Abstract

The evolving crisis of drug addiction and its intersection with the criminal justice system has prompted critical reassessment of punitive legal models. This paper argues that meaningful rehabilitation is best achieved through judicially guided diversion rather than decriminalisation alone. Drawing from case studies such as Unit 104 at the Kenton County Detention Center, Portsmouth’s city-wide recovery initiatives, the Dalgarno Institute's advocacy for the "Judicial Educator" model, and innovative rehabilitative programs including animal-assisted therapy and financial literacy initiatives, this paper explores the integration of restorative justice, individualised treatment, and community-based alternatives to incarceration. By synthesising field-based innovations with a progressive vision for reform, the paper illustrates how shifting from punishment to rehabilitation promotes long-term public safety, reduces recidivism, and restores human dignity.

View PDF

New allegations have emerged about China’s role in the global fentanyl supply chain, highlighting the complex nature of international drug trafficking and the urgent need for comprehensive prevention strategies.

What We Know About Project Zero

According to Yuan Hongbing, a former Chinese academic now living in Australia, sources within Beijing’s political circles have described a coordinated effort called “Project Zero.” This alleged initiative represents one aspect of the broader China fentanyl crisis that has contributed to America’s ongoing opioid epidemic.

Yuan’s claims suggest that some Chinese officials view the current drug crisis through the lens of historical grievances, particularly the 19th-century Opium Wars. Whether accurate or not, these allegations underscore the complexity of the Chinese fentanyl trade and its impact on communities worldwide.

The Evolution of Supply Routes

The China fentanyl crisis has evolved significantly since 2019, when Beijing officially banned fentanyl production under international pressure. Rather than ending the problem, this led to a shift in tactics within the Chinese fentanyl trade.

Companies began focusing on precursor chemicals instead of finished products. These substances travel from manufacturing facilities to Mexico, where they’re processed into fentanyl before reaching American markets. This indirect approach complicates efforts to address the China fentanyl crisis at its source.

Impact on Communities

The human cost of the ongoing crisis is staggering. More than 107,000 Americans died from drug overdoses in 2023, with synthetic opioids like fentanyl being the primary cause. These deaths represent families torn apart and communities struggling with the consequences of widespread addiction.

The China fentanyl crisis affects people from all backgrounds. Parents lose children, children lose parents, and entire neighbourhoods face increased crime and social instability. Understanding these impacts is crucial for developing effective Chinese fentanyl trade prevention strategies.

Government Responses and Investigations

Congressional investigations have revealed concerning patterns in how some aspects of the Chinese fentanyl trade operate. The House Select Committee found evidence that certain companies receive government benefits for exporting precursor chemicals, raising questions about official oversight.

These findings suggest that addressing the China fentanyl crisis requires diplomatic engagement alongside enforcement measures. The complexity of international trade makes it challenging to distinguish between legitimate chemical exports and those intended for illicit use.

Economic Measures and Trade Relations

The current trade tensions between the US and China reflect broader concerns about the Chinese fentanyl trade. Recent tariffs include specific measures targeting fentanyl-related commerce, with most Chinese goods facing increased duties.

These economic responses acknowledge that the China fentanyl crisis extends beyond traditional criminal justice approaches. However, trade measures alone cannot solve the underlying issues that drive demand for these substances in affected communities.

International Cooperation Challenges

Addressing the Chinese fentanyl trade requires unprecedented international cooperation. Different legal systems, varying enforcement capabilities, and complex diplomatic relationships all complicate efforts to tackle the China fentanyl crisis effectively.

Success depends on finding common ground between nations with different perspectives on regulation, enforcement, and prevention. This includes sharing intelligence, coordinating investigations, and developing consistent approaches to precursor chemical controls.

The Role of Prevention

Prevention remains the most effective long-term response to the China fentanyl crisis. Community-based programmes that educate young people about the dangers of substance use can reduce demand for these deadly drugs.

Effective prevention strategies address the root causes that make individuals vulnerable to addiction. This includes mental health support, educational opportunities, and strong community connections that provide alternatives to substance use.

When communities invest in prevention, they create protective factors that help people resist the appeal of drugs, regardless of their source. The Chinese fentanyl trade thrives where demand exists, making prevention efforts crucial for breaking this cycle.

Treatment and Recovery

For those already affected by the China fentanyl crisis, accessible treatment services provide hope for recovery. Evidence-based approaches that combine medical treatment with psychological support offer the best outcomes for people struggling with addiction.

