National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Strategy Background Paper

More documents

Recommendations

Info

60 specific drug (Spoth et al., 2006). The evidence also indicates that effective school-based prevention programs do not just rely on passive information exchange or a singular focus on skills related to drug use (for example, drug refusal skills), but also include a focus on more generic personal self-management and social skills (Botvin & Griffin, 2003; Midford & Munro, 2006). In Australia, the Principles for school drug education (Department of Education, Science and Training) were developed to encourage the development of evidence-based school drug education. The principles are as follows (see Meyer & Cahill, 2004): 1. Base drug education on sound theory and current research and use evaluation to inform decisions; 2. Embed drug education within a comprehensive whole school approach to promoting health and wellbeing; 3. Establish drug education outcomes that are appropriate to the school context and contribute to the overall goal of minimising drug-related harm; 4. Promote a safe, supportive and inclusive school environment as part of seeking to prevent or reduce drug-related harm; 5. Promote collaborative relationships between students, staff, families and the broader community in the planning and implementation of school drug education; 6. Provide culturally appropriate, targeted and responsive drug education that addresses local needs, values and priorities; 7. Acknowledge that a range of risk and protective factors impact on health and education outcomes, and influence choices about drug use; 8. Use consistent police and practice to inform and manage responses to drug-related incidents and risks; 9. Locate programs within a curriculum framework, thus providing timely, developmentally appropriate and ongoing drug education; 10. Ensure that teachers are resourced and supported in their central role in delivering drug education programs; 11. Use student-centred, interactive strategies to develop students’ knowledge, skills, attitudes and values; and 12. Provide accurate information and meaningful learning activities that dispel myths about drug use and focus on real life contexts and challenges. These principles informed development of the Resilience Education and Drug Information (REDI) program (www.redi.gov.au). This is a set of resources designed to support the implementation of a resilience approach to school drug education in Australia, conceptualised as one component of promoting the health and wellbeing of students and school communities. Materials are available for use in the classroom (both primary
61 and secondary), for professional development, for parents, and in preparation for tertiary education. These are the first school drug education resources to focus on preventing and reducing harm from drug use by building resilience and connectedness in students. To date, there is a stronger evidence base for the effectiveness of school-based campaigns in targeting licit drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco, compared to illicit drugs, including ATS (Loxley et al., 2004). A major criticism of such approaches is their limited capacity to address the complex variety of factors associated with the uptake and continuation of drug use (Stubbs et al., 2004). An additional concern is that those young people most in need of such information and assistance are those who may not currently be attending school (e.g., engaged in truancy, been suspended or expelled). Consequently, the ‘Reconnecting Youth Program’ targets youth at risk of dropping out of school and those with multiple problems (Eggert et al., 1994). This program incorporates personal growth classes, social activities and school bonding to teach resiliency skills that moderate the effect of risk factors for drug abuse and has shown evidence of improving school performance as well as enhancing several psychological and emotional attributes of participants. Strategies targeting at-risk youth outside of educational institutions include peer education and those outlined below in the sub-section on ‘young people’. The issue of the effectiveness of school-based drug education campaigns generated contention and debate at some consultation forums. While some participants held that these strategies were important and effective, others argued that school-based programs can be problematic. In particular, concern was raised about the uptake of evidence based school drug education, as decisions to implement such programs were locally determined (e.g., by school principals) leaving a significant proportion of schools without effective and evidencebased programs. Two comments illustrate some of the issues: People are not always keen to take on the responsibility for the policy context of these campaigns or to deliver them at the school level. Although the curriculum includes a Health component dealing with drugs, its delivery is dependent on schools and the inclination and capacity of staff. Some participants recommended that there was a need for specialist educators and perhaps also ex-drug consumers to address school students as part of the drug education programs. Others suggested that rather than focus on drugs per se, a broader approach was needed to address psychosocial and cultural factors that improved general health and well being, such as social emotional wellbeing, self esteem and life skill programs. Others argued that any program adopted should be evidence-based: Best practice for school drug education is to focus on social skills such as resilience, decision making rather than respond to specific drug phases. Despite some debate about the best approaches to school drug education, there was consensus around the need to develop the capacity of teachers to implement school based drug prevention and harm reduction programs. There was also general agreement that school drug education programs should be ongoing, as opposed to short term, for example being repeated and reinforced in each school year. It was suggested that drug education programs should commence as early as Year 6 or 7 of primary school, and
