Write an essay focus on cause and effect?

***Justify your response using specific examples from your country(China) and at least one other country of your choice(United States).

What are the effects of government policy on illicit drug use?

 

Effects of Government Policy on Illicit Drug Use Outline

1. In modern culture, the usage of illegal substances is a serious concern. It is implied by both suppliers and customers' illicit activities; the latter are also exposed to significant health dangers. Unfortunately, the problem and its improvement possibilities are facing genuine hindrances to a productive understanding of public policy.
2. History of drug use

1. Although opium is a useful therapy for nerve problems, it is harmful to people who have used it for many years. Poppies are the source of opium. The human body of an addicted person is irreparably damaged.
2. In China, drug usage reappeared when economic reforms and an open-door policy were established in the 1980s. Trafficking in drugs takes place mostly along the road to Guangzhou and Hong Kong from the Golden Triangle (provinces of Myanmar, Yunnan and Guizhou).

3. Government regulations

1. In 1990, the National Congress of the Standing Office for the Prohibition of Narcotics issued "Regulations" that set up three tiers of administration. In the first place, drug users are penalized and/or urged to undertake treatments at the Ministry of Public Health's voluntary detoxification centres.

4. In developing a drug misuse policy, the Chinese government has achieved important progress. Harm reduction policies and HIV interventions were modified and strengthened based on research and practice findings.

Effects of Government Policy on Illicit Drug Use

In modern culture, the usage of illegal substances is a serious concern. It is implied by both suppliers and customers' illicit activities; the latter are also exposed to significant health dangers. Unfortunately, the problem and its improvement possibilities are facing genuine hindrances to a productive understanding of public policy. The highly unlawful nature of the harsh drug market and the cultural disgrace associated with it are particularly a problem for standard economic analysis: the acquisition of trustworthy information is obstructed by several impediments and the social limitations of active policy experiments. This paper offers a helpful exercise in comparative statics by taking advantage of data from a less remote history in which the use of opium, a strong drug, had already been allowed. It explores historical information about China and other states. We concentrate on the latter part of the 19th century, which experienced a change from policy to policy. The government's private opium monopolies were gradually superseded by a tight government monopoly, the opium market (Dietze & Peacock, 2020).

History of drug use

Although opium is a useful therapy for nerve problems, it is harmful to people who have used it for many years. Poppies are the source of opium. The human body of an addicted person is irreparably damaged. China and Britain had a tumultuous trade relationship in the nineteenth century. Chinese items were immensely popular in Europe, including silk and tea. Great Britain considered it a good moment to change that and, as a result of China's vast population and the politics of keeping countries off from outside, opened the door to opium trading. Britain, through the East India Company, began to establish commerce with opium in China (Hall, 2018). During the 18th century, the East India Company only liked the UK government's ideals in Asia. The East India Company took control of India's largest opium poppy fields in 1757.

In China, drug usage reappeared when economic reforms and an open-door policy were established in the 1980s. Trafficking in drugs takes place mostly along the road to Guangzhou and Hong Kong from the Golden Triangle (provinces of Myanmar, Yunnan and Guizhou). From Myanmar to Yunan Province or from Vietnam, substantial amounts of heroin and opium have been trafficked to Guangxi Province in China. China's third-biggest heroin seizure in the world, and the largest one in Asia in 2006, according to the World Drug Report in 2008 (Zhang et al., 2018). However, the number of drug users registered in China has climbed, according to the China Minister of Public Security, from 70,000 in 1990 to 1,16 million in 2005, although the figure is regarded as high. Most pharmaceuticals use heroin. Most of them are young, educated little and do not have steady jobs. New drugs, including ATS, in particular methamphetamine, and other substances have grown popular amongst young people in China since the late 1990s and have been available since then in medium and big cities (Hall & Lynskey, 2020).

Government regulations

In 1990, the National Congress of the Standing Office for the Prohibition of Narcotics issued "Regulations" that set up three tiers of administration. In the first place, drug users are penalized and/or urged to undertake treatments at the Ministry of Public Health's voluntary detoxification centres. Usually, they remain for 7-30 days at the centre. Those who have passed the first level and relapse are sent by the Office of Public Security to obligatory detoxification centres (second level). They stay at a mandatory detoxifying centre for a minimum of six months, participating in a mixture of detoxification, physical activity and handling. At the third level, drug users, after being detoxified, must be re-educated for 2 or 3 years by the Justice Bureau at work camps (Ji Kwon & Han, 2018).

Drug addicts are unable to leave detoxification centres and work camps, which are regarded as prisons. They are not permitted to leave. The major goal of forced and willing detoxification, which is outlined in the 'Rules on the prohibition of narcotics,' is to reduce drug use, drug-related crimes and injectable drug usage demands which are aimed at eventually reducing the rates of HIV transmission. The health ministry has published guidance on the selection of drugs for detoxification, but the treatment protocol and treatment quality differ from one centre to another. This is because they lack adequate professional staff and funds to deliver these services, especially at the municipal and county level. Psychosocial counselling and behavioural response treatments are not provided for drug users at detoxification clinics. The police and physicians are unable to provide harm reduction and behavioural therapy knowledge and capabilities. Military management tactics are commonly applied by the police to address drug addicts when they are in prison. The majority of the drug users treated return and do not modify their behaviour after they leave prison (Lancaster et al., 2019).

In recent years, China has made significant success in developing and implementing drug-management regulations and effective HIV/AIDS intervention techniques. A milestone in harm reduction and HIV prevention initiatives is the newly passed Narcotic Control Law. With the structure of hierarchical powers in China, the new legislation would swiftly be passed at the various levels of government, which would lead to a new era of drug and HIV intervention in both community and prison in the most populous nation in the world.

In developing a drug misuse policy, the Chinese government has achieved important progress. Harm reduction policies and HIV interventions were modified and strengthened based on research and practice findings. This study shows that harm reduction initiatives have, in most cases, been successfully implemented and that drug-related drug risks have been reduced in China. This research serves as a significant resource for the ongoing development of this group of harm reduction programmes. Although obstacles exist, China is adopting increasingly scientifically based techniques and has promoted pilot testing of risk reduction strategies. This wider use of scientifically proven evidence and support for harm reduction schemes illustrates the ongoing dedication and resolve of the Chinese government in fighting HIV, as well as the necessity of future research into interventions in China (Yuan, 2019).