Health and the Use of Illicit Drugs - Essay Example

What Contemporary Pressures or Influences have made Health and the use of illicit drugs an issue of Health Policy Agenda? This report deals with the contemporary pressures and influences in shaping of polices towards illicit drug supply and use in Australia. Australia has been responding to international influences though treaties of the U.N. towards regulation and control drugs capable of being used as illicit drugs. The policies spelt out at the international level have spared these drugs for exclusive purposes of medical and scientific purposes. Over the years Australia has transformed its soft approach towards illicit drugs into a hard core stricter law enforcement approach and also made the issue of illicit drugs as part of broader health issue as a welfare measure for the Australian community. . Introduction Although the mood altering drugs have been in use by the humans since several thousands of years, Australia had no illicit drugs consumption until 1950s. It was the American soldiers on vacation from Vietnam to Australia during 1960s who started spreading the use of cannabis and heroin in Australia. The Federal Senate’s approach during 1970s towards drugs use was that personal consumption of marijuana was not to be treated as a crime but the penalty could be monetary without any conviction record and also not to be used for punishment in repeat offences in future. But the Government did not approve (Pennington,1999). Australia was very vigorous right from the beginning going by the report of Cannabis arrests that almost rose by 1000 percent in New South Wales itself during 1966-1969. (Pennington,1999). This is quite encouraging but one fails to understand why in spite of the of tough attitude of the Government, use of illicit drugs are still widely prevalent in Australia. This paper aims to trace the history of policy initiatives of successive Governments in Australia and examine contemporary pressures and issues that forces the present day Government to have the issue of illicit drugs as part of the country’s health policy. International influences By virtue of being a U.N. member Australia has been influenced by the U.N. initiatives in connection with control of illicit drugs. Thus Australia has always been a signatory to various international treaties dealing with control of drugs such as Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961of the U.N., Convention on Psychotropic Substances 1971 of the U.N. and United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances 1988. The Single Convention of 1961 imposes obligations on the signatory States to make laws to implement the provisions of the Convention. One of them is to ensure use of drugs only for medical and scientific purposes. The States are required to permit opium production only to the extent required for genuine needs without resulting in excess production that would in turn result in trafficking in the drug. Similar controls are also applicable for Coca Bush, Coca leaves, Cannabis, Possession of drugs without legal authority is prohibited. Prevention of abuse of drugs and training of personnel for treatment and rehabilitation of those affected by abuse are also provided for. The States are also free to provide for even more stringent measures for control (The International drug control framework). Subsequently the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971 also provide for similar measures as applicable for Narcotic drugs. The drugs considered as Psychotropic substances have been listed in the schedule to the Convention document ((The International drug control framework). The third convention of the U.N of 1988 dealing with both Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances provides measures for prevention of illicit traffic in these without derogating any powers already conferred under the above said previous two conventions. The measures include exchange of information, confiscation of funds earned through commission offences prohibited, the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, properties and equipments used in the course of committing the offences, extradition of offenders, conversion of transfer of property etc. (The International drug control framework). General public “Public opinion’s role in shaping policy is strongest for issues that the public is genuinely interested in “ (Burstein, 2003). Surveys held in 2004 revealed that public perceived heroin was the main problem drug and cannabis came next. Besides, excessive alcohol and tobacco consumption were of greater concern for the general community. 25 % of the population surveyed did not object to Cannabis being used by an adult. 50 % opposed legislation against cannabis while 25 % welcome it. The support however for cannabis has been declining. Law enforcement was the most preferred method to deal with high harm drugs and high level of support was offered for increased penalties for sale and supply of illicit drugs. Australian community welcomed the Needle Syringe program. Similar survey in 2007 however found changes in the public attitude. While the public insisted on Heroin as the most problematic drug but comparatively more concerns were expressed against the problems associated with methamphetamine. Support for Cannabis legislation reduced while it increased for enhanced penalties for sale and supply of cannabis. Number people indifferent towards these issues has grown probably because of more important social and political issues ( Mathew-Simmons et al, 2008). The importance of an accurate understanding of public opinion is increased when we consider the power that perceived public opinion can have over decision making. “Harm