol  b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 10-13 a s o p p o s e d t o t h e S o u t h where more t h a n e x p e c t e d , s t a t e d ages. in  they s t a r t e d d r i n k i n g between  C o n v e r s e l y more 14-15 y e a r o l d s  than expected  44.1%, these  (26.7%)  t h e N o r t h o f S u r r e y , as o p p o s e d t o 20.7%, f e w e r 14-15 y e a r  olds  than expected  i n t h i s age  range.  i n the South  of Surrey, started  drinking  55  Table 12 Age of f i r s t drink by North/South Surrey  AGE FIRST COUNT 1 ROW PCT 1 COL PCT 1 TOT PCT 1 Never  ROW TOTAL Age 1Recently 1  15+  1 14-15  10 1 - 13  Before 1  10  SCHOOL NORTH  SOUTH  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  52 7.4 68.4 5.2  1 1 1 1  8 1.1 44.4 0.8  1 1 1 1  59 8.4 79.7 5.9  1 1 1 1  188 26.7 75.2 18.7  1 1 1 1  264 37.4 66.7 26.3  1  134  1 1 1  19.0 70.5 13.3  24 8.0 31.6 2.4  1 1 1 1  10 1 3.3 1 55.6 1 1.0 1  15 5.0 20.3 1.5  1 1 1 1  62 20.7 24.8 6.2  1 1  132 44.1  1 1  33.3 13.1  1 1 1 1  56 18.7 29.5 5.6  76 7.6  14.40082 WITH  18 1.8  705 70.2  299 29.8  74  250  396  190  1004  7.4  24.9  39.4  18.9  100.0  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE =  0.0133  56  Age be s a i d  by g e n d e r f o r d r u n k  t o d r i n k t o the p o i n t of being  More g i r l s  would  g e t drunk  sooner  than boys.  The g i r l s  to g e t drunk  of  appear  " h i g h " o r drunk.  t o take t h e i r  first  drink  t h a n b o y s and r e d u c e  their  tendancy  20.4% o f 14 y e a r o l d g i r l s  begin to decline.  29.2%.  Sex and age c a n  t o p l a y some p a r t i n d e t e r m i n i n g when a s t u d e n t i s  most l i k e l y  drunk.  or high f e e l i n g .  stated  i n order t o earlier  t h e y had b e e n  peak a t t h e age o f 15 ( 2 7 % ) and t h e r e a f t e r Up t o t h e age o f 14 boys a r e l e s s  on t h e i r  first  o c c a s i o n than g i r l s ,  From t h e age o f 15 t h e r a t e r i s e s  inclined  13.9% vs  from 24.8% t o a peak  2 9 . 2 % a t 16 y e a r s o f age and t h e n b e g i n s t o d e c l i n e .  However, a h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e group  (32.1%) t h a n g i r l s  occasion of their  first  o f boys i n t h e 17 and o v e r age  ( 1 9 . 7 % ) became d r u n k drink.  o r " h i g h " on t h e  57  Table 13 Age by gender for drunk or high feeling  SEX COUNT ROW PCT COL PCT  ROW TOTAL  TOT PCT 1  Male  I Fema1e  1  1  12  18  1 1  66.7 8.8  6.6  1  6 33.3 4.4  1  2.2  1  4.4  1 I I 1  13 31.7 9.5 4.7  1 1 1 1  28 68.3 20.4 10.2  1 1 1 1  34 47.9 24.8 12.4  1 1 1 1  37 52.1 27.0 13.5  AGE (YRS) 13 AND UNDER  1  14  15  41 15.0  1  71 25.9  1  40  1  33  73  16  1 1 1  54.8 29.2 14.6  1 1 1  45.2 24.1 12.0  26.6  17  1 1 1 1  31 59.6 22.6 11.3  I 1 1 1  21 40.4 15.3 7.7  52 19.0  1 1 1  13 68.4 9.5  1 1 1  6 31.6 4.4  19 6.9  1  4.7  1  2.2  18+  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  12.78782  137 50.0 WITH  137  274  50.0  100.0  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0255  58  Age by g e n d e r f o r c u r i o s i t y . and 15 y e a r s c u r i o s i t y differs l i t t l e  Between t h e ages o f 13  as a r e a s o n f o r t a k i n g a f i r s t  between the s e x e s .  Of t h o s e who r e s p o n d e d  4 4 . 3 % o f m a l e s and 4 5 . 1 % o f f e m a l e s s a i d first  m a l e s and 3 5 . 1 % o f f e m a l e s drink  old  first  i n this  from c u r i o s i t y .  s t u d e n t s 31.3% o f females their  they took  contrast.  44.9% o f  age b r a c k e t t o o k  drink  their  I n t h e c a s e o f 16 y e a r o l d  compared w i t h  20.1% o f males  d r i n k o u t o f c u r i o s i t y , whereas  f o r t h e same r e a s o n .  took  2 4 . 8 % o f 17 y e a r  male s t u d e n t s and 1 3 . 8 % o f f e m a l e s t u d e n t s t o o k  first  their  drink out of c u r i o s i t y . The ages 16 and 17 show a marked  first  drink  their  59  Table 14 Age by gender for c u r i o s i t y  SEX COUNT ROW PCT  ROW  COL PCT  TOTAL  TOT PCT  Male  Fema I e  AGE (YRS) 13 AND UNDER  14  15  16  17  18+  COLUMN TOTAL CHI  SQUARE =  11.20106  11 37.9 7.4 3.2  18 62.1 9.2 5.2  29 8.4  26 50.0 17.4 7.6  26 50.0 13.3 7.6  52 15.1  29 39.7 19.5 8.4  44 60.3 22.6 12.8  73 21.2  30 33.0 20.1 8.7  61 67.0 31.3 17.7  91 26.5  37 57.8 24.8 10.8  27 42.2 13.8 7.8  64 18.6  16 45.7 10.7 4.7  19 54.3 9.7 5.5  35 10.2  149 43.3  195 56.7  344 100.0  WITH  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0475  60  Age  by g e n d e r  f o r amount consumed.  The  crosstabulation  on age and s e x by amount c o r r e s p o n d s c l o s e l y w i t h given for taking to  the f i r s t  drink.  Females  show a t e n d e n c y  d r i n k t o t h e p o i n t o f b e i n g d r u n k a t an e a r l i e r age  boys.  than  However, f e w e r o f them do s o f r o m t h e age o f 17 and  1 1 . 7 % o f 13 and 14 y e a r o l d boys as o p p o s e d 14 y e a r o l d g i r l s age  the r e a s o n  up.  t o 2 6 . 1 % o f 13 and  drank t o the p o i n t of being drunk.  For the  r a n g e 17 t o 18+ y e a r s t h e g r o u p i n g s a r e a l m o s t r e v e r s e d .  34.6% o f m a l e s and 1 7 . 1 % o f f e m a l e s d r a n k t o t h e p o i n t o f being  drunk. The  females.  ages 14-16  y e a r s seem t o be t h e most c r i t i c a l  76.7% d r a n k t o t h e p o i n t o f b e i n g d r u n k  78.7% o f m a l e s b e t w e e n of  being  drunk.  15-17  for  whereas  y e a r s o f age d r a n k t o t h e p o i n t  61  Table 15 Age by gender for amount consumed  SEX COUNT ROW PCT COL PCT TOT PCT  ROW TOTAL Male  Fema I e  AGE (YRS) 13 AND UNDER  1 1 1  4 30.8 2.9  1  1.4  1 1 1  14  15  16  17  18+  1 1  13 4.6  6.2 3.2  1 1 1 1 1 1  41 14.5  1  4.3  1 1 1 1  37 45.1 27.2 13.1  45 54.9 30.8 16.0  1 1 1 1  82 29. 1  1 1  36 48.6  38 51.4  1 1  74 26.2  1 1  26.5 12.8  26.0 13.5  1 1  1 1  34 64.2  1 1 1 1 1 1  16.29651  12 1 29.3 8.8 1  9 69.2  29 70.7 19.9 10.3  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  1  19  1  25.0 12.1  35.8 13.0 6.7  1 1 1  13 68.4 9.6 4.6  6 31.6 4.1 2.1  1 I 1 1  136 48.2  146 51.8  WITH  53 18.8  19 6.7  282 100.0  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0060  62  Amount consumed by a g e . d r u n k by age i n d i c a t e s t h e r e  The c r o s s t a b u l a t i o n o f amount i s a general  t o i n c r e a s e w i t h amount as age i n c r e a s e s 69.1%  o f 15 y e a r  o l d s , 7 0 . 3 % o f 16 y e a r  trend  for drinking  up t o t h e age o f 18. o l d s and 7 1 . 7 % o f 17  year  o l d s d r i n k a minimum o f t h r e e d r i n k s and c o n t i n u e  they  become e i t h e r " h i g h " o r d r u n k .  until  63  Table 16 Amount consumed by age  AGE (YRS) 1  ROW  ROW PCT 1 COL PCT 1 13 & TOT PCT 1Under 1  TOTAL  COUNT  14  15  46 27.5 29.7 4.9  36 21.6  16  17  18+  23 13.8  12 7.2  9.9 2.6  12.8 2.5  15.6 1.3  28 16.4 15.6  16  1  171  9.4 20.8  1  18.4  3.0  1.7  AMOUNT 1  1  26 15.6 36.1 2.8  17.6 3.9  24 14.4  1  1 1  167 18.0  15 8.8 20.8 1.6  37  27  48  21.6 23.9 4.0  15.8 13.2 2.9  28.1 19.8 5.2  13 5.8 18.1 1.4  24 10.7 15.5 2.6  47 21.0 23.0 5.1  60 26.8 24.8 6.5  57 25.4 31.7 6.1  23 10.3 29.9 2.5  1 1  224 24. 1  5 5.8 6.9 0.5  7 8.1 4.5 0.8  12 14.0 5.9 1.3  36 41.9 14.9 3.9  19 22. 