I just read this one this morning which is mostly about the consequences of heroin overdose and the effects on both the boy and his mother. Buried in the middle however was this description which I imagine could apply to many of the kids talked about on this board.

"But the promise of his young life — he excelled at math and loved to play guitar — appears dashed. He once dreamed of playing in a band; he now dreams of being able to walk.

Alex had learned his multiplication tables when he was three and scored 700 on his math SATs. Today he can hardly add, though he occasionally recalls his calculus and watches television programs on topics like string theory."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/us/a-mother-lifts-her-son-slowly-from-heroins-abyss.html?_r=0

That is terribly sad. I've done evals on kids who experimented with much less deadly substances and seen a similar swiss cheese brain effect. Protracted marijuana use (which many of my students don't consider to be using drugs) often results in what I think of as the shards of a broken mirror--here and there you see flashes of the brilliance that used to be, but the individual can no longer put it together to make a complete image.

It is sad. The New York Times is calling for legalization of marijuana: Repeal Prohibition, Again. I don't have a strong opinion about it, but I do worry that laws serve not to only to define what behavior can be punished by the state but also to express what society thinks is right and wrong. The views my wife forcefully expresses to our children will certainly not change.

I would agree. The state I live in (among many other states), moved to reduce penalties for marijuana possession (at the "personal use" level, vs distribution quantities) a few years ago, and I definitely saw a marked increase in students expressing that the government had "legalized marijuana", thereby legitimizing their use of it. So much so that when I do clinical interviews, I have to ask specifically about marijuana use, in addition to "do you use any drugs", just like I ask about alcohol and nicotine. (And, btw, kids are surprisingly honest about this; I get lists of all kinds of things from them, including education about the latest street drugs.)

This sounds like the impact college had on my life.

In the metaphysical sense, or in the neurochemical sense? Assuming there was a bright line between the two for you...

When I was in school, I also knew a couple kids who had apparent brain damage from smoking too much pot. One of them was a (formerly) bright guy. The kids used to talk about it: "So-and-so smokes too much pot, and look what he's done to himself." TBH, I think those kids taught the rest of us a lesson because what they had done to themselves was just so obvious.

This is another one of those stories showing that gifted kids in high SES environments are susceptible to things like irrational thinking and/or making incredibly bad life-changing mistakes.

I see it as much the same as ethanol in most ways. Legalization would address other problems, though (the kind that come from trafficking in anything illegal).

I disagree. I see frequent disconnects between what society sees as acceptable, and what laws express.

For example, adultery is perfectly legal, and speeding is not. Most people reject the former, and frequently engage in the latter.

What are you talking about? The tort of criminal conversation, or as you put it in non-legal jargon, "adultery," is in no sense "perfectly legal".

Mistresses get sued all the time for alienation of affection and criminal conversation, with multi-million dollar damage awards. There was a nice $30,000,000 award in 2011.

If people took your advice on the nature of the laws of the United States, they would end up with quite a surprise when a local Sheriff shows up and serves them with a lawsuit!

"Stealing someone else's spouse can cost you in North Carolina. State law allows divorcees to sue a person who had an affair with their spouse.

Those who have used the alienation of affection law say that it makes cheaters think twice. Some divorce attorneys, though, say that taxpayers are the ones who pay under the law.

"If you steal a high-income male who's a good husband and you have a hand in that, you should be held accountable," said family law attorney Charles Ullman, who supports the law."

Read more at http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/9314276/#fkmSjib0FAWYt7dT.99

Jon: As any sheriff would tell you, that's a civil issue, not a criminal one.

I think my brain was definitely not helped by my wild child behaviour....