reduction services in Australia have been forced to close due to perceived public opposition” (Korner & Treloar, 2004; Treloar & Fraser, 2007). Pressure groups Pressure groups come from various quarters. Prominent among them are the NGOs whose activities are transparent. There may be other lobbyists who are secretive and self serving. For example, an NGO called “ Drug Free Australia” has been campaigning for containing illicit drugs supply and been shaping public opinion and motivating the public which are taken serious note of by the policy makers (DFA). Different Government ideologies Government ideologies have remained the same as far as viewing the illicit drug supply and use as a social evil. The enforcement was initially made through monetary punishments. Over the years it has been transformed to harsher punishment of imprisonments for violating drug laws. Media Media plays a constructive role in shaping of attitudes of youth towards illicit drugs. The research sponsored by the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing on the role of media against the illicit drug supply has reported that on analysis of some 4,397 newspaper articles during the year from 2003 to 2008 and a national online survey from 2,296 youth between the ages of 16-24, it was found that media reporting has discouraged youth from using illicit drugs. The media must be recognized as being instrumental in shaping the attitudes of youth and reducing demand for illicit drugs (Hughes et al, 2010). Australian Crime Commission (ACC) has listed the following questions as frequently being asked by the media. “Doses the ACC fear crime syndicates increasingly targeting Australia as a market for their drugs?, What is the most common route that authorities have detected for cocaine arriving in Australia?, When and how did the Australian authorities become aware of the emergence of Mexico as the top supplier of cocaine?, What are the main concerns around clandestine laboratories discoveries in suburban and rural home?, What is the current status of the draft guidelines to clean up suburban homes following dismantling of a clandestine laboratory? Is the cocaine industry in Australia well-organised and structured? Is there a figure on how much the cocaine industry in Australia is worth each year?, To what extent is the cocaine industry dominated by well-known organised crime syndicates? , Do organised criminals limit themselves to the cocaine industry or is this drug directly linked to other drug industries in the country? , Generally how many current drug operations is the ACC working on and when does the ACC get involved in them? and To what extent do organised crime groups manipulate drug prices?” (Australian Crime Commission) Government departments The Centre for Adolescent Health, Australia recommended programmes based on some 178 research articles which the State Government recognised for being implemented. The Victorian government took the advice of Drugs Policy Expert Committee and earmarked funding for those programmes up to 10% of the total drug budget for prevention purposes. The programmes included health promoting schools, social marketing, peer intervention parent support and community strengthening (Catford, 2001). Governments are expected to tackle drug prevention as part of a health promotion framework in view of vast knowledge now available. Budgets should be made for expenditure on expert advice, aiding those who engage in prevention strategies including those in Government departments, The health promotion approaches are recommended as it would cover youth as they would tackle the causes for drugs abuse. They would result in positive outcomes in the problems (Crafford, 2001) of “depression, youth suicide, teenage pregnancy, eating disorder, crime and violence.” (Crafford, 2001, p 110). Schools are important target sites for prevention of youth substance use. The prevention of substance use in schools would translate into health promotion in schools. It has been predicted that if the current trend of tobacco consumption by the youth is not curbed, 250 million children living now would die of tobacco related diseases. Initiation on drugs use and alcohol consumption during childhood and adolescence would result in more misuse in later life. Adolescent drugs use has been resulting in physical violence, social unrest, accidents, broken families, relationships, poor academic performance and more importantly over use of the drugs (Evans-Whipp et al, 2004). Individuals Individual, as said earlier are part of the public and depending on their own experience or involvement of their family members, they react to the illicit drugs issue. Statistics Surveys reveal that 38 % of Australians aged 14 years and above have used illicit drugs in their life time and 15 % in the previous one year as of 2004. Marijuana and Cannabis have been used by 34 % of Australians in their life time. 9 % of Australians aged 14 and above have used methamphetamine in their life time and 3 % in the last year (2004). 