1 10.6 2.0  7 8.1 9.1 0.8  1 1  86 9.2  13 4.6 18.1 1.4  41 14.5 26.5 4.4  82 29.1 40.2  74 26.2 30.6 8.0  53 18.8 29.4 5.7  19 6.7 24.7 2.0  1 1  282 30.3  COLUMN  72  242  7.7  155 16.7  204  TOTAL  21.9  26.0  ' 180 19.4  8.3  2  CHI  1  1  3-6  1  6+  1  )RUNK  1  SQUARE =  8.8  82.14154 WITH 20 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE =  77  0.0000  930 100.0  64  Age by g e n d e r f o r t h o s e age.  Of s t u d e n t s  who d r i n k w i t h  who d r i n k w i t h  friends their  f r i e n d s t h e i r own age 16  o l d s a r e t h e most l i k e l y  age g r o u p t o d r i n k amongst  (28.1%  15 y e a r  of respondents).  ( 2 1 . 1 % ) a l s o seem more t h e i r own a g e .  inclined  olds  The g r o u p l e a s t l i k e l y  t h e i r own age a r e t h e 13 y e a r w i t h p e o p l e t h e same a g e .  olds  individuals  to drink with  olds with only  year  themselves  ( 2 2 . 9 % ) and 17 y e a r  to drink with  own  students  5.9% d r i n k i n g  65  Table 17 Age by gender for those who drink with friends their own age  SEX COUNT 1 ROW PCT 1 COL PCT 1 TOT PCT  13 AND UNDER  Male  1  14  15  16  17  14  22  1  38.9  61.1  1  5.1 2.3  6.6 3.6  1 1  26 33.3 9.4  52 66.7 15.5  1 1 1  4.2  8.5  1  59 42.1 21.3 9.6  81  1  57.9 24.2 13.2  1 1 1  76 44.2 27.4 12.4  96 55.8 28.7 15.7  1 1 1 1  172 28.1  60 46.5 17.9 9.8  1 1 1 1  129 21.1  69 53.5 24.9 11.3 33 57.9 11.9 5.4  18+  COLUMN TOTAL CHI SQUARE =  ROW TOTAL Fema 1 e 1  12.89521  277 45.3 WITH  1 1 1  1 1  24 1 42. 1 7.2 1 3.9 335 54.7  36 5.9  78 12.7  140 22.9  57 9.3  612 100.0  5 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE  =  0.0244  66  Age by e f f e c t o f a l c o h o l . students  (31.3%) s t a t e d  " l o o s e easy  feeling".  they drank  until  t o the p o i n t o f having a  Of t h o s e s t u d e n t s 63.8% o f them were  i n t h e 14-16 y e a r o l d age r a n g e . reported drinking  The l a r g e s t p r o p o r t i o n o f  21.1% o f s t u d e n t s  t h e y were d r u n k  64.1% o f those r e s p o n d e n t s  also  and i n t h i s i n s t a n c e  were i n t h e 14-16 y e a r o l d g r o u p .  67 Table 18 Age by effect of alcohol  EFFECT COUNT ROW PCT COL PCT 1Loose  ROW TOTAL  Moderate TOT PCT 1& Easy 1 High 1 Drunk  II 1  Passed 1 Out  No Reca11  AGE (YRS) UNDER  14  15  1  1  1  17  18+  1  1  I  0.0 0.0  1  10 1 8.9 1  24 21.4  9 8.0  1 1  15.7 3.3  1 1 1 1  1 1 1  5 1 9.3 1 6.4 1  1  0.7  50 44.6  1 1  22.0 6.9  1 1  12.8 1.4  43 27.6 18.9  1 1 1 1  23 14.7 29.5 3.2  5.9  16  0  1 1  1  3 5.6 3.7 0.4  1  31.5 11.1 2.3  26 48.1 11.5 3.6  54  1  7.4  0.0  3 5.6 2.4 0.4  1  1 1 1  1 1  8 7.1  1 1  11 9.8  1 1  112 15.4  11.1 1.2  1 1  12.9 1.1  1  8.9 1.5  30 19.2 19.6 4.1  16 10.3 19.8 2.2  1 1 1  17 10.9 27.4  1 1  156 21.5  1  2.3  27 17.3 21.8 1 3.7 1  52  1  14  1  44  28.0 22.9 7.2  1 1 1  7.5 17.9 1.9  1 1 1  23.7 28.8 6.1  23 12.4 28.4 3.2  1 1 1 1  19 10.2 30.6 2.6  34 22.8 15.0 4.7  1 1  17 1 11.4 1 21.8 2.3  1 1  23 15.4 28.4 3.2  1 1 1 1  13 8.7 21.0 1.8  1 1  1 1  30 20.1 19.6 4.1  22 32.4 9.7 3.0  1 1 1 1  9 13.2 11.5 1.2  1 1 1 1  8 11.8 5.2 1.1  7 10.3 8.6 1.0  1 1 1 1  5 7.4 8.1 0.7  153 21.1  81  62  124  725  11.2  8.6  17.1  100.0  COLUMN  227  78  TOTAL  31.3  10.8  CHI SQUARE =  17  51.47964 WITH 25 DEGREES OF FREEDOM  SIGNIFICANCE =  1  34  1  186  1  25.7  1 1  18.3 27.4 4.7  32 21.5 25.8 1 4.4  1 1  149 20.6  1 1 1 1  1 1  68 9.4  17 25.0 13.7 2.3  0.0014  68  Summary o f  Findings  93.4%  o f the s t u d e n t s sampled  a t some t i m e d u r i n g  their  lives.  i n S u r r e y have u s e d The g r e a t e r  indicate  they are r e g u l a r d r i n k e r s , that  or twice  a month o r e v e r y weekend.  stated there  alcohol  majority  (62.7%)  i s , they d r i n k  once  1.2% o f t h e s a m p l e ( 1 2 )  t h e y d r a n k e v e r y d a y w h i c h w o u l d mean by i n f e r e n c e , a r e as many a s 120 s t u d e n t s  i n the Surrey School  that  System  who d r i n k e v e r y d a y . Although the l a r g e s t m a j o r i t y  (63.8%) s t a r t e d  b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 10 and 15 y e a r s , experienced a l c o h o l before  one i n f i v e  drinking  ( 1 8 . 8 % ) had  t h e age o f 10.  P a r e n t s and r e l a t i v e s seem t o have t h e s t r o n g e s t e f f e c t on s t u d e n t s ' (39.3%) took t h e i r drink with  first  The l a r g e s t  only  first  drink  t o be l i k e  their  5.1% s a i d f r i e n d s i n f l u e n c e d  drink with  The liquor  friends. them.  may p l a y  peer  influence  7.9% s a i d t h e y  Nevertheless  a greater  d r i n k i n g p r a c t i c e s than students  took  Interestingly  f r i e n d s t h e i r own age and 3 4 . 0 % w i t h  which suggests peer pressure continued  a l c o h o l i c beverages  S t u d e n t s seem t o d i s c o u n t  a reason f o r s t a r t i n g to d r i n k ; only  their  majority  d r i n k because p a r e n t s o f f e r e d , 40.3%  t h e i r p a r e n t s and 4 1 . 7 % o b t a i n  from t h e i r parents. as  drinking habits.  initial  older  60.4% friends  part i n  realize.  most common r e a s o n f o r s t u d e n t s who had consumed  t o s t a r t d r i n k i n g was b e c a u s e t h e y l i k e d  the t a s t e  (61.8%).  B e e r was t h e most commonly d r u n k b e v e r a g e  f o l l o w e d by w i n e  (42.3%) and mixed d r i n k s  (62.9%)  (41.4%).  When t h e y d r a n k most s t u d e n t s (74.0%) d r a n k a t n i g h t . 19.2% d r a n k w i t h meals. the  point of being  consumed b e t w e e n  A high proportion  (27.8%) drank t o  " h i g h " o r d r u n k and a f u r t h e r 2 2 . 1 %  t h r e e and s i x d r i n k s a t a s e s s i o n .  33.4% d r a n k s p a r i n g l y ,  that  i seither  However  one o r two d r i n k s a t a  time. Students would appear t o b e l i e v e a l c o h o l e f f e c t on t h e i r l i v e s . lives  70.4% f e l t  and 9 4 . 7 % d i d n o t s e e a l c o h o l  t h e y had i t under c o n t r o l . their drinking habits considered Age  i t had no e f f e c t on t h e i r as b e i n g a p r o b l e m o r f e l t  When a s k e d how o t h e r s  79.7% c o u l d n ' t s a y o r f e l t  normal d r i n k e r s  Between  e v e r y weekend r i s e s  13-16  i n student  once  o r t w i c e p e r month  f r o m 6 9 . 5 % t o 74.0%.  y e a r s , f e m a l e s ( 7 7 . 7 % ) a r e more l i k e l y  weekend t h a n m a l e s  (58.3%).  t h e y were  t h e ages o f 15 a n d 17 t h e  percentages of students using alcohol or  perceived  f o r t h e i r age.  and s e x w o u l d a p p e a r t o p l a y r o l e s  drinking patterns.  has l i t t l e  I n t h e age r a n g e to drink every  C o n v e r s e l y , more male s t u d e n t s  o v e r t h e ages o f 17 ( 4 1 . 6 % ) d r i n k e v e r y weekend t h a n f e m a l e students  ( 3 2 . 3 % ) o f t h e same a g e .  Of t h e b e v e r a g e s consumed b e e r and h a r d l i q u o r a r e s u b j e c t t o s e x and age v a r i a t i o n s . f e m a l e s a r e more l i k e l y  Up t o t h e age o f 16  t o d r i n k beer  ( 7 9 . 6 % ) and h a r d l i q u o r  70 (80.5%) t h a n m a l e s , age  6 7 . 1 % and 6 2 . 7 % r e s p e c t i v e l y .  o f 17 m a l e s a r e more l i k e l y  liquor  t o d r i n k beer  consumed a l c o h o l underlying  variations  of students s t a r t i n g f o r each  ( 4 8 . 8 % ) and  (45.1%) t h a n i n t h e S e n i o r Secondary  There  between the Secondary  Schools  (26.5%).  