This study includes the different kind of drug policies that are existed by several countries like Australia, France and USA. A drug policy is prepared by the government of the country in order to control and regulate illegal drugs. These regulations and control on the drugs helps to protect the people from different dangers of addictive. In this study, it is defined that the drug policies considers each type of drugs to restrict it. By use of the drug policies, the government of the country try to reduce the drug addiction and controls on the demand & supply of drugs. These policies also help the general public to mitigate the evils of drugs abuses in the society by providing medical treatments. The study is contrasts on the drug policies of all the three countries to find out the similarities and differentiation. In this study, the drug policies also compare the drug policy of one country to another country’s policy. In this policy, the legal framework of the countries includes prohibition, depenalisation, decriminalization, and legislations for supply of the drugs as medicine. According to the different policies, the use of the drugs is the criminal offence and the supplier can get the penalty for it. This study provides the drug policy, in which the harmfulness of drugs can be minimises by effectively implementation. So, it can be said that the supply of drug is illegal in these country because the drug addiction is harmful for the people.
According to Teesson et al. (2012), it is determined that the use and harm tobacco policy of Australia also includes different objectives like develop the understanding about the harm of tobacco products in the mind of the different community of country. It also reduces the supply or use of illicit drugs to prevent the public from harmful tobacco products in the market as medicine (Degenhardt & Hall, 2012). The economy of the country can also be affected by without drug policy because there may be social disrupts loss in the quality of life, reduction in the productivity, etc. So, this policy helped the Australia to provide a high quality prevention and treatment of tobacco related problems. The health department of the Australia highly restricts the tobacco because these are very harmful for human health.
The alcohol is restricted for the child and younger’s to prevent them because the young people can easily attract on this kind of drug addict. The alcohol is also an illegal drag that can lead a person to addiction it is also restricted in the USA. But at the same time, the government provide freedom to the public that they can take alcohol at home (Strang et al., 2012). It is because this is not very harmful for the human body but the over-limit can only be harmful. The drugs policy is developed at Australia according to the harmfulness or use of the drugs types. The government developed different policies according to the type of drugs because some drugs are used in medicines also. At the same time, the government has aim to reduce the risk related with the use of alcohol and drug such as crime, violence, anti-social behaviour of people.
The research finding of Barratt et al. (2014), defines that the drug policy of Australian government is developed for reducing the consumption of alcohol and drugs in the country. It is because the alcohol and other drug improve the health problems and harmful diseases in the human body. Moreover, Moodie, et al., (2013) described that the government also encourage the organisations that helped in promoting the risks that can be happen due to alcohol and other drugs. The national campaign against drugs abuse (NCADA 1993-97) was very helpful for Australia to introduce the herms of different kind drugs on the public health. In this campaign, it is introduced the public that the drug should be use as the treatment of the public heath only. After this, the government developed the National drug strategy (NDS) to minimize the impact of the illicit drugs, alcohol, and tobacco on the health of public such as illness, diseases, premature death, etc (Room & Reuter, 2012). In this strategy, the drug related crime and violence was also reduced. The commonwealth laws of the Australian legislation include the import and export certain drugs like narcotics and cannabis as illegal. There are many laws to prevent the country from different harmful drugs such as Drug Court Act 1998, Drug, poisons and controlled substances act 1981, Drug Misuse Act 1986, Controlled Substances Act 1981, etc. According to the strategy of Barratt, et al., (2014) it is analysed that each acts are developed by the Australian government to prevent the public by different harm by directly or indirectly use of drug which is harmful for body.
The government of USA is also developed the use and harm policy according to the drug type such as Tobacco. The findings of Caulkins et al., (2012) clearly describes that the government has different rule and regulation in the county as comparison than other harmful drugs. The use of the tobacco is not highly restricted then other drugs like Heroin, Crack, Amphetamines, Cocaine, Hallucinogens, etc. The tobacco is the most common drug for addict’s person so these are separated from others. But, at the same time, the policy of the tobacco says that the seller of tobacco should have licence. In this policy, the youth and children are prevented and some campaigns are started to save them. The tobacco laws and regulations are provided by the policy to reduce the harm and related diseases, disabilities, and effects of it. For this, the government developed different educational programs in this policy to eliminate the negative effect by using of the tobacco and how it harmful for health.