71 % illicit drug arrests in 2004-05 related to marijuana or cannabis. In 2005, one in ten prisoners had been jailed for drug related offences. Death due to opioid overdose increased from 36.6 per million persons in 2004 to 101.9 per million persons in 1999 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2007). . Laws that have influenced Enforcing drug laws is the responsibility of State Governments. Federal government enter into various treaties with the U.N and provides framework for State legislation. One Federal Act that regulates entry of drugs in to Australia is The Customs act 1901. Following is the list of laws at state and federal level (MacKay, 2001). “New South Wales: Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985; Drug Court Act 1998 Victoria: Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 Queensland: Drugs Misuse Act 1986; Drug Rehabilitation (Court Diversion) Act 2000 Western Australia: Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 South Australia: Controlled Substances Act 1984 Tasmania: Poisons Act 1971 Northern Territory: Drugs of Dependence Act 1990 Australian Capital Territory: Drugs of Dependence Act 1989 Commonwealth: Customs Act 1901 Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 Psychotropic Substances Act 1976 Crimes (Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) Act 1990” (MacKay, 2001). Health Policy Agenda A report of The Parliament Joint Committee on the National Crime Authority conceded that the law enforcement authorities could not prevent the import of illicit drugs supply to Australian markets in spite of harsh penalties and hence advised to look for radical alternatives. But no action was initiated by the Government. However, at the time of 1984 Commonwealth election, the then Prime Minister, Bob Hawke literally cried on televised appearance on being questioned about his daughter’s heroin addiction. This incident served towards a major policy change or change in approach in Australia (Pennington, 1999). After the election, during a conference on Drugs in 1985, increasing mortality rates and diseases associated with drugs abuse were emphasized and both the Commonwealth and state government committed to minimise the harm being caused to the society by the illicit drugs supply. Even then legal sanctions were not changed (Pennington, 1999). However in 1995, the Victorian government constituted a Drug Advisory Council to go into the aspects mounting heroin deaths and open supply of drugs on the streets. The council recommended various measures ranging from education for prevention at primary level, better counselling, treatment and rehabilitation services, handling of drugs affected persons in prisons and police custody to introducing new drugs for withdrawal and rehabilitation (Parliament Joint Committee…..,1988). The Howard era witnessed personal involvement of the Prime Minister in tackling the drug menace. Drugs policy was keenly pursued in his period keeping in view the electoral designs and also because it offered opportunities for policy development based on public policy. Howard who ignored the criticism that commonwealth’s had zero tolerance policy, went on to seek from church organisations such as Salvation Army instead of medical profession. John Perrin, the then social policy adviser to Howard is credited with having played a key role in what Howard initiated as part of National Drugs Strategy, though Perrin had an untimely death in 2006 when Howard praised him for having helped his government in its social coalition approach for betterment of Australians. Salvation Army’s Major Waters played a key role in formulating the policy pursuant the Prime Minister’s statement “tough on Drugs”. The statement by prepared by the Prime Minster’s office in 1997 spelt the intended strategy. To implement it Major Waters presided over the apex body at the Federal level from 1998 to 2003. The framework spelt out in Tough on Drugs was a broader one with both Federal and State came to be known as National Illicit Drugs Strategy (NIDS), later National Drugs Strategy. The funding was by the Commonwealth and the Commonwealth proceeded on the premise that drug use ruined families and was determined to curb the menace through forces in its control. Since the schools strategy did not bring about the desired result of reducing the availability of illicit drugs, Howard’s approach changed towards stricter law enforcement. As a result Australian Federal Police (AFP) was granted more funds under NIDS which prompted the force to aggressively operate by closer cooperation from the police forces from neighbouring Indonesia which is a major source of supply. The policy frame work also brought into its fold the third sector organisations even closer. Thus, the non-government advisory body “Australian National Council on Drugs” (ANCD) started playing bigger role by making out a case for larger funding. As a result, from 1997 non-government and community based institutions received increased funding. In order to get rid of bureaucratic bottle, the ANCD sidelined the Ministerial Council of Federal, State, and Territory Health and Police Ministers and their official and instead brought outsiders for participation in policymaking (Stewart and Maley, 2007). As there is no clarity in Australia as to the volume of money spent on drugs, drug budgets are necessary as is prevailing in the U.S. since 1973 and also in other countries, an attempt was made in 2002/03 in this direction.(Morre,.2005). Drug Policy Modelling Program (DPMP) set up in 2004 aims to improve the country’s drug policy through new evidences to be translated into policy-relevant document and study how the policy should be formulated. Main strategy is to link the drug policy with a broader social policy and make it part of the health promotion by the commonwealth (DPMP,2010). Another innovation is the Drug Harm Index developed by Australian Federal Police (AFP) to serve as a single measure of value of AFP drug seizures to the Australian community (McFadden,2006) Harm Minimisation concept has not only worked well for the NDS but also has engaged people from diverse fields (Miller, No Date) The DPMP maintains timeline providing of “list of key events, policy, and legislative changes that have occurred in Australia between 1985 and June 30 2010” (Drug Policy Timeline, No date ). Conclusion The above report traces the history of illicit drug supply