'Zero tolerance' and drug education in Australian Schools

For a decade in Australia, drug education in schools has been shaped by the approach of harm minimization adopted by state and national governments alike. Harm minimization has been accepted broadly by drug educators, and has encouraged schools to deepen their commitment to drug education, allowed them to communicate honestly with students, and to respond to instances of drug use in a less confrontational and more caring manner. Despite those advances, the notion of 'zero tolerance' within schools has been promoted recently by protagonists in the formulation of drug policy and it is mentioned in the recently published national school drug education policy. This article suggests that the adoption of a zero tolerance policy will end the consensus among drug educators, reduce the efficacy of drug education, lead to more punitive treatment of youthful drug experimenters, while doing nothing to reduce drug use. It concludes the existing policy of harm minimization offers schools more scope to address drug issues in a constructive manner than does zero tolerance, which in practice may inflate the harmful effects on young people of drug use

‘Cruel and unusual punishment’: an inter-jurisdictional study of the criminalisation of young people with complex support needs

Although several criminologists and social scientists have drawn attention to the high rates of mental and cognitive disability amongst populations of young people embroiled in youth justice systems, less attention has been paid to the ways in which young people with disability are disproportionately exposed to processes of criminalisation and how the same processes serve to further disable them. In this paper, we aim to make a contribution towards filling this gap by drawing upon qualitative findings from the Comparative Youth Penality Project - an empirical inter-jurisdictional study of youth justice and penality in England and Wales and in four Australian states. We build on, integrate and extend theoretical perspectives from critical disability studies and from critical criminology to examine the presence of, and responses to, socio-economically disadvantaged young people with multiple disabilities (complex support needs) in youth justice systems in our selected jurisdictions. Four key findings emerge from our research pertaining to: (i) the criminalisation of disability and disadvantage; (ii) the management of children and young people with disabilities by youth justice agencies; (iii) the significance of early and holistic responses for children and young people with complex support needs; and (iv) the inadequate nature of community based support

Are hygiene and public health interventions likely to improve outcomes for Australian Aboriginal children living in remote communities? A systematic review of the literature

Background Australian Aboriginal children living in remote communities still experience a high burden of common infectious diseases which are generally attributed to poor hygiene and unsanitary living conditions. The objective of this systematic literature review was to examine the epidemiological evidence for a relationship between various hygiene and public health intervention strategies, separately or in combination, and the occurrence of common preventable childhood infectious diseases. The purpose was to determine what intervention/s might most effectively reduce the incidence of skin, diarrhoeal and infectious diseases experienced by children living in remote Indigenous communities. Methods Studies were identified through systematically searching electronic databases and hand searching. Study types were restricted to those included in Cochrane Collaboration Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group (EPOC) guidelines and reviewers assessed the quality of studies and extracted data using the same guidelines. The types of participants eligible were Indigenous populations and populations of developing countries. The types of intervention eligible for inclusion were restricted to those likely to prevent conditions caused by poor personal hygiene and poor living environments. Results The evidence showed that there is clear and strong evidence of effect of education and handwashing with soap in preventing diarrhoeal disease among children (consistent effect in four studies). In the largest well-designed study, children living in households that received plain soap and encouragement to wash their hands had a 53% lower incidence of diarrhoea (95% CI, 0.35, 0.59). There is some evidence of an effect of education and other hygiene behaviour change interventions (six studies), as well as the provision of water supply, sanitation and hygiene education (two studies) on reducing rates of diarrhoeal disease. The size of these effects is small and the quality of the studies generally poor. Conclusion Research which measures the effectiveness of hygiene interventions is complex and difficult to implement. Multifaceted interventions (which target handwashing with soap and include water, sanitation and hygiene promotion) are likely to provide the greatest opportunity to improve child health outcomes in remote Indigenous communities

Models of Service Delivery and Funding of Mental Health Services

Mental health funding is neither neutral nor impartial. Decisions about funding shape the nature of care, its availability, duration, and the relationships between service providers. It is estimated that Australia spends $28.6bn on mental health annually, including funding for services, employment, disability support, and other payments. Almost$10bn is provided by Australia’s nine governments for mental health services specifically, with the states and territories providing $6bn, the Australian Government$3.4bn. Mental health funding is often tied to a model of care, a population or geographic group, or to provide general support for an organization. But in the Australian mental health “system” relationships are complex and fragmented. Repeated inquiries have revealed major gaps in the spectrum of care. Consumers, carers, and even providers are too often left lost, confused, and frustrated. This fragmentation is mirrored in the way mental health is funded. In fact, Australian mental health funding is not really any kind of joined-up system at all. Rather, multiple funders engage with a confounding and sometimes competing array of service providers, obscuring role clarity and diminishing accountability. Services operate in silos to overlapping or even conflicting goals. This situation applies to rural and remote areas as much as urban contexts. This chapter describes this chaotic situation and considers the implications arising for the organization and delivery of mental health services in rural and remote communities. Our findings suggest a situation so flawed fundamental changes in governance and accountability are necessary. These changes that would see capital city-based funders working collaboratively with local experts and rural leaders, with strong accountability to the rural communities they are supposed to serve. This would drive more integration in funding, reflecting local context, better supporting, and improving rural mental health