Current Drug Legislation and Alternative Approaches in Australia - Essay Example

Current Drug Legislation and Alternative Approaches in Australia [Name of the Student] [Name of the University] Current Drug Legislation and Alternative Approaches in Australia Introduction The extant legislation, pertaining to drug control, has singularly proved to be ineffective in controlling the drug industry. Drastic measures are required to address this deplorable situation, and one of them is to reduce if not entirely abandon the legislation relating to drug prohibition. These burning issues are discussed in depth, in the sequel. The Australian Federal Police (AFP) has been made principally responsible for the detection and prosecution of those who endeavour to import or export controlled drugs into Australia. In the context of border controlled precursors, the AFP collaborates with the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service. Part 9 Section 307 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, provides details regarding border controlled drugs and precursors, and the relevant offences and penalties. Furthermore, the AFP combines forces with a number of enforcement agencies at the national and international levels, in order to formulate and implement policies to disassemble illicit drugs and drug precursor traffickers (Australian Federal Police, 2012). The term harm reduction is wide ranging and incorporates a large number of drug types and interventions. It includes all the population interventions and the interventions that specifically pertain to individuals. In addition, harm reduction is intimately associated with the new public health movement (Ritter & Cameron, 2006, p. 611). From the perspective of harm reduction, education and information have as their objective the provision of accurate and reliable information that encourages risk reducing conduct. Such information can be disseminated via a multitude of means; such as, public awareness campaigns, outreach services, peer networks, and targeted campaigns (Ritter & Cameron, 2006, p. 616). Moreover, this information and education can be made available through health services and by resorting to leaflets, posters, booklets, and videos. However, it is to be realised that information regarding the effectiveness of education and information is weak. After conducting a meta – analysis regarding the effectiveness of educational programmes, it was concluded that on the whole there had been some benefit (Ritter & Cameron, 2006, p. 616). This was with regard to the NIDA HIV prevention intervention. With regard to reducing the harm caused by cannabis in Australia, some of the important policy challenges are as follows. The prevailing uncertainty regarding the health effects of cannabis, with special emphasis on the young people. The extent to which cannabis is harmful, in reality, as the degree of harm of cannabis tends to be exaggerated by its critics. In addition, there is marked disparity among the members of the community, with respect to cannabis use. This has resulted in significant reduction, with regard to the severity of the penalties for cannabis use (Hall, 2009, p. 113). A report emanating from Australia has provided considerable information regarding the prevalence of new drugs on the market. These drugs are not regulated and are easily available on the Internet. This has made it quite simple to procure illicit drugs. By resorting to the various search engines, athletes can procure products that have been disallowed by the sorting authorities (Hoult, 2013). However, the principle of harm minimisation has been the underlying basis of Australian policy for more than 20 years. However, there is considerable disagreement regarding its meaning. Perhaps the best illustration of the approach adopted by harm minimisation was the response to the rapidly growing international HIV epidemic of the 1980s (Bammer, Hall, Hamilton, & Ali, 2002, p. 87). During this response, several innovative interventions were adopted, such as needle and syringe exchange programmes, and frank public education campaigns. In addition, drug offenders were diverted into treatment, methadone maintenance and drug – free treatment programmes were expanded, and police officers were instructed to be discrete in enforcing the law against the possession of hypodermic paraphernalia (Bammer, Hall, Hamilton, & Ali, 2002, p. 92). In addition, some of the challenges being envisaged by the Australian drug policy are the loss of bipartisan support, increasingly polarised debate, enhanced use of cocaine, and a very high death rate due to drug overdose. Despite these shortcomings, the drug policy of this nation continues to be effective and the focus is on humane pragmatism (Bammer, Hall, Hamilton, & Ali, 2002, p. 92). Moreover, health and illness, in an individual, throughout life, conform to patterns that are significantly affected by the patterns that have been established during the early stages. In fact, long term health is strongly influenced by biological and environmental risk and protective factors, and early life experiences. When parents indulge in drugs, the impact upon the children is particularly marked. The problem is quite endemic, as is illustrated by the fact that 13% of the children in Australia, who are less than 12 years of age, are confronted with a parent who frequently overindulges in drink (National Preventative Health Taskforce, 2009). Furthermore, there is a close association between drinking and domestic violence. Alcohol has been seen to enhance the violent propensities of men who are likely to indulge in domestic violence. Moreover, the consumption of alcohol increases the risk of becoming a victim of domestic violence. As such, children are great risk of undergoing severe emotional disturbance, upon being forced to view domestic violence that persists for long periods and with considerable intensity (National Preventative Health Taskforce, 2009). As such, children will be the worst affected, on account of drinking by adults. Non – smokers who live with a smoker are at a 30% greater risk of developing lung cancer, in comparison to non – smokers who do not live with a smoker. In addition, individuals exposed to environmental tobacco smoke are at a greater risk of developing cardiac problems and undergoing heart attacks and sudden death from heart failure (Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing, n.d.). Moreover, in their 2001 work, MacCoun and Reuter conducted the most comprehensive synthetic review regarding the influence of decriminalisation of drugs. This review evaluated data obtained from Australia, Italy, Netherlands and the US. The conclusion of this work was that the removal of criminal penalties had a beneficial effect. As such, this was seen to reduce the burden on the criminal justice system. The prevalence of drug use or drug related harm was not affected much by decriminalisation (Hemp Party, 2012). From the Australian experience it becomes evident that comprehensive legislation to ensure a smoke free environment, is indispensable for providing every citizen with smoke free public places and workplaces. There is widespread compliance and support, across the nation, for smoke free laws. Some vested interests had warned that businesses could be adversely affected by such laws. However, these warnings proved to be unfounded and were summarily rejected (Riseley, n.d.). Otherwise