may a l s o be some v a r i a t i o n due t o l o c a t i o n .  North S u r r e y fewer s t u d e n t s than expected consuming a l c o h o l  than expected  i n South  26.7% o f  i n N o r t h S u r r e y and 20.7%,  Surrey, started  In  (37.4%) s t a r t e d  b e t w e e n t h e ages o f 10 and 1 3 .  s t u d e n t s , more t h a n e x p e c t e d  age  to drink  s c h o o l type i t  t h a t more s t u d e n t s s t a r t e d d r i n k i n g  o f 10-13 i n t h e J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y  School  ( 8 3 . 2 % ) have  t h a t s h o u l d be n o t e d .  u n d e r t h e age o f 10 a r e v e r y s i m i l a r appear  of students  b e f o r e t h e age o f 14 o r 15 t h e r e a r e  Whereas t h e p e r c e n t a g e s  age  ( 3 3 . 0 % ) and h a r d  ( 3 7 . 4 % ) t h a n f e m a l e s , 2 0 . 3 % and 1 9 . 4 % r e s p e c t i v e l y .  Although the g r e a t e s t percentage  would  From t h e  drinking  fewer  i n t h e 14-15  range. Not  surprisingly  as age i n c r e a s e s s o t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f  non-drinkers decreases.  1 9 . 3 % o f s t u d e n t s 13 y e a r s and u n d e r  had  n o t had a d r i n k compared w i t h 2.4% o f s t u d e n t s 18 y e a r s  and  over. C r o s s t a b u l a t i o n o f s e x and age i n f e r  age  o f 14 y e a r s a r e more l i k e l y  get  " h i g h " o r drunk  17 a r e more l i k e l y (32.1% vs 19.7%).  t h a n boys  that g i r l s  t o take t h e i r  first  up t o t h e drink to  ( 2 9 . 2 % v s 13.9%) and boys  over  t o f o l l o w t h e same p a t t e r n t h a n a r e g i r l s  71  These f i n d i n g s a r e s i m i l a r t o those  relating  who consume a l c o h o l t o t h e p o i n t o f b e i n g 11.7%  to students  "high" or drunk.  o f m a l e s 14 and u n d e r as o p p o s e d t o 2 6 . 1 % o f  consume a l c o h o l t o t h e p o i n t o f b e i n g  females  "high" or drunk.  The  trend  i s a g a i n r e v e a l e d i n t h e 17 and o v e r age g r o u p w i t h  34.6%  o f m a l e s and 17% o f f e m a l e s  being  drunk. Curiosity  took  their  reason  t o the p o i n t of  not o n l y played a major r o l e  first  differences.  drinking  i n why  d r i n k b u t was a l s o s u b j e c t t o age and s e x  Sex and age has l i t t l e  e f f e c t on c u r i o s i t y  b e t w e e n t h e a g e s 13-15 o r 18 and o v e r .  males are l e s s than females  students  likely  t o take t h e i r  first  as a  B u t 16 y e a r o l d  d r i n k from  curiosity  w h i l e t h e r e v e r s e i s t r u e i n t h e 17 y e a r o l d  category. 13 y e a r o l d s t u d e n t s a r e most l i k e l y  t o consume o n l y one  d r i n k when t h e y d r i n k w h e r e a s 15 y e a r o l d s t u d e n t s a r e t h e most l i k e l y  t o d r i n k t o the p o i n t of being e i t h e r  "high" or  drunk. The t y p e o f s c h o o l w o u l d a l s o seem t o p l a y a r o l e l e v e l of drinking.  For example, 37.1% o f J u n i o r Secondary  p u p i l s as o p p o s e d t o 2 2 . 2 % o f S e c o n d a r y S c h o o l 28.7%  i n the  s t u d e n t s and  o f S e n i o r Secondary students d r i n k t o the p o i n t of being  "high" or drunk. B e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 15 and 17 y e a r s likely  to drink with friends  s t u d e n t s a r e more  t h e i r own age ( 7 2 . 1 % ) w i t h 16  year olds  ( 2 8 . 1 % ) b e i n g t h e most l i k e l y  to indulge i n this  practice. Of t h e s t u d e n t s who r e s p o n d e d  t o t h e q u e s t i o n 'What i s  t h e g r e a t e s t e f f e c t y o u have had f r o m a l c o h o l ? ' t h e y had a c h i e v e d a " l o o s e e a s y drunk.  Though d r u n k e n n e s s  to.become d r u n k  (31.5%).  i s l o w e s t among t h e 18 and o v e r age g r o u p  t h e y a r e a l s o t h e g r o u p most l i k e l y they are unable  t o become  ( 4 8 . 1 % a n d 4 4 . 6 % r e s p e c t i v e l y ) and 13 y e a r  s t u d e n t s w e r e a l s o most l i k e l y  (11.8%).  and 2 1 . 1 % have been  13 and 14 y e a r o l d s t u d e n t s were most l i k e l y  " l o o s e and e a s y " old  feeling"  31.3% s a i d  to recall  events  t o d r i n k t o the p o i n t t h a t  d u r i n g the d r i n k i n g  episode  Chapter  5  Discussion I n common w i t h a l l t h e a v a i l a b l e  s t u d i e s the vast  m a j o r i t y o f s t u d e n t s , 9 3 . 4 % , have used a l c o h o l a t some during  their lives.  Storm's  This  i s i n keeping  78.1%.  (1974) n o t e d  (1973) n o t e d  73% i n Toronto  43% i n M o n t r e a l .  C u t l e r and S t o r m  45% o f females use  of i t .  females  alcohol  (1973) f o u n d  t o those o f  86% o f O n t a r i o  once i n t h e i r  lives.  considerable differences  use o f a l c o h o l .  2 5 % o f m a l e s and  had n e v e r u s e d a l c o h o l o r made v e r y  infrequent  T h i s compares w i t h 8 8 . 0 % o f m a l e s and 8 5 . 1 % o f  i n the study  findings of this latter  w h e r e a s C u t l e r and S t o r m  ( 1 9 7 6 ) who e s t i m a t e d  and t h e i r  Smart and  Results are s i m i l a r  had used a l c o h o l a t l e a s t  between the sexes  f i g u r e s are  f o r o t h e r p a r t s o f Canada.  S m a r t , G r a y and B e n n e t t students  (1977) 9 1 . 0 % .  (1978) f i g u r e was o n l y  I t i s perhaps worth n o t i n g t h a t these  g e n e r a l l y h i g h e r than Fejer  w i t h C u t l e r and  (1973) 9 2 . 1 % and K i t c h e n and R o b i n s o n ' s  On t h e o t h e r hand M a c u r d y & H o l l a n d e r ' s  stage  study  and s u g g e s t s a t some  by M a c u r d y and H o l l a n d e r  (1978).  a r e much more c o m p a t i b l e  The  w i t h the  9 3 % o f m a l e s and 9 2 % o f f e m a l e s  have  used  time.  Comparisons r e g a r d i n g f r e q u e n c i e s o f d r i n k i n g episodes are d i f f i c u l t  t o make.  M a c u r d y and H o l l a n d e r  (1978),  Kitchen  and  Robinson  (1977) and  C u t l e r and  f i g u r e s f o r s t u d e n t s who 1 4 . 3 % , 27% and drink several  15.3%  Storm  (1973) a l l g i v e  d r i n k once a week o r more, n a m e l y  respectively.  I n S u r r e y 5.1%  t i m e s a week w i t h a f u r t h e r 30.3%  of  students  drinking  every  weekend. There i s s p e c u l a t i o n t h a t t e e n a g e r s earlier.  K i t c h e n and  s a m p l e had  used  Robinson  alcohol  age  o f 12.  M a c u r d y and  s a m p l e had  used  (1977) f o u n d  by t h e age  b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 12 and  14 had  started  (1973) r e p o r t e d c o n s i d e r a b l y f e w e r  tends  t o support the e a r l i e r  a r e some r e s e r v a t i o n s on  and  u n d e r t o 18 p l u s .  did  any o t h e r g r o u p ;  The  g r e a t e s t d i f f e r e n c e which  nonetheless  first  In c o n t r a s t o n l y 18.3%  and  This  theory although  there  before  support  was  o f 10  16.3%  13  54.5%  24.4%  group  o f them d i d n o t  drinking  o f 13  o f 15 y e a r o l d s  o v e r age  than  t o 23.2%.  the e a r l i e r  group.  