and measures to contain the supply in Australia. Successive government have displayed varied commitments towards the drug strategy. Howard Era of 1996-2006 has seen the perceptible change in the Government’s commitment towards strict enforcement of drug laws of the country, mainly because of the .Prime Ministerial personal commitment. It was during his regime that a need to make drug strategy a part of Health Policy Agenda in order drive home the point that illicit supply containment if not eradication actually translates into national well being. Successor commonwealth government headed by Labour party candidate Gillard has also followed a policy of similar objective. The new prime minster Julia Gillard of the Labour party also seems to follow the same policy set out by the conservative prima mister John Howard who held the post for more than 11 years . References Australian Crime Commission, Frequently Asked Media Questions, Retrieved 19 October 2010 from Australian Institute of health and Welfare, (2007). Statistics on drug use in Australia 2006. Drug Statistics Series No. 18. Cat. no. PHE 80. Canberra: AIHW. Burstein, P. (2003). The impact of public opinion on public policy: A review and an agenda. Political Research Quarterly, 56(1), 29-40.cited in Mathew-Simmons Francis, Love Stephanie and Ritter Alison, (2008) A review of Australian Public Opinion Surveys on illicit drugs. Drug Policy Modelling Program Monograph Series, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre. Catford J. (2001) Illicit drugs: effective prevention requires a health promotion approach. Health Promotion International. 16 (2) p 107-110. DFA, Drug Free Australia. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from DPMP, (2010). Drug Policy Modelling Program. Australia’s National Drug Strategy: Beyond 2009 Consultation Process Drug Policy Timeline, (No date) Drug Policy Modelling Program, UNSW. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from Evans-Whipp Tracy, Beyers Jennifer M, Lloyd Sian, Lafazia Andrea N, Toumbourou John W, Arthur and Catalona Richard F. (2004). Health Promotion International, 19 (2) pp 227-234. Hughes Caitlin, Spicer Bridget, Lancaster Kari Mathew Simmons Francis and Dillon Paul. (2010). Media Reporting on illicit drugs in Australia: Trends and Impacts on Youth Attitudes to Illicit Drug Use. AustralianPolicyOnline, Retrieved 19 October 2010 from< http://www.apo.org.au/research/media-reporting-illicit-drugs-australia-trends-and-impacts-youth-attitudes-illicit-drug-use > Korner, H., & Treloar, C. (2004). Needle and syringe programmes in the local media: "needle anger" versus "effective education in the community". International Journal of Drug Policy, 15(1), 46-55. cited in Mathew-Simmons Francis, Love Stephanie and Ritter Alison, (2008) A review of Australian Public Opinion Surveys on illicit drugs. Drug Policy Modelling Program Monograph Series, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre. MacKay Rabin,(2001) National drug policy:  Australia. Prepared For The Senate Special Committee On Illegal Drugs. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from < http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/ille-e/library-e/robin-e.htm> McFadden Michael. (2006) The Australian Federal Police Drug Harm Index : new methodology for quantifying success in combating drug use. Australian Journal of Public Administration 65(4):68-81. Mathew-Simmons Francis, Love Stephanie and Ritter Alison, (2008) A review of Australian Public Opinion Surveys on illicit drugs. Drug Policy Modelling Program Monograph Series, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre. Miller Siggins (No Date) Chapter 8: Enhancing Australia’s drug strategy Evaluation of the NDS, p 86-94 Moore, T.J. (2005). Monograph No. 01: What is Australia’s “drug budget”? The policy mix of illicit drug-related government spending in Australia. DPMP Monograph Series. Fitzroy: Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre. Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Crime Authority (1988)“Drugs, Crime and Society” Commonwealth ofAustralia cited in Pennington David (1999). The need for a rational policy on illicit drugs in Australia. Museum Victoria Lecture Series. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from Pennington David (1999). The need for a rational policy on illicit drugs in Australia. Museum Victoria Lecture Series. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from Stewart Jenny and Maley Maria (2007) The Howard Government and Political Management: The Challenge of Policy Activism. Australian Journal of Political Science, 42 (2) pp 277-293. The International drug control framework, Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 as amended by the 1972 Protocol. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from < http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/sp/illicitdrugs.htm#control > The International drug control framework. Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from < http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/sp/illicitdrugs.htm#control > The International drug control framework. United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. Retrieved 19 October 2010 from < http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/sp/illicitdrugs.htm#control > Treloar, C., & Fraser, S. (2007). Public opinion on needle and syringe programmes: avoiding assumptions for policy and practice. Drug and Alcohol Review, 26(4), 355 - 361.cited in Mathew-Simmons Francis, Love Stephanie and Ritter Alison, (2008) A review of Australian Public Opinion Surveys on illicit drugs. Drug Policy Modelling Program Monograph Series, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre. Read More