Michael G Vaughn1, Christopher P Salas-Wright2, Kristen P Kremer3, Brandy R Maynard3, Greg Roberts4, Sharon Vaughn4. 1. School of Social Work, College for Public Health and Social Justice, Saint Louis University, 3550 Lindell Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63103, United States. Electronic address: mvaughn9@slu.edu. 2. School of Social Work, The University of Texas at Austin, 1925 San Jacinto Blvd D3500, Austin, TX 78712, United States. 3. School of Social Work, College for Public Health and Social Justice, Saint Louis University, 3550 Lindell Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63103, United States. 4. Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway D4900, Austin, TX 78712, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nearly two million school-aged children in US are currently homeschooled. This study seeks to examine homeschooled adolescents' attitudes toward, access to, and use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs (ATOD) compared to their non-homeschooled peers. METHODS: The study uses data between 2002 and 2013 from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) for school-attending respondents aged 12-17 (n=200,824). Participants were questioned regarding peer use of licit and illicit substances, ease of accessing illicit substances, and past 12-month substance use. Survey adjusted binary logistic regression analyses were systematically executed to compare non-homeschooled adolescents with homeschooled adolescents with respect to views toward, access to, and use of substances. RESULTS: Findings indicate that homeschooled adolescents were significantly more likely to strongly disapprove of their peers drinking (AOR=1.23) and trying (AOR=1.47) and routinely using (AOR=1.59) marijuana. Homeschooled adolescents were significantly less likely to report using tobacco (AOR=0.76), alcohol (AOR=0.50), cannabis (AOR=0.56) and other illicit drugs and to be diagnosed with an alcohol (AOR=0.65) or marijuana (AOR=0.60) use disorder. Finally, homeschooled adolescents were also less likely to report easier access to illicit drugs and to be approached by someone trying to sell drugs compared to non-homeschooled peers. CONCLUSIONS: Homeschooled adolescents' views, access, use and abuse of ATOD are uniquely different from those of non-homeschooled adolescents. Findings point to the need to more extensively examine the underlying mechanisms that may account for these differences.
BACKGROUND: Nearly two million school-aged children in US are currently homeschooled. This study seeks to examine homeschooled adolescents' attitudes toward, access to, and use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs (ATOD) compared to their non-homeschooled peers. METHODS: The study uses data between 2002 and 2013 from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) for school-attending respondents aged 12-17 (n=200,824). Participants were questioned regarding peer use of licit and illicit substances, ease of accessing illicit substances, and past 12-month substance use. Survey adjusted binary logistic regression analyses were systematically executed to compare non-homeschooled adolescents with homeschooled adolescents with respect to views toward, access to, and use of substances. RESULTS: Findings indicate that homeschooled adolescents were significantly more likely to strongly disapprove of their peers drinking (AOR=1.23) and trying (AOR=1.47) and routinely using (AOR=1.59) marijuana. Homeschooled adolescents were significantly less likely to report using tobacco (AOR=0.76), alcohol (AOR=0.50), cannabis (AOR=0.56) and other illicit drugs and to be diagnosed with an alcohol (AOR=0.65) or marijuana (AOR=0.60) use disorder. Finally, homeschooled adolescents were also less likely to report easier access to illicit drugs and to be approached by someone trying to sell drugs compared to non-homeschooled peers. CONCLUSIONS: Homeschooled adolescents' views, access, use and abuse of ATOD are uniquely different from those of non-homeschooled adolescents. Findings point to the need to more extensively examine the underlying mechanisms that may account for these differences.
Authors: Cindy Tworek; Ryoko Yamaguchi; Deborah D Kloska; Sherry Emery; Dianne C Barker; Gary A Giovino; Patrick M O'Malley; Frank J Chaloupka Journal: Health Policy Date: 2010-05-18 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Mark J Edlund; Valerie L Forman-Hoffman; Cherie R Winder; David C Heller; Larry A Kroutil; Rachel N Lipari; Lisa J Colpe Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Christopher P Salas-Wright; Michael G Vaughn; Jelena Todic; David Córdova; Brian E Perron Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2015 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Sean Esteban McCabe; Philip Veliz; Timothy E Wilens; Brady T West; Ty S Schepis; Jason A Ford; Corey Pomykacz; Carol J Boyd Journal: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2019-03-27 Impact factor: 8.829
Authors: Christopher P Salas-Wright; Sehun Oh; Trenette Clark Goings; Michael G Vaughn Journal: J Stud Alcohol Drugs Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 2.582