45.6%  o f t h e 18 and and  the  group  d r i n k b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 10 and  b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 10-13  study  The  t h e age  b e f o r e t h e age  the range  may  o f 14 y e a r o l d s and  their  their  a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n o f 18 p l u s  a r g u m e n t i s i n t h e 13 t o 15 y e a r age  they took  of  Cutler  t o consume l i q u o r  (23.2%) r e p o r t e d d r i n k i n g  o l d s , 54.3%  70.6%  a t 39.6%.  q u i t e c o n s i s t e n t through Indeed  those  before the -  the p a r t o f the w r i t e r .  of students s t a r t i n g  o f 10 r e m a i n e d  students  drinking  of  drinking  o f 14.  to d r i n k  their  61.6%  H o l l a n d e r (1978) n o t e d  a l c o h o l b e f o r e t h e age  age  91% of  o f 15 and  Storm  percentage  are s t a r t i n g  year  stated 13.  started take  their  75 first may  drink until  suggest  12 and and  t h e y were o v e r 15 y e a r s o f a g e .  t h a t more s t u d e n t s  15 have t a k e n t h e i r  first  d r i n k b e t w e e n t h e age  teenage  drinking.  39.3%  t o the  p l a y an i m p o r t a n t r o l e of s t u d e n t s took  of  10  over.  f i n d i n g s of t h i s study l e n d credence  that parents or r e l a t i v e s  one  i n S u r r e y b e t w e e n t h e ages o f  13 t h a n d i d t h o s e s t u d e n t s 16 y e a r s and The  Thus,  their  argument  in  promoting  first  drink  b e c a u s e p a r e n t s o f f e r e d , 41.7%  obtain their alcohol  parents or r e l a t i v e s  of s t u d e n t s say they d r i n k w i t h  their parents. and  Robinson  and  40.3%  These f i g u r e s a r e most c o n s i s t e n t w i t h K i t c h e n  (1977) who  found  44.6%  obtained alcohol  t h e i r p a r e n t s a l t h o u g h they are l o w e r  than Macurdy  Hollander  (1973) who  56.1%  from  (1978) and  C u t l e r and  Storm  r e s p e c t i v e l y of s t u d e n t s drank w i t h p a r e n t s  from and  said  63%  and  or  r e l a t i ves . The  m a j o r i t y of students  took a l c o h o l w i t h t h e i r afternoon. night.  In part  and  food.  0.9%  drank  T h i s combined t o t a l  s t u d e n t s who to-day  0.6%  (74%) d r a n k 15.3%  a t n i g h t and  started  19.2%  t o d r i n k i n the  i n the morning o r d u r i n g the  o f 1.5%  suggests  s a y t h e y d r i n k e i t h e r e v e r y day  t h a t t h e 1.2%  of  o r have d r u n k  i s reasonably accurate. the o p i n i o n of t h i s w r i t e r ,  i n our l i v e s .  It is difficult  popular p u b l i c a t i o n without encouraging m u l t i t u d e of  t h e use  finding  of a l c o h o l  reasons.  a d v e r t i s i n g p l a y s a major t o t u r n t h e pages o f at l e a s t  one  any  advertisement  i n some shape o r f o r m and  for a  76 It  should not therefore  role  be s u p r i s i n g  that c u r i o s i t y plays  i n why s t u d e n t s t a k e t h e i r f i r s t  drinks.  a  34% o f t h e  Surrey students took t h e i r f i r s t  drink  C u t l e r and S t o r m  32% o f t h e i r sample gave  the  same  (1973) r e p o r t e d  f o r this  reason.  S t u d e n t s w o u l d a p p e a r t o have d i f f e r e n t regarding  the r o l e peer pressure plays  patterns.  Only 10.6% o f r e s p o n d e n t s s t a t e d  e n c e d them.  compares f a v o u r a b l y  C u t l e r and S t o r m  their  first  contrast and  This  drink  they s t a r t d r i n k i n g  and  that  49.2% s t a t e d  perhaps, therefore,  they obtained  and R o b i n s o n  (1977)  first  their  student drinking  alcohol  on s t u d e n t s .  pat-  from t h e i r f r i e n d s  the s u b t l e t i e s  Iti s that  Few i n d i v i d u a l s a r e influence  In t h i s s t u d y 46.7% o f s t u d e n t s f e l t  no p r o b l e m a t a l l .  t h e i r behaviour.  they could  t h e i r d r i n k i n g and impose s e l f d e t e r m i n e d alcohol  took  i sin  f r i e n d s t h e i r own a g e .  t o c o n c e d e t h a t o t h e r s may  considered  This  o r t o be l i k e  unwise t o d i s r e g a r d  p e e r p r e s s u r e may p l a c e  found  they took t h e i r  influence  60.4% s a i d they drank w i t h  willing  the f i g u r e  (1964).  e i t h e r because a f r i e n d o f f e r e d  f r i e n d s , f r i e n d s undoubtably  influ-  7.9% s a i d t h e y  by K i t c h e n  R e g a r d l e s s o f how few c l a i m  terns.  friends  because f r i e n d s o f f e r e d .  t h e 20% by Maddox and M c C o l l  drink  with  (197 3) n a m e l y 7.3%.  t o t h e 22.3% r e p o r t e d  perceptions  on t h e i r d r i n k i n g  b e c a u s e o f p e e r p r e s s u r e and 5.1% c o n s i d e r e d  by  reason.  control  limits  Society  and 4 8 . 0 %  as a w h o l e ,  not  j u s t i m m e d i a t e p e e r s , must b e a r some o f t h e  f o r teenage  drinking.  questionnaire British  1005  Columbia  them as normal forced  t h e 1013  hazards  s t u d e n t s who  were u n d e r t h e l e g a l  and  y e t 79.7%  d r i n k e r s f o r t h e i r age.  of a l c o h o l .  or even endorse surprising  drinking  One  liked  Maddox and drank  McColl  f o r t h e same Perhaps  w i t h 62.9%  the consumption  that teenagers  fail  of alcohol  ( 1 9 6 4 ) who  liquor  substitute.  6.7%  drank  d i d so because  they  found  by  sample  reason.  M a c u r d y and  51.4%.  i t i s not  habits.  r e p o r t e d 50% o f t h e i r  not s u r p r i s i n g l y  drank  teenage  to c o n s i d e r peer  T h i s i s h i g h e r than the f i g u r e s  o f t h o s e who  s t u d e n t s who  see  I f a d u l t s tend t o d i s r e g a r d the  beer  b e e r was  drank  4 2 . 3 % , m i x e d d r i n k s a t 41.4% comparison  in  i n g e n e r a l condones  o f t h e S u r r e y s a m p l e who  the t a s t e .  age  this  is therefore  p r e s s u r e as a m a j o r i n f l u e n c e on t h e i r . d r i n k i n g 61.8%  completed  apparently believe others  to speculate that society  consumption  unduly  Of  responsibility  t h e most p o p u l a r d r i n k  u s i n g i t f o l l o w e d by w i n e and  Hollander to equal  hard l i q u o r (1978) f o u n d  a t 29.2%.  5 3 . 2 % , w i n e 50.5%  this  In  t h e number o f  o f t h e S u r r e y sample s t a t e d  Several indicated  at  and  hard  t h e y used  s u b s t i t u t e was  pot whereas  o t h e r s d i d not e l a b o r a t e . The  available literature  suggests  a disturbingly  high  p r o p o r t i o n o f s t u d e n t s d r i n k t o the p o i n t t h e y c o n c e i v e being  intoxicated.  M a c u r d y and H o l l a n d e r  a  (1978) f o u n d  as at  78 least  50%  i n the  had  b e e n d r u n k o n c e , and  s i x months p r e c e d i n g  (1973) r e p o r t e d 53.4%  had  i n the  the  opinion  of  you?"  8.0%  passed out, leading  up  and  when one  12.2%  their  considers  enough t o d r i n k  feel  had  only  o r d i d not 3.4%  2.6%  good t i m e .  26.3%  2.8% and  considered 9.5%  that  27.8%  point  the  given  the  e f f e c t on  had  passed out  interfered with  have b e e n i n t r o u b l e  a t home.  8.2%  have  statistic  legally  fact  old  that  their lives. 41,3%  70.4%  of become  d r i n k i n g and their  been p r e v e n t e d  have been i l l , alcohol  had  Columbia.  their lives,  interfered with  had  events  alarming  t o the  events p r i o r to t h e i r  t h e y had  has  s a i d they  sample are  of B r i t i s h  little  had  been  effect alcohol 6.1%  of  of  e i t h e r been d r u n k , p a s s e d o u t ,  said alcohol  someone and  serious  t h e y had  f o r l i q u o r , an  no e f f e c t on  recall  as  data  I n s h o r t , a t l e a s t 41.4%  province  has  considered  r e c o l l e c t i o n of  capacity  s t u d e n t s s a i d t h e y had ill  no  must a l s o be  had  present  quite  t o the  been i l l ,  condition.  