children will be suffer, due to inadequate laws against smoking. Furthermore, the use of illicit drugs shows no abatement. For instance, in the year 2004, more than a third of the population had declared that they had undergone intoxication with cannabis. The corresponding proportion of persons indulging in this intoxication increases to 60% with regard to persons in the age group of 20 to 39 years (Macintosh, 2006). Although, the abuse of heroin has decreased, there has been a significant increase in the use of methamphetamine and other stimulants. The abuse of these stimulants has posed a major problem for health officials and law enforcement. Since, the 2000s there has been great difficulty in obtaining heroin in Australia (Macintosh, 2006). This salutary achievement of the concerned governmental agencies constitutes a strong defence for the extant policies related to the prohibition of certain drugs. In addition, the demand reduction section of the Australian National Drugs Strategy incorporates the notion of recovery in the context of alcohol and other drug treatment. The contemporary recovery oriented systems of care are in the initial stages of implementation in Australia (Anex, 2012). These systems can successfully continue from the existing programmes of harm reduction and minimisation.. It is now a well – recognised fact that these programmes have effectively controlled the spread of disease and provided greater opportunities for treatment, thereby providing significant promotion of public health in Australia. These recovery systems have highlighted the fact that abstinence from drugs, including alcohol, is most beneficial to the populace. As such, the notion of recovery, in the context of alcohol and other drug treatment, has been in vogue from quite some time (Anex, 2012). However, there is a distinct imbalance, Vis – a – Vis the harm minimisation framework of Australia and the methods of its law enforcement. These methods have been deemed to be more important with respect to public health approaches to drug problems. Specifically, harm reduction strategies are provided with very less funds, in comparison to police, courts and customs aimed at curbing illegal drug availability (Australia’s National Drug Strategy). In fact, the policies of the government that disallow certain drugs and validate the repressive measures adopted by the police to eradicate the use of illegal drugs, have been widely condemned by judges, senior law enforcement officials, government reviews and policy experts (Australia’s National Drug Strategy). Such criticism has been at the national, as well as the international levels. Moreover, turning Point, which was founded in 1994, comprises a component of the international network of Drug Treatment and Rehabilitation Centres of the UN office of Drugs and Crime and is in addition, a member of the International Harm Reduction Association. The objective of this entity is to develop knowledge regarding treatment strategies and to apply such information for achieving the best health outcomes for the people of Australia (Australia’s National Drug Strategy). Furthermore, it is necessary to disassociate drug treatment from the criminal justice system, along the lines of any other component of the health system. The current emphasis is on drug law enforcement, and once this is eschewed, the drug market will become significantly less violent and achieve better stability. In addition, the less dangerous intoxicants will replace the more dangerous drugs. The authorities in question, have failed to realise that as long as there is a demand for drugs, there will certainly be a supply (Wodak, 2012, p. 313). By reducing the stringency of the drug laws, if not altogether abolishing them, the drug user will be safeguarded. As such, decriminalisation of drugs would put an end to the current practice of unnecessarily criminalising individuals for consuming drugs (Open Society Foundations, 2012). In addition, by not making it a crime to possess or use drugs, various features of individuals, such as their employment relationship, eligibility for accommodation and other social attributes would not be affected adversely. List of References Anex. (2012, April). Australian drug policy. Retrieved May 26, 2013, from http://www.anex.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Australian-Drug-Policy-harm-reduction-and-new-recovery-April-2012.pdf Australia’s National Drug Strategy. (n.d.). Retrieved May 26, 2013, from http://www.fitzroy-legal.org.au/cb_pages/files/Australias%20National%20Drug%20Strategy.pdf Australian Federal Police. (2012). Drug Crime. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from http://www.afp.gov.au/policing/drug-crime.aspx Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. (n.d.). The dangers of passive smoking. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/3B85A3D460C59239CA256F190004A8D5/$File/tobcfacts_passive.pdf Bammer, G., Hall, W., Hamilton, M., & Ali, R. (2002). Harm Minimization in a Prohibition Context – Australia. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 582(1), 80 – 93. Criminal Code Act . (1995, March 15). Commonwealth of Australia. Hall, W. D. (2009). Challenges in reducing cannabis – related harm in Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, 28(2), 110 – 116. Hemp Party. (2012, September 23). Decriminalisation of Illicit Drugs. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from http://australianhempparty.com/general/decriminalisation Hoult, N. (2013, February 8). Australian drugs scandal reveals how criminal underworld's vice-like grip is choking sport. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from The Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/drugsinsport/9856321/Australian-drugs-scandal-reveals-how-criminal-underworlds-vice-like-grip-is-choking-sport.html Macintosh, A. (2006, February). Drug Law Reform. Retrieved May 25, 2013, from The Australia Institute: http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CG0QFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tai.org.au%2Ffile.php%3Ffile%3Ddiscussion_papers%2FDP83.pdf&ei=xJefUYOOCo7NrQegvIHADA&usg=AFQjCNEPgn9uXcmlnpZTuubL1S1Oblltyg&bvm=bv.47008514,d.bmk National Preventative Health Taskforce. (2009, June 30). Australia: the healthiest country by 2020. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&ved=0CGAQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.preventativehealth.org.au%2Finternet%2Fpreventativehealth%2Fpublishing.nsf%2FContent%2Fnphs-roadmap%2F%24File%2Fnphs-roadmap.doc&ei=hBukUcOCEMmTrgfHpYHQBA& Open Society Foundations. (2012, July). A Quiet Revolution: Drug Decriminalisation Policies in Practice Across the Globe. Retrieved May 26, 2013, from http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/reports/quiet-revolution-drug-decriminalisation-policies-practice-across-globe Riseley, K. (n.d.). Report on Smoke – Free Policies in Australia. Retrieved May 28, 2013, from World Health Organization: http://www.who.int/tobacco/research/secondhand_smoke/en/best_practices_australia.pdf Ritter, A., & Cameron, J. (2006). A review of the efficacy and effectiveness of harm reduction strategies for alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs. Drug and Alcohol Review, 25(6), 611 – 624. Wodak, A. D. (2012). The need and direction for drug law reform in Australia. The Medical Journal of Australia, 197(6), 312 – 313. Read More