The Alcohol policy of the USA is very effective because the government has strictly controlled on the trade of Alcohol. Alcohol policy has a good border security to restrict illegal import of Alcohol. This policy was very beneficial for the country to protect people by different drug addiction problems. The Alcohol market of USA is controlled by different policies and prohibition programs by need of licences. According to Hall et al., (2015) the government has a strict policy to restrict the use of illegal supply of Alcohol and arrested several people to save the public from its harm. Alcohol policy of the government is different from other drugs because the general public has no restriction on drinking. Additionally, only the licensed agencies can provide regular drugs such as tobacco, and alcohol. The alcohol policy of the USA is established by Federal that includes statutory laws, administration laws, and case laws. The study conducted by Gleeson & Friel, (2013) stated that the statutory law is published by every state and federal government to provide effect on the bill. The administration law is also created by both state and federal government to develop the regulations for the public. The case laws are defined by court to resolve the requirement of the court and these laws are separate from state laws.
The government also spend a high amount of dollars into the public security from use of the drugs and also spend on the anti-drug military to save the public by its harm. This military has done a very hard work and arrested more than 40 million persons who were involved in the illegal drug supply. The government of USA was facing different kind problems by use of alcohol and drugs during the 17th, 18th and 19th century (Degenhardt et al., 2013). So, government developed authority letters for reducing the consumption level of the alcohol after the half of 19th century. But after the Second World-War, the consumption was also increased but it was reduced by the government to develop awareness campaigns. In the current scenario, the drug law of the USA is criminal laws that exist at the territory level of the country. In order to save the country from drug, the government spends a number of amounts on the prevention, treatment, harm reduction, and law enforcement. But also provided authorities to some agencies for regular provide the important drugs for medicines.
In the same contrast of Alcohol, tobacco policies are also strict in India because in India, tobacco is major health challenge for Indian people. According to a study published in The Lancet, it is analysed that more than 275 million people are consuming different kind of tobacco products (Prasad, 2012). The policies regarding the tobacco in India shows that country believes on the WHO the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2004. In India, flow of the tobacco is controlled by the National Tobacco Control Programme that is allied in 21 states of the country. As the same of Alcohol, tobacco is also banned to sell to below 18 years person (Chakrapani et al., 2014). At the same time, Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940 (Amendment) depicts that in the country the use of the dental drug and product is banned. In the similar manner, The Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Act 2000 also developed some strict policies in the promotion of the tobacco.
In India, there is strict rules and regulation on the trade of the Alcohol. All the process of buying and selling of the alcohol hands on the Government of India. At the same time, according to Shah et al., (2011) it is described that activity of the movement of the alcohol without the government of India is illegal in India. In India, the ministry of food processing industry and central government nodal agency are working as together. There is a Model Excise Policy and Excise Act between both that is applicable in all the states of the country. In the country, there are also strict policies on the promotion activities on the alcohol. At the same time, there are some areas where Indian government works with World Health Organisation. These areas are leadership, awareness, commitment, health service, community action, drink – driving policy, marketing of alcoholic beverage, pricing policy, availability of stock etc (Stran et al., 2012). Along with this, in India, the government of India is has banned on the sales of the wine after 8PM in the context of the society well fare. Furthermore, it is also found that the government of India does not allow sale of wine below 18 year person, it is illegal in India.
On the other hand, in the context of the other drugs such as medicines, it is found that all the policies are clear in the each context. The comparative study of Shah, et al. (2011), defined that the main policies are developed regarding the pricing of the drugs. The pricing of the drug is determined by the pricing authority. At the same time, the use and harm of policies also focus on the unreasonable trade of the drug and for this, punishment are decided in the law and policies. The draft policy also legitimises and encourages for the online trading of the drug. In India, the government of the country have developed significant rules and regulations for trading and use of the drug that represent the legal procedure for drug (Csete et al., 2016).