alcohol  been d r u n k ,  The  i s not  greatest  t h e y had  i n the  s a i d l i q u o r has  15.1%  only e i g h t of  Consideration students  passed out.  times  Storm  this writer, i t is disturbing.  "what i s the  to t h e i r  over-indulged  C u t l e r and  t h e y consume a l c o h o l  stated  s e v e n o r more  t h e i r s a m p l e had  32.1%  drunk although only  d r u n k when a s k e d on  and  of  study.  s i t u a t i o n i n Surrey  respondents stated getting  54.7%  become i l l  suggests that but  that  the  20.7%  yet  t a l k i n g to  from having  o r had  no  recall,  t h e i r school of the  a  work  students  79 have been i n a f i g h t , d e s t r o y e d p r o p e r t y had an a c c i d e n t , i n j u r y , been a r r e s t e d o r p u n i s h e d a t s c h o o l because drinking.  P u t a n o t h e r way we c o u l d e x p e c t t o f i n d  800  S u r r e y s t u d e n t s have s u f f e r e d s e r i o u s  the  influence  about  of a l c o h o l .  their drinking,  and  that  consequences  2.8% o f r e s p o n d e n t s e i t h e r  thought  due t o f e l t bad  t o d r i n k d i d so  t h e y were s a d o r l o n e l y and 5.4% d r a n k a l o n e .  McColl  (1964)  found  nearly  t h e y needed h e l p o r have had  h e l p a l t h o u g h 3.5% o f t h o s e who s t a r t e d because  of  Maddox  8% o f t h e i r s a m p l e d r a n k when t h e y  w e r e unhappy. It of  i s possible  alcohol  Teenagers way.  t h a t a d u l t s become a l a r m e d  on t h e o t h e r hand do n o t a p p e a r  control  to feel  t h e same  48.0% o f s t u d e n t s c o n s i d e r e d  p r e s e n t e d no p r o b l e m  t h e y had i t u n d e r 94.7%.  t h e use  among t e e n a g e r s w i t h h i n d s i g h t and m a t u r i t y .  As p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d  alcohol  about  t o them and a f u r t h e r 4 6 . 7 % f e l t  giving  a combined p e r c e n t a g e o f  By t h e same t o k e n 7 9 . 7 % o f r e s p o n d e n t s e i t h e r c o u l d n ' t  say o r f e l t  o t h e r s r e g a r d e d t h e i r d r i n k i n g p a t t e r n s as  normal. Conclusions One i s f o r c e d towards  alcohol  t o c o n s i d e r young p e o p l e ' s  inlight  o f a number o f f a c t o r s .  b o t h F e d e r a l and P r o v i n c i a l of  revenue  bring  I n Canada  governments r a i s e l a r g e  from the s a l e o f a l c o h o l , a p o l i c y which  i n t o q u e s t i o n the current a n t i - d r i n k i n g  sponsored  attitude  by t h e g o v e r n m e n t o f B r i t i s h  amounts must  campaign being  Columbia.  80  Can  an o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t c o n t r o l s and p r o m o t e s a l l l i q u o r  outlets  i n a province  be e x p e c t e d t o p u r s u e a w h o l e - h e a r t e d  c a m p a i g n a b o u t t h e e f f e c t s o f a l c o h o l on i t s c o n s u m e r s ? M a n u f a c t u r e r s and a d v e r t i s e r s must a l s o responsibility  accept  f o r t h e i r more o v e r t a d v e r t i s i n g c a m p a i g n s  w h i c h may be i n p a r t r e s p o n s i b l e teenage d r i n k e r s .  Although  f o r t h e g r o w i n g number o f  favourable  life  style advertising  o f a l c o h o l i s c u r r e n t l y banned f r o m o u r T.V. s c r e e n s  many  alcohol  manufacturers c u r r e n t l y endorse high p r o f i l e  sports.  As l o n g  as o u r y o u t h a r e e n c o u r a g e d t o a s s o c i a t e s p o r t s and  physical  f i t n e s s w i t h t h e c o n s u m p t i o n o f a l c o h o l t h e n we a r e  unlikely  t o b r e a k what seems t o be a g r o w i n g  S o c i e t y t o o must be p r e p a r e d Alcohol  production,  distribution,  multi-million dollar  business  t o make some  those  concession.  p r o m o t i o n and r e t a i l i n g  i n this province  major r e d u c t i o n i n the d r i n k i n g p a t t e r n s r e s i d e n t s would a f f e c t  trend.  alone.  of B r i t i s h  Any  Columbia  the p r o s p e r i t y of t h i s province.  whose j o b s seem t h r e a t e n e d  give  t h e i r support  isa  Will  to a drive  t o r e d u c e a l c o h o l c o n s u m p t i o n e v e n i f s u c h a c a m p a i g n was designed  only  to influence  teenagers?  I t seems we must make a s t a r t w i t h p a r e n t s Several  principals  commented t h a t p a r e n t s  and s t u d e n t s .  expressed  relief  t h a t t h e i r s o n s o r d a u g h t e r s o n l y used a l c o h o l and n o t d r u g s , this despite alcohol  the f a c t t h a t the medical  t o be a d r u g .  profession  considers  I t i s t h e r e f o r e e s s e n t i a l t h a t the  81 general  p u b l i c be made aware t h a t a l c o h o l i s a d r u g and  as  such i s h i g h l y a d d i c t i v e . S c h o o l s do  teach  some o f t h e  The  w r i t e r ' s own  school  the  t o p i c of  classes  and  not  e v e r we  the  has  are  to educate students  doing  a l c o h o l has  on  us  as  a t t e m p t t o d e m o n s t r a t e how t h e p o s i t i v e and,  by  Province  overnight  once r e a c h i n g  d r i n k i n g age  and  wine w i t h d i n n e r . intoxicated  do  He  aspects  the  presumably accentuating  negative  1980.  not  He  given  o r two  one  reported  Dr.  Bill  i n Glasgow,  l e a r n to  birthday,  Kingdom.  of  drink  the  recommended glasses  The  a u t h o r i s not  of d i l u t e d  but  i f we  are  to continue  must, then i n f o r m a t i o n  p e o p l e d r i n k must be  become  been e d u c a t e d ,  suggesting  that  in  'drinking  to l i v e on  legal  that  a l s o a r g u e d t h a t y o u n g s t e r s who  i t seems we  o f why  done by  centre  their eighteenth  o v e r be  taught i n schools  a l c o h o l as  be  that teenagers could  so b e c a u s e t h e y have n o t  "safe d r i n k i n g " . be  a l c o h o l study  i n the U n i t e d  c h i l d r e n o f 12  about the e f f e c t s  As e d u c a t o r s we  should  not  their  A c o n t r o v e r s i a l r e p o r t was  S a u n d e r s , d i r e c t o r o f an observed  C l e a r l y what-  i n d i c a t e d on  n e w s p a p e r on November 19,  Scotland,  alcohol  about a l c o h o l i s  i m p l i c a t i o n , denying  p a r t i c u l a r concept. the  this  However,  as d r u g s and  too n e g a t i v e  individuals.  subject.  'drugs'.  P e r h a p s , as some s t u d e n t s a d u l t s are  of a l c o h o l misuse.  the  i s categorized  s i n g l e notation of  questionnaires,  in  c l a s s e s on  under the  sufficient.  any  aspects  with  the p o s i t i v e  d e m o n s t r a t e d w i t h as much  82  c a n d o u r as t h e n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s . adults  i n the h y p o c r i t i c a l  position  many o f them c l e a r l y e n j o y . reasonable  and  lucid  better position  At p r e s e n t  teenagers  of condemning  see  something  I f t h e y were more a b l e t o p r o v i d e  i n f o r m a t i o n teenagers  t o judge f o r themselves  w o u l d be  in a  some o f the  inherent  dangers of a l c o h o l consumption. W e a k n e s s e s t o be In truly  an  considered  i d e a l questionnaire survey  random.  