However, the principle of harm minimisation has been the underlying basis of Australian policy for more than 20 years. However, there is considerable disagreement regarding its meaning. Perhaps the best illustration of the approach adopted by harm minimisation was the response to the rapidly growing international HIV epidemic of the 1980s (Bammer, Hall, Hamilton, & Ali, 2002, p. 87). During this response, several innovative interventions were adopted, such as needle and syringe exchange programmes, and frank public education campaigns.

In addition, drug offenders were diverted into treatment, methadone maintenance and drug – free treatment programmes were expanded, and police officers were instructed to be discrete in enforcing the law against the possession of hypodermic paraphernalia (Bammer, Hall, Hamilton, & Ali, 2002, p. 92). In addition, some of the challenges being envisaged by the Australian drug policy are the loss of bipartisan support, increasingly polarised debate, enhanced use of cocaine, and a very high death rate due to drug overdose.

Despite these shortcomings, the drug policy of this nation continues to be effective and the focus is on humane pragmatism (Bammer, Hall, Hamilton, & Ali, 2002, p. 92). Moreover, health and illness, in an individual, throughout life, conform to patterns that are significantly affected by the patterns that have been established during the early stages. In fact, long term health is strongly influenced by biological and environmental risk and protective factors, and early life experiences.

When parents indulge in drugs, the impact upon the children is particularly marked. The problem is quite endemic, as is illustrated by the fact that 13% of the children in Australia, who are less than 12 years of age, are confronted with a parent who frequently overindulges in drink (National Preventative Health Taskforce, 2009). Furthermore, there is a close association between drinking and domestic violence. Alcohol has been seen to enhance the violent propensities of men who are likely to indulge in domestic violence.

Moreover, the consumption of alcohol increases the risk of becoming a victim of domestic violence. As such, children are great risk of undergoing severe emotional disturbance, upon being forced to view domestic violence that persists for long periods and with considerable intensity (National Preventative Health Taskforce, 2009). As such, children will be the worst affected, on account of drinking by adults. Non – smokers who live with a smoker are at a 30% greater risk of developing lung cancer, in comparison to non – smokers who do not live with a smoker.

In addition, individuals exposed to environmental tobacco smoke are at a greater risk of developing cardiac problems and undergoing heart attacks and sudden death from heart failure (Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing, n.d.). Moreover, in their 2001 work, MacCoun and Reuter conducted the most comprehensive synthetic review regarding the influence of decriminalisation of drugs. This review evaluated data obtained from Australia, Italy, Netherlands and the US. The conclusion of this work was that the removal of criminal penalties had a beneficial effect.

As such, this was seen to reduce the burden on the criminal justice system. The prevalence of drug use or drug related harm was not affected much by decriminalisation (Hemp Party, 2012). From the Australian experience it becomes evident that comprehensive legislation to ensure a smoke free environment, is indispensable for providing every citizen with smoke free public places and workplaces. There is widespread compliance and support, across the nation, for smoke free laws. Some vested interests had warned that businesses could be adversely affected by such laws.

However, these warnings proved to be unfounded and were summarily rejected (Riseley, n.d.). Otherwise children will be suffer, due to inadequate laws against smoking. Furthermore, the use of illicit drugs shows no abatement.

Read More