Page 1:
National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant
Page 4 and 5:
ii Acknowledgments This research wo
Page 6 and 7:
iv Table of contents Acknowledgemen
Page 8 and 9:
vi List of tables Table 1.1: Amphet
Page 10 and 11:
viii
Page 12 and 13:
2 The NDS framework and the Law Enf
Page 14 and 15:
4 Table 1.1: Amphetamine-type stimu
Page 16 and 17:
6 particularly on the Pacific Coast
Page 18 and 19:
8 Figure 1.1: MDMA (ecstasy) tablet
Page 20 and 21: 10 a 10-year period. While some of
Page 22 and 23: 12 Figure 1.4: Forms of methampheta
Page 24 and 25: 14 Figure 1.5: Median purity of met
Page 26 and 27: 16 As noted, the route of administr
Page 28 and 29: 18 Chapter 2: Setting the Context T
Page 30 and 31: 20 Figure 2.2: Prevalence of ecstas
Page 32 and 33: 22 19 years (Dunn et al., 2007). Th
Page 34 and 35: 24 The use of MDMA among police det
Page 36 and 37: 26 this survey is conducted with th
Page 38 and 39: 28 models might be useful. On the o
Page 40 and 41: 30 the questionnaire in February 20
Page 42 and 43: 32 2.5 Summary According to the lat
Page 44 and 45: 34 anxiety, agitation, tremor, teet
Page 46 and 47: 36 may be stronger than the link wi
Page 48 and 49: 38 Srisurapanot and colleagues (200
Page 50 and 51: 40 Psychiatric problems appear to o
Page 52 and 53: 42 In 2005, there was a total of 68
Page 54 and 55: 44 The most recent EDRS survey foun
Page 56 and 57: 46 same reasons they use the drugs
Page 58 and 59: 48 Shoptaw and Reback (2007) review
Page 60 and 61: 50 It has also been speculated that
Page 62 and 63: 52 Parental ATS use In addition to
Page 64 and 65: 54 The Minnesota Department of Heal
Page 66 and 67: 56 Chapter 4: Prevention and Harm R
Page 68 and 69: 58 should cover the full range of d
Page 72 and 73: 62 be applied regularly and systema
Page 74 and 75: 64 Strategies targeting vulnerable
Page 76 and 77: 66 Examples of particular periods t
Page 78 and 79: 68 At-risk workplaces There is incr
Page 80 and 81: 70 The consultation forum with Abor
Page 82 and 83: 72 young people was noted in the su
Page 84 and 85: 74 and/or others); mental health ef
Page 86 and 87: 76 of the fact that frequently peop
Page 88 and 89: 78 Sexual risk behaviour is a furth
Page 90 and 91: 80 • Cleaning up; • Transport o
Page 92 and 93: 82 Assessing the risks of illicitly
Page 94 and 95: 84 4.4 Challenges of applying preve
Page 96 and 97: 86 but a number of studies are now
Page 98 and 99: 88 The pack included a video, train
Page 100 and 101: 90 Chapter 5: Treatment and Service
Page 102 and 103: 92 to the occurrence of amphetamine
Page 104 and 105: 94 In relation to the need for spec
Page 106 and 107: 96 These studies replicate earlier
Page 108 and 109: 98 addressed not only the drug user
Page 110 and 111: 100 Research conducted in the subse
Page 112 and 113: 102 users, data that may be general
Page 114 and 115: 104 that limit brain exposure to me
Page 116 and 117: 106 only significant difference was
Page 118 and 119: 108 through the use of antipsychoti
Page 120 and 121:
110 to develop the capacity of the
Page 122 and 123:
112 It was also suggested that link
Page 124 and 125:
114 as new evidence emerges. New ps
Page 126 and 127:
116 border in 2000 (McKetin et al.,
Page 128 and 129:
118 Table 6.1: Number of clandestin
Page 130 and 131:
120 Table 6.2: Examples of domestic
Page 132 and 133:
122 Tasmania In 2004, strengthened
Page 134 and 135:
124 Recommendations from the consul
Page 136 and 137:
126 Although there are a number of
Page 138 and 139:
128 illegal drugs. When incarcerate
Page 140 and 141:
130 heroin) (Payne et al., 2007). I
Page 142 and 143:
132 Some examples of diversion prog
Page 144 and 145:
134 Other research has compared psy
Page 146 and 147:
136 Rehabilitation in Corrections T
Page 148 and 149:
138 Synthetic Drugs measure will im
Page 150 and 151:
140 • Stealing from motor vehicle
Page 152 and 153:
142 criminal offences There continu
Page 154 and 155:
144 • Increase international coll
Page 156 and 157:
146 • Ensuring offence and penalt
Page 158 and 159:
148 Law enforcement agencies are pl
Page 160 and 161:
150 Appendix 1 National consultatio
Page 162 and 163:
152 Appendix 2 Written submissions
Page 164 and 165:
154 Australian Institute of Health
Page 166 and 167:
156 Bowers, J. & Johnson, S. (2003)
Page 168 and 169:
158 Crits-Christoph, P., Siqueland,
Page 170 and 171:
160 Drug & Alcohol Services South A
Page 172 and 173:
162 Halkitis, P.N., Parsons, J.T.,
Page 174 and 175:
164 Hull, P., Rawstorne, P., Zablot
Page 176 and 177:
166 Leek, L., Seneque, D., & Ward,
Page 178 and 179:
168 McKetin, R., McLaren, J., Kelly
Page 180 and 181:
170 NSW Health (2006). Psychostimul
Page 182 and 183:
172 Ressler, K.J., & Nemeroff, C.B.
Page 184 and 185:
174 Small, W., Kerr, T., Charette,
Page 186 and 187:
176 United Nations Office for Drug
Page 188 and 189:
178
Page 190:
180
show all

National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Strategy Background Paper

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?