In t h i s  e n t s were m i n o r s s u c h initial only  s a m p l e was  those  permitted  i n s t a n c e s i n c e n e a r l y a l l the a p a t t e r n was  not p o s s i b l e .  randomly s e l e c t e d i t should  s t u d e n t s who  were g u a r a n t e e d  r e s e a r c h e r and  t h i s was  of the s u r v e y .  noted  the that  s l i p s were  administrators. collected  t o t a l a n o n y m i t y by  honoured throughout  the r e s e a r c h e r from h i r i n g  For p r a c t i c a l  reasons  the r e s e a r c h e r s t r e s s e d t h a t they should d e n t i a l i t y of student  responses.  t h e same day  and  number o f s c h o o l s  a t t h e same t i m e . i n v o l v e d and  not p o s s i b l e .  time  anonymous  consurvey  administered  i t should  be  r e s p e c t the  Similarly,  c o n d i t i o n s , a l l questionnaires should  and  teachers  the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , a l t h o u g h  the  the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  However, f i n a n c i a l l i m i t a t i o n s  s t r a i n t s prevented  t h i s was  respond-  While  be  r e t u r n e d the p e r m i s s i o n  be  t o complete the q u e s t i o n n a i r e .  Students  and  the sample s h o u l d  under  noted  confi-  ideal  have been c o m p l e t e d  Again  due  t o the  t h e i r d i f f e r i n g time  large tables  on  83 The  survey  satisfactorily considered  instrument although  i n the event  1. Q u e s t i o n  itself  seems t o have p e r f o r m e d  some m i n o r m o d i f i c a t i o n s s h o u l d be t h a t i t i s used  D 'What do y o u d r i n k  again: the l a s t  1  response i s  'have a s u b s t i t u t e f o r a l c o h o l ' .  This  i s t o o vague and g i v e s  no  is.  The s u r v e y  i n d i c a t i o n what t h e s u b s t i t u t e  b e n e f i t from s t u d e n t s 2. Q u e s t i o n from a l a s t students their  inserted  naming t h e s u b s t i t u t e .  E 'How do y o u g e t y o u r  response  would  stating  d r i n k s ' would b e n e f i t  'other, please  they bought l i q u o r  state .  Ten  1  from " b o o t l e g g e r s " i n  schools. 3. Q u e s t i o n  "recently" benefit  F.  i s almost  In a survey  of this  s i z e the response  redundant.  The q u e s t i o n w o u l d a l s o  f r o m s t a t i n g e a c h age r a t h e r t h a n g r o u p i n g  ages 1 0 - 1 3 ,  14 o r 15 and 15+. 4. Q u e s t i o n responses  I 'How much do s t u d e n t s  available  drink?'  The  do n o t g i v e an a c c u r a t e p i c t u r e o f amounts  consumed e.g. how much i s one d r i n k ?  Nevertheless  since  i n d i v i d u a l p e r c e p t i o n s and q u a n t i t i e s v a r y c o n s i d e r a b l e is  this  not c o n s i d e r e d a major problem. 5. Q u e s t i o n  response  K.  T h i s q u e s t i o n would b e n e f i t from a  o f 'none o r no e f f e c t ' .  t o respond  28.4% o f t h e s a m p l e  t o t h i s q u e s t i o n and t h e r e f o r e p r e s u m a b l y  c o n s i d e r e d a l c o h o l had n o t a f f e c t e d them i n any way.  first  failed  84 One to  group of students  their 1.  attached  the  following criticisms  questionnaires: The  questionnaire  assumes most s t u d e n t s  drink  and  drink heavily. 2.  The  students  questionnaire  t o be  a p p e a r s t o be p e r s u a s i v e  for  alcoholics.  3.  T h e r e i s no m e n t i o n o f m i x i n g  4.  The  questionnaire  5.  The  q u e s t i o n n a i r e makes you  a l c o h o l and  assumes d r i n k i n g i s  drugs.  negative.  think parents  influence  students' drinking. 6.  The  last  7.  The  questionnaire  alcohol. students The the  use  three questions  There should  fails  to d e a l w i t h a t t i t u d e s towards  be  In t h i s  check three q u e s t i o n s .  questionnaire  i n t e r p r e t e d as b e i n g instance  Similarly  non-drinkers  any  Finally  if  not  only  which  equally used  Allowing  be as  open  w o u l d have made t a b u l a t i o n  difficult,  impossible.  Possibilities The  on  need  t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was  a means o f c o l l e c t i n g q u a n t i f i a b l e d a t a . responses from students  allow  persuasive  questionnaire  e m p h a s i z e d d r i n k i n g as a p o s i t i v e f a c t o r c o u l d open t o c r i t i c i s m .  to  comments.  w o u l d a r g u e t h a t any  of a l c o h o l could  towards d r i n k i n g .  'sad'.  have been more open q u e s t i o n s  t o make i n d i v i d u a l researcher  are  study  For Future has  Research  attempted to f u r t h e r increase  the  infor-  85 m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e on little  teenage d r i n k i n g h a b i t s . C u r r e n t l y  information exists  t o make any  the d r i n k i n g h a b i t s of B r i t i s h F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h n e e d s t o be Mainland  of B r i t i s h  possibly  across  as  Columbian or Canadian  c o n d u c t e d n o t o n l y on  Columbia but  Canada.  firm prognosis  too to  students.  the  Lower  t h r o u g h o u t the p r o v i n c e  Such s u r v e y s  w o u l d be  in a  and  position  t o c o n s i d e r demographic v a r i a t i o n s between p r o v i n c e s ,  cities  and  consider  r u r a l areas.  Future  h i g h , medium and families.  low  r e s e a r c h e r s may  a l s o want t o  income f a m i l i e s and  There a l s o e x i s t s  one  the p o s s i b i l i t y  o r two  parent  of a d m i n i s t e r i n g  a s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o the p a r e n t s , p a r e n t  or guardians  those  research  students  who  agree to take p a r t  in later  e s t a b l i s h i n g p o s s i b l e c o r r e l a t i o n s between s t u d e n t s  of  and  and  paternal drinking habits. Studies some way  investigating  t o p r o v i d i n g more d a t a  moment i s s u r p r i s i n g l y In the  final  s h o r t of  has  informative  and  to  t h i s paper  argue to  i n the l i f e s t y l e of  From t h e s e  aware o f t h e p o s s i b l e s h o r t and  p h y s i c a l e f f e c t s of a l c o h o l  use.  go  the  i s prepared  been f u r n i s h e d by  students.  would  statistics.  i t i s p e r h a p s a d v i s a b l e t o make s t u d e n t s  c u l a r l y parents social  i n an a r e a w h i c h a t  t h a t a l c o h o l p l a y s a major r o l e  very h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of our alone  o f the above q u e s t i o n s  a n a l y s i s the r e s e a r c h e r  that s u f f i c i e n t evidence conclude  any  and  figures parti-  long  term  a  86 References  C u t l e r , R. and S t o r m , cities:  T.  Drinking practices  Student survey.  Vancouver,  i n t h r e e B.C.  Alcoholism Foundation  o f B.C., 1973. H e a l t h and W e l f a r e C a n a d a .  A l c o h o l problems  summary o f c u r r e n t k n o w l e d g e .  Research  i n Canada:  A  B u r e a u , Non-  M e d i c a l Use o f D r u g s D i r e c t o r a t e , H e a l t h  Protection  B r a n c h , 1976. J e s s e r , R.,  B o u t o u r l i n e - Y o u n g , H., Y o u n g , E.B., and T e s i ,  P e r c e i v e d o p p o r t u n i t y , a l i e n a t i o n and d r i n k i n g among I t a l i a n and A m e r i c a n and  behaviour  Journal of Personality  S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1 9 7 0 , 1 5 , 215-222.  