Analyzing the 'No Drugs in Our Schools' (NDioS) Campaign Report

This report examines the 'No Drugs in Our Schools' (NDioS) campaign, an Australian initiative advocating for the banning of certain medications in primary schools. The report begins with a standardization of arguments presented in NDioS leaflets, followed by an analysis of their strengths and weaknesses. It then delves into the rhetoric employed by the campaign and offers recommendations for its overall position. The report explores the rising concern of drug overdoses among Australian school students, the limitations of internet restrictions on drug supply, and the importance of early intervention. It also addresses the complexities of drug testing policies in schools, including issues of consent and implementation. The report emphasizes the importance of fostering trusting relationships, promoting healthy lifestyles, and providing education on the harms of drug use. It also offers recommendations for parents and schools on how to address suspected drug use among children, including the importance of calm communication and providing support. The report concludes by highlighting the various motivations behind drug use among children and the importance of addressing these underlying causes.

Running head: NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
No drugs in our schools (NDioS)
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author Note

1NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
Executive summary
The “No Drugs in our schools” or NDioS is a philanthropist group that has been involved in
lobbying to ban medications at the primary schools. In this study various standardizations of
arguments under the NDioS leaflet. Then the strengths and weaknesses of those logics are analyzed.
Moreover, the rhetoric founding from the arguments and recommendations are made in the
following literatures.

2NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
Table of Contents
1. Introduction:......................................................................................................................................3
2. Standardization of the argument contained in the NDioS leaflet:.....................................................3
3. Strengths and weaknesses found in the above argument:..................................................................4
4. Analysis of rhetoric used in the above argument:.............................................................................5
5. Recommendation for the overall position:.......................................................................................7
6. Conclusion:........................................................................................................................................9
7. References:......................................................................................................................................10

3NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
1. Introduction:
The NDioS or “No drugs in our schools” is an Australian group lobbying to ban the ADHD
medication in the local primary schools. It has been claiming that the children get over-diagnosed
and then get over-medicated. Further, they are found to distribute leaflets to parents and children at
the local schools. This has resulted in lots of attention and few confrontations.
The following report has included standardization of argument within the NDioS leaflet.
Further, it has demonstrated the benefits and disadvantages in the arguments. This has also included
examination of rhetoric found in that logic. Lastly, a recommendation is made on the overall
position.
2. Standardization of the argument contained in the NDioS leaflet:
It is found that every year there is a crisis of demand from various countries for a fresh
National Day of Celebration. However, the leaders have never been found to respond to that the
expectations of the public. The overdoses of drugs for the school students at Australia have been a
rising concern. It is been placed under the context of daily risks of the children. Australian police
have been inquiring how students of Gold Costs have been found to get drugs through the Internet
(Evans-Whipp et al. 2015). The investigating of internet usage and various limitations of internet
supply of various drugs has been highly vital. Besides, they have been never totally stopping the
children to gain harmful synthetic drugs. Due to the same cause the restrictions on alcohol supply
has never stopped to stamp out the underage usage of alcohol. It has been unable to address
adolescent drug use instead of any better understanding the reason why the people has been finding
drugs at the initial stage (Kim 2016). This has been clear that Australians has required decreasing the
demand of alcohol and drugs for the children with an early and well-informed intervention.

4NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
Besides, it is also known that surprisingly the nation of Australia regarding various
adolescent attitudes and beliefs related to the substance use and various generational modifications
in those attitudes and beliefs. The drug usage rate has been escalating the approaches for school-
leaving people and then entry to apprenticeships and universities. It is found that the average age of
the initial usage of drug is 19.8 years (Donges et al. 2017). The various scopes of using drugs have
been rising drastically through involving in higher varieties of social settings as the children grow
up. Besides, the scopes come from the direct way observation of usage of drugs behavior in those
settings. This has also included various information of varying quality regarding drug impacts. Here,
by and large the high school children who have been trying drugs various usage of patterns has been
haphazard, infrequent and experimental (Wood et al. 2015). Thus they have possessed small
knowledge and experience in driving those actions. Further, some of the peers have been using and
possessing restricted scopes to use. Besides, there have been various curiosities in trying various
things occurring from early age and early to the mid-adolescence that are susceptible to different
peer influences.
3. Strengths and weaknesses found in the above argument:
At Australia, there has been no legislative or any case authority denying the schools with the
ability to go through the random drug tests. Besides, in most the territories and states, there has been
random drug test for the students. Here, for instance, the New South Wales Department of Education
has stated that the guidelines of government schools have been assuring that the drug is not tested.
This has included breath testing at school and as the activities at school goes on during school
formals and excursions (Kelly et al. 2015). Further, “Department of Education in Victoria” has
released report whether is reported that they have not been supporting drug testing at school as this
has been rising various kinds of financial, ethical, technical and legal issues.

5NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
Further, there has been no legal impasse in stopping the non-governmental schools to apply
and develop policies in test whether the students has been taking drugs in random manner. As they
suspect that they have been using and within influence of drugs. Further, some the Australian non-
government schools have been considering drug testing students as they suspect them to take drugs.
As per another report one school at Victoria has regarded the conduction of drug tests over students
that they have been suspecting that under the influence. Moreover, as per the ABC News it has been
reported that school over the Gold Coast has implemented and during the time of publication has
been including random drug testing policies that designed to eradicate the student drug use (Vogler
and Vitry 2016). Further, there have been various issues that schools must be considering the policy
implementations like random policies of drug testing. As the implementation is done, the schools
must be consulting with the staffs, parents of students and the broader school communities regarding
what the policy must be like.
The consultations must be done through the information evenings and sending letters to
parents and school communities to confirm the change of policy. Moreover, there has been another
hurdle has been the issue of the consent (Somogyi, Coller and Barratt 2015). As the school intend to
test the drugs in students including voluntary consent from the both the students and the parents that
is needed to be retrieved. The consent has been students in various cases where the minor gets
enough maturities and understandings. This is providing the consent the absence of the parents.
Besides, the students should totally know the implications and nature of consents of the drug tests.
This has included administrating various tests.
4. Analysis of rhetoric used in the above argument:
There are particular aims of NDioS or “No drugs in our schools”. At Australia, various
schools are selected to provide the economic incentives. They have explored creative and innovative

6NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
approaches regarding drug educations with various local organizations. They have encouraged
school for developing strategies as far as long-term changes are considered in the school
communities. They have been assisting the school in performing activities with various Australian
Government budget resources within the community (Wong et al. 2015). There have been primary
considerations for the community or school-based partnerships under drug education based. This is
done on the principles for school drug educations and evaluations of NDioS projects.
These are demonstrated over the leaflet. From there various kind propositions have emerged
that are worthy to consider. Further, this school-based partnership of NDioS with drug educations
has been more effective as they contribute to the multi-faceted and comprehensive approach towards
wellbeing and health. Here, the developing of resilience has been primary strategy underpinning to
effective usage of drugs in educations. They have been lying on the basis of evidences and
necessities of constituents. Here, they have been focusing on drugs and behaviors that are relevant to
various involved young people. The students have involved the assuring of proper methods and
activities. This formation of partnerships taking place between community services, schools, families
and various organizations. This has the attitudes encouraging reciprocal advantages (Taylor 2017).
Moreover, this has included the sensitive and pro-active liaison taking place between minority and
schools grouped together the community leads to inclusiveness. Moreover, there have been enough
professional developments that are given to those participants.
Further, there has been a clear and achievable result helping participants for working together
towards their common reasons (O'Keefe et al. 2018). Further, NDioS has been providing clarity to
evaluations and monitoring. Development of resilience at the nation among the youth has been the
primary strategy towards drugs educations. This resilience is referred to as the ability to manage
positively or then overcome the stress and has been the primary determinant of wellbeing and health.

7NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
This is further calculates by the ability to adapt by any person or then recover from setbacks and
difficulties. Currently, a notable range of study is constructed regarding how to create the resilience
among the children. It consists of a safe, secure and warm scenario where individuals have been
genuinely caring about each other. This also includes access to notable relationships, particularly
with pro-social adults providing general role modeling, advocacy, mentoring guidance and
supervision. Next, it has focus on various strengths.
This denotes the concept of various protective factors. The researchers, has been tending to
focus previously over various risk factors. This has included small direction about how to decrease
them. Previously, the research has tended to concentrate in focusing over risk factors and has
involved various directions regarding how to decrease them (Lee et al. 2017). Moreover, various
bodies of knowledge are developed regarding decrease risk by doing promotion of various protective
factors. Here, the programs promoting resilience has been putting emphasis over protective strengths
or factors instead of deficits.
5. Recommendation for the overall position:
Recommendations regarding prevention of drugs used in the children:
Though there is no behavior and parenting skill guaranteeing the young person never touching
drugs, NDioS can decrease the probability of young person experiencing drug issues in various ways
listed below.
 Fostering trusting and close relationships with children from early age supporting and
encouraging positive behavior.
 Modelling proper behaviours like drinking moderately and not smoking and utilising illicit
drugs.

8NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
 Establishing guidelines and agreements regarding what is acceptable behaviour across drugs
and alcohols.
 Encouraging healthy approaches towards life that includes right foods, regular sports and
exercises.
 Encouraging children to have more than only just a single team of friends.
 Permitting children to practice develop and liability of useful decision-making expertise from
the early ages.
 Keeping informed regarding drugs and educating children about harms of usage of drugs.
 The information should note exaggerated and make the information up.
 Having honest and open discussions regarding drugs.
Recommendations as the children are suspected top take drugs:
There have been particular behaviours and specific signs revealing that the young person has
been the drugs. The uncharacteristic behaviours such as swings in moods and drops in performance
in schooling, various friends and change in appearances indicated usage of drugs. Moreover, there
have been multiple ways that denote challenges that are not related to drugs. For this, the different
recommendations are highlighted hereafter.
 Not to react on the first impulse as possible providing the time to think.
 Resisting drugs such that they never have facts.
 Rising concerns with the children calmly feeling relaxed.
 As the children are found to be taking drugs, the ultimatums must not be issued.
 Children must be educated regarding lifestyle and health risks.
 It can be accepted that the elder ones might not stop taking drugs, no matter what is said.

9NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
 As the children get into trouble with the police and need to visits to court, they must be
supported. However, they must be coped with the results like paying their fines.
6. Conclusion:
The children of Australia have been in taking drugs in the same reason as the adults do. They
do this to feel different or better. The goals involve socialising with friends, relaxations and fund,
boredom, experimentations, curiosities and escape from physiological and psychological risks. For
example, it can be a typical concern that children turns out to be dependent on drugs like cocaine,
heroin, ecstasy, methamphetamines and so on. Besides, the health of teenagers gets threatened with
the taking of legal drugs such as tobacco or alcohol. Here, there is no method to guarantee that
children must not intake medicines. However, one can decrease the possibility that teenager
experience problems of drugs in various ways. The above study is helpful to research out for support
and help the vital first step to deal with the issues of alcohol and drugs to cause the life, affecting
school children. In this study, various kind of different resources are demonstrated that is helpful to
support NDioS. Furthermore, the Australian Government has been providing more help than it is
done previously. They have been viewing various ranges of counseling, treatments, information
services and different kinds of supports. The NDioS leaflet has tailored accurate evidence-based data
regarding guidance, effects and uses and illegal drugs.

10NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
7. References:
Butler, K., Day, C., Sutherland, R., van Buskirk, J., Breen, C., Burns, L. and Larney, S., 2017.
Hepatitis C testing in general practice settings: A cross-sectional study of people who inject drugs in
Australia. International Journal of Drug Policy, 47, pp.102-106.
Donges, E., Staatz, C.E., Benham, H., Kubler, P. and Hollingworth, S.A., 2017. Patterns in use and
costs of conventional and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in Australia. Clinical and
experimental rheumatology, 35(6), pp.907-912.
Evans-Whipp, T.J., Plenty, S.M., Catalano, R.F., Herrenkohl, T.I. and Toumbourou, J.W., 2015.
Longitudinal effects of school drug policies on student marijuana use in Washington State and
Victoria, Australia. American journal of public health, 105(5), pp.994-1000.
Grebely, J., Alavi, M., Micallef, M., Dunlop, A.J., Balcomb, A.C., Phung, N., Weltman, M.D., Day,
C.A., Treloar, C., Bath, N. and Haber, P.S., 2016. Treatment for hepatitis C virus infection among
people who inject drugs attending opioid substitution treatment and community health clinics: the
ETHOS Study. Addiction, 111(2), pp.311-319.
Kelly, A.B., Evans‐Whipp, T.J., Smith, R., Chan, G.C., Toumbourou, J.W., Patton, G.C., Hemphill,
S.A., Hall, W.D. and Catalano, R.F., 2015. A longitudinal study of the association of adolescent
polydrug use, alcohol use and high school non‐completion. Addiction, 110(4), pp.627-635.
Kim, S.K., 2016. Handbook of anticancer drugs from marine origin. Springer.
Lee, Y.Y., Barendregt, J.J., Stockings, E.A., Ferrari, A.J., Whiteford, H.A., Patton, G.A. and
Mihalopoulos, C., 2017. The population cost-effectiveness of delivering universal and indicated

11NO DRUGS IN OUR SCHOOLS (NDIOS)
school-based interventions to prevent the onset of major depression among youth in
Australia. Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 26(5), pp.545-564.
Li, J. and Powdthavee, N., 2015. Does more education lead to better health habits? Evidence from
the school reforms in Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 127, pp.83-91.
O'Keefe, D., Bowring, A., Aitken, C. and Dietze, P., 2018. The Association between Intentional
Overdose and Same-Sex Sexual Intercourse in a Cohort of People who Inject Drugs in Melbourne,
Australia. Substance use & misuse, 53(5), pp.755-762.
Selvey, L.A., Lobo, R.C., McCausland, K.L., Donovan, B., Bates, J. and Hallett, J., 2018.
Challenges facing Asian sex workers in Western Australia: implications for health promotion and
support services. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, p.171.
Somogyi, A.A., Coller, J.K. and Barratt, D.T., 2015. Pharmacogenetics of opioid response. Clinical
Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 97(2), pp.125-127.
Taylor, E., 2017. ‘This is not America’: Cultural mythscapes, media representation and the anatomy
of the Surveillance School in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 53(2), pp.413-429.
Ttofi, M.M., Farrington, D.P., Lösel, F., Crago, R.V. and Theodorakis, N., 2016. School bullying
and drug use later in life: A meta-analytic investigation. School psychology quarterly, 31(1), p.8.
Vogler, S. and Vitry, A., 2016. Cancer drugs in 16 European countries, Australia, and New Zealand:
a cross-country price comparison study. The Lancet Oncology, 17(1), pp.39-47.
Wong, C.K., Laos, A.J., Soeriyadi, A.H., Wiedenmann, J., Curmi, P.M., Gooding, J.J., Marquis,
C.P., Stenzel, M.H. and Thordarson, P., 2015. Polymersomes prepared from thermoresponsive