I would give it 0/5 if it were possible.
Initially I thought she was going to advocate for policies that reduce ACEs (reducing child abuse and strengthening families). Specifically I thought she was going to encourage more prison-based ministries that allow children more direct access to incarcerated parents. I have to admit I was excited to see where she was taking me, especially when she was talking about the Rat Park.
Instead the book took a turn for the worse. She is advocating for the legalization of drugs. *face palm* Now, even though she grew up poor and lost her parents at a young age, she had a stable family life growing up AND it sounds like she grew up fairly sheltered. (She thought all drug addicts were evil until she met her first foster child's mom.) So, I'm going to assume she didn't think her posited solution through all the way and that her view is still shaped by a certain degree of naivete.
Yes, ending the prohibition of alcohol eliminated the need for bootlegged alcohol. However alcoholism is still a problem. I repeat, alcoholism is still a problem. *shakes head* Yes, people can enjoy a drink legally and they can go to prison for drunk driving. But drunk drivers kill people and having an alcoholic parent is an ACE. So...alcohol, even though it is legal, is still very destructive to certain individuals and can lead to negative consequences for an alcoholic's child.
I'm not sure why she thinks legalizing drugs would improve things given how that went for alcohol.
Part of her naivete, in my opinion, is her belief that it's the illegality of the drug that lures people in or that great regulation of the drug market would eliminate the need for a street market. People huff paint for gosh sakes. Paint. Sometimes people are drawn to substances for a unique high or because it's a new trend, not just because it is illegal. ADHD medication and opiods are highly regulated, but there is still a street market for these drugs.
She also doesn't believe in letting an addict hit "rock bottom." Now, I get her point to a certain extent--that we shouldn't be so hard-nosed that we completely cut off addicts from basic services that could help them in the moment and that could help them get out of addiction. However, some people are so in love with the feeling they get from their drug of choice that it isn't until they reach rock bottom that they are willing to make a change. You can lead a horse to water and whatnot.
But I think the main failing of this book is her failure to ultimately focus on the true issue: preventing ACEs and empowering families.
In Rat Park, it was never illegal to take drugs, but the isolated/under-stimulated rats would still use drugs. It wasn't until the rats were placed in their ideal environment that they stopped taking drugs even though the drugs were still offered. It was like she completely forgot the point of Rat Park in parts II and III of her book.
When I volunteered at an Christian at-risk youth organization, there was a 15ish year old girl that I met there that completely shocked me by what she told me. She was bragging about using someone else's urine to pass her drug test given to her by her parole officer. Bragging. I found this odd so I asked her some questions. Well, it turns out that in her family it is completely normal to do drugs, commit theft and other crimes and go to prison. It's hard to blame her for taking the path she did because it's normal for her and it's a lifestyle has been modeled for her by her family.
When it comes to caring for people with active addictions, we, as a society, may need to incentize sobriety. Pay people to stay sober, offer free medication assisted treatment, and offer parole with drug counseling as a sentencing option for drug offenses.
Short story long, I think the author is suggesting harmful solutions. I think her heart is in the right place, but her suggestions and rationale are not sound.
Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.