J e s s e r , R. and J e s s e r , S.L. onset of d r i n k i n g . 36,  youth.  G.  A d o l e s c e n t d e v e l o p m e n t and t h e  J o u r n a l o f S t u d i e s on A l c o h o l , 1 9 7 6 ,  27-51.  K i t c h e n , B. and R o b i n s o n , Youth.  Vancouver,  P.  A l c o h o l Use by N o r t h  U n i t e d Way o f G r e a t e r  Vancouver  Vancouver,  1977. M a c u r d y , J . and H o l l a n d e r , S. Vancouver  Secondary  A l c o h o l and d r u g u s e among  S c h o o l s t u d e n t s , 1970-1974-1978.  M i n i s t r y o f H e a l t h , A l c o h o l a n d Drug C o m m i s s i o n , B.C., 1978. Maddox, G.L. and M c C o l l , B.C. Brunswick,  D r i n k i n g among t e e n a g e r s .  R u t g e r s C e n t r e o f A l c o h o l s t u d i e s , 1964.  M a y e r , J . E . and F i l s t e a d , W.  Adolescence  Cambridge, M a s s a c h u s e t t s , 1980.  and a l c o h o l .  New  87 M i n i s t r y of Health, Alcohol  and  Drug Commission.  drug s t a t i s t i c s f o r Canada and B.C.;  Alcohol  1955-1976.  and  Canada,  1976. Smart, R.G.  and  F e j e r , A.  Trends i n drug use among  M e t r o p o l i t a n Toronto high school A d d i c t i o n Research Foundation, Smart, R.G.  The  Foundation, Smart, R.G., and  new  students.  Toronto,  1974.  d r i n k e r s . Toronto, A d d i c t i o n Research  1976.  Gray, G.  and Bennett, C.  P r e d i c t o r s of d r i n k i n g  s i g n s of heavy d r i n k i n g among high school  Toronto, A d d i c t i o n Research Foundation, Smart, R.G.  and  Gray, G.  Parental  and  1976.  peer i n f l u e n c e s as  c o r r e l a t e s of problem d r i n k i n g among high students. Smart, R.G. school  and  B l a i r , N.  Test-retest r e l i a b i l i t y  questionnaire.  Research Foundation,  Province,  correlates.  A l c h o h o l , 1973,  34,  of a high  Toronto, A d d i c t i o n  " S t a r t them e a r l y - on  November 19,  Wechsler, H. and Thorn, D. social  1977.  1977.  International.  bottle."  school  Toronto, A d d i c t i o n Research Foundation,  drug use  United Press  students.  1980,  p.  the  A8.  Teenage d r i n k i n g , drug use  Q u a r t e r l y Journal 1220-1227.  of Studies  and on  Appendix  1  S u r v e y o f Teenage D r i n k i n g  There would  appear  t o be a g r o w i n g c o n c e r n i n s o c i e t y  t h a t t e e n a g e r s are consuming frequently  and  Patterns  more a l c o h o l i c  a t an e a r l i e r age  b e v e r a g e s , more  t h a n have o t h e r g e n e r a t i o n s .  This survey i s p a r t of a r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t being conducted the  U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  h a v e been s e l e c t e d obtain  Columbia.  Surrey secondary schools  f o r t h i s s u r v e y w h i c h has been d e s i g n e d t o  i n f o r m a t i o n about teenage  f r e q u e n c y , amount and  drinking  t i m e o f day a l c o h o l  S t u d e n t s have been s e l e c t e d  randomly  habits  (e.g. age,  i s used.) t o answer t h i s  q u e s t i o n n a i r e w h i c h s h o u l d t a k e no more t h a n 10-15 complete.  In o r d e r t o g u a r a n t e e  n o t w r i t e y o u r name. the  the anonymity  Mark o n l y y o u r age and  a n s w e r ( s ) t o e a c h q u e s t i o n and c h e c k  provided.  A l l students are free  r e f u s e t o a n s w e r any If  at  short  minutes  to  o f s t u d e n t s do  sex, then  (v) the  select  box(es)  t o w i t h d r a w a t any  time or t o  questions.  the q u e s t i o n n a i r e  consent to p a r t i c i p a t e  in this  pleted questionnaries w i l l Thank y o u f o r y o u r  i s completed  i t will  be assumed  s u r v e y has been g i v e n .  t h e n be c o l l e c t e d  cooperation.  that  Com-  by t h e t e a c h e r .  S u r v e y o f Teenage D r i n k i n g  Age  years  Sex  Male  A. How 25 67 222 328 307 52 12 (1013)  often  9 67 49 114 213 402 147 12 (1013)  do you  [ 2 . 5%] [ 6 . 6%] [ 2 1 . 9%] [ 3 2 . 4%] [ 3 0 . 3%] [ 5 . 1%] [ 1 . 2%]  . When d i d  C.  Patterns  35 (1013)  y o u have y o u r l a s t  [ o . 9%] [ 6 . 6%] [ 4 . 8%] [ 1 1 . 3%] [ 2 1 . 0%] [ 3 9 . 7%] [ 1 4 . 5%] [ 1 . 2%]  [ 1 1 . 2%] [ 6 1 . 8%] [ 1 0 . 6%] [ 3 . 3%] [ 9 . 6%] [  drink?  no a n s w e r never once o r t w i c e a y e a r once o r t w i c e a month e v e r y weekend s e v e r a l t i m e s a week e v e r y day  3 . 5%]  to drink  because:  (option  of  ago  multiple  no a n s w e r I l i k e the t a s t e t o be l i k e my f r i e n d s t o f e e l l i k e an a d u l t I feel nervous, tense, f u l l of worries problems I feel sad, l o n e l y , sorry f o r myself  D. What do y o u d r i n k ? 429 637 419 296 68 (1849 )  drink?  no answer never drank not f o r o v e r a y e a r b e t w e e n s i x months and one y e a r s e v e r a l weeks ago l a s t week yesterday today  I usually start responses.) 115 626 107 33 97  Femal e  (option of m u l t i p l e  wine beer mixed d r i n k s hard l i q u o r [ 6 . 7 % ] have a s u b s t i t u t e  responses.)  [42.3%] [62.9%] [41.4%] [29.2%]  for alcohol  or  Ro -  E.  How do you g e t 422 150 125 498 85  [41.7%] [14.8%] [12.3%] [49.2%] [ 8.4%]  2  your d r i n k s ?  -  (option  of  multiple  response)  s u p e r v i s e d by p a r e n t s o r r e l a t i v e s from b r o t h e r s or s i s t e r s f r o m home w i t h o u t p a r e n t s ' knowledge from f r i e n d s buy i t w i t h f a l s e identification  (1280)  When d i d 9 76 18 74 250 396 190 (1013)  G.  you  [ o .9 % ] [ 7.5%] [ 1 .8%] [ 7.3%] [ 2 4 . 7%] [ 3 9 . 1%] [ 1 8 . 8%]  take  your  first  drink?  no answer never recentl y a f t e r age 1 5 a t ages 1 4 o r 1 5 between ages 1 0 - 1 3 b e f o r e age 1 0  What time o f the day do you u s u a l l y d r i n k ? multiple response) 195 750 155 6 9  (option  [ 1 9 . 2 % ] w i t h meals [ 7 4 . 0 % ] at night [15.3%] afternoons [ 0 . 6 % ] m o s t l y i n the m o r n i n g o r when I [ 0 . 9 % ] I o f t e n g e t up d u r i n g the n i g h t  of  f i r s t wake and d r i n k  (1115)  H.  Why d i d you t a k e y o u r response) 344 398 80 16 274  [34.0%] [39.3%] [ 7.9%] [ 1.6%] [27.0%]  first  drink?  (option  curiosity parents or r e l a t i v e s o f f e r e d f r i e n d s e n c o u r a g e d me t o f e e l more l i k e an a d u l t t o get drunk or " h i g h "  (1112)  I.  How much do you d r i n k when you do d r i n k ? 82 167 171 224 86 282 (1012)  [ 8.1%] [16.5%] [16.9%] [22.1%] [ 8.5%] [27.8%]  no answer one d r i n k two d r i n k s 3-6 d r i n k s 6 o r more d r i n k s u n t i l I get " h i g h " or  drunk  of  multiple  up  J . Who  do you  408 148 612 344 55 (1567)  d r i n k with?  [40.3%] [14.6%] [60.4%] [34.0%] [ 5.4%]  (option of m u l t i p l e  parents or r e l a t i v e s with brothers or s i s t e r s with f r i e n d s own age with o l d e r f r i e n d s alone  K. What i s the g r e a t e s t e f f e c t you 288 227 78 153 81 62 124  [28.4%] [22.4%] [ 7.7%] [15.1%] [ 8.0%] [ 6.1%] [12.2ft]  (1063)  have had  no answer l o o s e easy f e e l i n g moderate "high" drunk became i l l passed out was d r i n k i n g h e a v i l y and r e c a l l what happened  from  the  L. What are the g r e a t e s t e f f e c t s d r i n k i n g has l i f e , (option of m u l t i p l e response) 26 713 34 26 28 6 96 40 44  [ 2.5%] [70. 