From the above discussion, it can be concluded that all the three countries has different policies in concern to the different drugs. The tobacco and alcohol are not highly restricted but the other harmful drugs totally prohibited in the different countries. It is because drugs other than tobacco and alcohol are very harmful for the human body. This study also concluded that the USA has more effective policy then other countries to restrict the use of drugs. The government of USA has provided different regulations in order to restrict the drugs in illegal way. From the above different policies of three different countries, it can be concluded that the American policy about the drugs are very effective to restrict the import and export of drugs. The necessary drugs can be used as the medicines but unnecessary items are not allowed strictly because it is very harmful for people of country.
Barratt, M. J., Ferris, J. A., & Winstock, A. R. (2014). Use of Silk Road, the online drug marketplace, in the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States. Addiction, 109(5), 774-783.
Caulkins, J. P., Kilmer, B., MacCoun, R. J., Pacula, R. L., & Reuter, P. (2012). Design considerations for legalizing cannabis: lessons inspired by analysis of California’s Proposition 19. Addiction, 107(5), 865-871.
Chakrapani, V., Newman, P. A., Shunmugam, M., & Dubrow, R. (2011). Social-structural contexts of needle and syringe sharing behaviours of HIV-positive injecting drug users in Manipur, India: a mixed methods investigation. Harm Reduction Journal, 8(1), 9.
Chakrapani, V., Velayudham, J., Shunmugam, M., Newman, P. A., & Dubrow, R. (2014). Barriers to antiretroviral treatment access for injecting drug users living with HIV in Chennai, South India. AIDS care, 26(7), 835-841.
Csete, J., Kamarulzaman, A., Kazatchkine, M., Altice, F., Balicki, M., Buxton, J., … & Hart, C. (2016). Public Health and International Drug Policy: Report of the Johns Hopkins–Lancet Commission on Drug Policy and Health. Lancet (London, England), 387(10026), 1427.
Degenhardt, L., & Hall, W. (2012). Extent of illicit drug use and dependence, and their contribution to the global burden of disease. The Lancet, 379(9810), 55-70.
Degenhardt, L., Whiteford, H. A., Ferrari, A. J., Baxter, A. J., Charlson, F. J., Hall, W. D., … & Flaxman, A. (2013). Global burden of disease attributable to illicit drug use and dependence: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet, 382(9904), 1564-1574.
Gleeson, D., & Friel, S. (2013). Emerging threats to public health from regional trade agreements. The Lancet, 381(9876), 1507-1509.
Hall, W., Carter, A., & Forlini, C. (2015). The brain disease model of addiction: is it supported by the evidence and has it delivered on its promises?. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2(1), 105-110.
Moodie, R., Stuckler, D., Monteiro, C., Sheron, N., Neal, B., Thamarangsi, T., … & Lancet NCD Action Group. (2013). Profits and pandemics: prevention of harmful effects of tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed food and drink industries. The Lancet, 381(9867), 670-679.
Prasad R. (2012). 206 million Indians use smokeless tobacco: study. Retrieved from:
Room, R., & Reuter, P. (2012). How well do international drug conventions protect public health?. The Lancet, 379(9810), 84-91.
Shah, N. K., Dhillon, G. P., Dash, A. P., Arora, U., Meshnick, S. R., & Valecha, N. (2011). Antimalarial drug resistance of Plasmodium falciparum in India: changes over time and space. The Lancet infectious diseases, 11(1), 57-64.
Strang, J., Babor, T., Caulkins, J., Fischer, B., Foxcroft, D., & Humphreys, K. (2012). Drug policy and the public good: evidence for effective interventions. The Lancet, 379(9810), 71-83.
Teesson, M., Newton, N. C., & Barrett, E. L. (2012). Australian school‐based prevention programs for alcohol and other drugs: A systematic review. Drug and Alcohol Review, 31(6), 731-736.