4%] [ 3.4%] [ 2.6%] [ 2.8%] [ o . 6%] [ 9.5%] [ 3.9%] [ 4.3%]  (1013) M.  How 486 473 52 22 6 1  (1040)  do you  response)  alcohol?  next day  had  didn't  on your  no answer none, no e f f e c t has i n t e r f e r e d with t a l k i n g to someone has prevented me from having a good time has i n t e r f e r e d with my school work have l o s t f r i e n d s because of d r i n k i n g has got me i n t o trouble at home was i n a f i g h t or destroyed peoperty has r e s u l t e d i n an a c c i d e n t , an i n j u r y , a r r e s t or being punished at school f o r d r i n k i n g  feel  about your  drinking?  [48 .'0ft] no problem at a l l [46 . 7ft] I can c o n t r o l i t and set l i m i t s on myself [ 5 .1%] I can c o n t r o l myself but by f r i e n d s i n f l u e n c e me [ 2.1%] I o f t e n f e e l bad about my d r i n k i n g [ o . 6%] I need help to c o n t r o l myself [ o .1%] I have had p r o f e s s i o n a l help to c o n t r o l my drinking  N. How do o t h e r s s e e y o u ? 170 8 07 14 19 1 2 (843)  Reprinted copyright  (option of multiple  response)  [17.7%] no answer [79.7%] c a n ' t s a y o r a n o r m a l d r i n k e r f o r my age [ 1.4%] when I d r i n k I t e n d t o n e g l e c t my f a m i l y o r friends [ 1.9%] my f a m i l y o r f r i e n d s a d v i s e me t o c u t down o r c o n t r o l my d r i n k i n g [ 0.1%] my f r i e n d s o r f a m i l y t e l l me t o g e t h e l p f o r my d r i n k i n g [ 0.2%] my f a m i l y o r f r i e n d s have a l r e a d y a r r a n g e d h e l p f o r my d r i n k i n g  by p e r m i s s i o n o f J . E . Mayer and W. 1980.  Filstead,  qs  Appendix 2 L e t t e r to S e n i o r Secondary Dear-  Principals  - - - - - - I am  currently enrolled  Columbia i n a Master  a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f  o f A r t s p r o g r a m and  approached the D i s t r i c t S u p e r i n t e n d a n t , request  to conduct a research study  degree  requirements.  The  purpose of t h i s study  the d r i n k i n g h a b i t s of our a p p e a r t o be  a growing  e a r l i e r age  will  amount and  the  f o c u s on  contacted in  this  I am  the  why  survey  now  writing  individual find  t h e age  t o ask  teenagers  take  effects  interest.  be a d m i n i s t e r e d  It  first the  them. I  first  cooperation  to take p a r t . the  hope t h a t you  will  A copy o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e  t o a random s e l e c t i o n o f  students  enclosed. I s h a l l make p e r s o n a l c o n t a c t w i t h you  the next  Yours B.  their  schools for their  s c h o o l s and  an  of d r i n k e r s , the  w h a t , i f any, on  are  particular,  f o r the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f  s e n i o r secondary  my  at  a l c o h o l i s used.  e i g h t o f them have a g r e e d  t h i s p r o j e c t of  which w i l l is  and  In  McBurney"s i n s t r u c t i o n s  j u n i o r secondary  a  There would  more f r e q u e n t l y and  t i m e o f day  t h e y d r i n k w i t h and  a g r e e m e n t w i t h Mr.  as p a r t o f  i n s o c i e t y that teenagers  t e e n a g e p o p u l a t i o n t h i n k a l c o h o l has In  McBurney, w i t h  i n Surrey  t h a n have o t h e r g e n e r a t i o n s .  a l s o seek t o determine  d r i n k , who  Mr.  teenage p o p u l a t i o n .  beverages,  t h e r e f o r e , the survey w i l l frequency,  I have r e c e n t l y  i s to o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n about  concern  c o n s u m i n g more a l c o h o l i c  British  few  d a y s t o g i v e you  further details.  faithfully,  Stuart  (Teacher,  by  Cleathero W h i t e Rock J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y )  telephone  over  Appendix 3 Instructions to Principals Dear  Principal, Please find enclosed  instructions  f o rthe s e l e c t i o n of  s t u d e n t s t a k i n g p a r t i n the survey o f teenage  drinking  patterns. I would l i k e  t o sample a p p r o x i m a t e l y  10% o f your  s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t and l e a v e y o u t o d e t e r m i n e c o n v e n i e n t method o f s e l e c t i o n i ) Should  you wish  from  your  the f o l l o w i n g  most proposals:  t o c h o o s e random home-rooms w h i c h  m i x e d g r a d e 8,9 and 10 s t u d e n t s , as i n most j u n i o r schools, please select numeration  contain secondary  t h e c l a s s r o o m number by s t a r t i n g  r a n d o m l y a t a n y p o i n t on t h e s u p p l i e d random numbers Classroom  total  will  determine  table.  t h e number o f n u m e r a l s y o u  require. ii)  Should  you wish  to select  f r o m home-rooms t h a t a r e g r a d e d  t h e n u s e t h e same random numbers t a b l e number o f s t u d e n t s of students iii)  from  the r e g i s t e r  i s o b t a i n e d from each  Schools  randomly s e l e c t i n g  to select  until  the r e q u i r e d  the d e s i r e d  quota  classroom.  f r o m e a c h g r a d e may use t h e  t a b l e t o s e l e c t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e number o f s t u d e n t s  from  each  grade. Please give the selected students t a k e home t o t h e i r p a r e n t s  the covering l e t t e r t o  t h r e e days b e f o r e  the q u e s t i o n -  n a i r e s a r e t o be a d m i n i s t e r e d . Thank y o u a g a i n f o r y o u r you  cooperation.  In the event  have any f u r t h e r q u e s t i o n s p l e a s e t e l e p h o n e o r a t W h i t e Rock J u n i o r S e c o n d a r y  Yours  faithfully,  B. S t u a r t C l e a t h e r o .  that  me a t ^ home  95"  Appendix 4 L e t t e r of Consent Dear P a r e n t ( s ) , T h i s s c h o o l has agreed use  to participate  o f a l c o h o l among j u n i o r and s e n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s ,  which  i s being conducted  i n S u r r e y by a U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  Columbia Education student f o r a Master The  sample from  cent of the t o t a l s e l e c t i o n your will  s c h o o l e n r o l l m e n t and t h r o u g h  son/daughter  will  be a s k e d  ten per  random a short  The r e s e a r c h e r  a t no t i m e be aware o f s t u d e n t names o r be i n a p o s i t i o n  guaranteeing In  their  days.  order that your P l e a s e note  son/daughter  below d u r i n g the next  i n the survey, your  h o n o u r e d and t h e r e f u s a l w i l l  three  son/daughter  decision w i l l  i n no way a f f e c t  not be  the student's  record.  Thank y o u f o r y o u r  Student  thus  may t a k e p a r t i n t h i s  t h a t should you o r your  to participate  school  students,  anonymity.  s u r v e y p l e a s e r e t u r n the form  cooperation.  Name  I do/do n o t a g r e e on  thesis.  t o complete  habits.  match q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i t h i n d i v i d u a l  wish  of Arts  the school equals approximately  q u e s t i o n n a i r e about teenage d r i n k i n g to  i n a survey of the  t o my s o n / d a u g h t e r  t a k i n g p a r t i n the survey  t h e use o f a l c o h o l among j u n i o r and s e n i o r h i g h  students. Parent's Signature  school  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054463/manifest

Comment

Related Items