Recovery programmes that involve families and communities tend to be more successful than those focusing solely on individual treatment. This holistic approach recognises that addiction affects entire social networks, not just individual users.

The Path to Prevention and Recovery

The allegations about Chinese involvement in fentanyl trafficking highlight the need for sustained international cooperation on drug prevention. Whether through diplomatic channels, trade measures, or community-based initiatives, addressing this crisis requires coordinated action.

Prevention must remain at the centre of any effective response to the China fentanyl crisis. By reducing demand through education and community support, we can address the root causes that make these supply chains profitable in the first place.

The Chinese fentanyl trade represents a complex challenge that requires nuanced solutions. Success will depend on combining international cooperation with strong local prevention efforts that protect vulnerable individuals and strengthen community resilience.

Only through sustained commitment to prevention, treatment, and community support can we hope to reduce the devastating impact of the China fentanyl crisis on families and communities worldwide.(Source: The Epoch Times)

Victoria is in the news seeking to open a fixed pill testing site as Pill Testing Australia operatives have shifted their focus from their ineffective and harm-escalating** pill testing narrative to one that now includes testing all manner of illicit drugs in a new operation they call ‘drug checking’.

ABC has been posting warnings about more potent opioids such as fentanyl and nitazenes, inferring that their higher potencies create higher death ratios amongst opioid users.  But Drug Free Australia demonstrates that this is most certainly untrue.  The ABC posts say, 

“Non-prescription drug overdose deaths in the ACT have doubled since the start of 2024 to 20.  Police have renewed warnings to users about the dangers of highly potent substances being increasingly detected in illicit drugs, such as fentanyl and nitazines.”

But it takes only two graphs from Australia’s official 2024 opioid overdose report to falsify this misinformation.

The first shows that deaths from the use of ALL opioids have risen at very similar rates since the 2007 Federal Government scrapped Tough on Drugs, which had kept opioid deaths at around 360 per annum between 2001 and 2007.  Deaths from all opioid types increased sharply post-2007, with deaths from the more potent Fentanyl increasing in line with the other opioids.

Just like pill testing, where Pill Testing Australia falsely** implied that most pill deaths came from other drugs or contaminants mixed into the pills, the new ‘drug checking’ narrative comes from the same playbook now used for decades in Australia.  They used to say that our masses of heroin fatalities were from criminals putting toxic contaminants in the powders or from wildly variable purities but the science demonstrated that this was simply false (p xiii).  It later emerged that just as many died from strictly uncontaminated and purity-controlled pharmaceutical opiates as from  criminal-supplied heroin, both at roughly 1% of dependent users per year.  In fact, the vast majority of opiate overdoses have had the same unifying cause – using opioids with other drugs such as alcohol and benzodiazepenes as the second graph below very clearly demonstrates.  NOTE CAREFULLY THE BOTTOM-MOST RED LINE – that is the one that includes deaths from Fentanyl alone.  And it says the very opposite of what ABC and their ilk infer.

The fact that Australian overdose reports show no major change in the ratio of polydrug-use deaths against opiates used alone suggests, despite the increased potency of Fentanyl and Nitazenes, that drug users accommodate for the increased potency of these newer substances.  When opiate deaths peaked at 1,116 in 1999, 1% of dependent heroin users were dying.  Very recent fatal overdose rates for countries with heavy Fentanyl use, which is 50 times stronger, show the same 1% dying again - pointing an accusing finger at polydrug use for BOTH opiate types.   We would expect similar user accommodation with Nitazenes which can be similar to, or stronger than Fentanyl, where weakened physiology of long-term opiate users and polydrug use are moreso causal in most fatalities.

Across Australia opiate users experience 72 non-fatal overdoses (p59) and two - three opiate fatalities per day, so these already troubling statistics can be alarmingly manipulated by media, and more made of these deaths than is warranted.   Drug Free Australia does not deny that criminal-manufactured pills with high potency opioids masquerading as lower potency opioids will cause some unexpected fatalities, but much more evidence is needed to show that these are anything but the tiny minority of fatalities.

Balanced against this are the massive number of opiate deaths caused by the harm reductionist messaging which teaches the ‘safe use of illicit drugs’, of which drug checking is seminally a part.  This messaging quadrupled opiate deaths between 1984 (below 250 for 15-44 year olds) and 1,116 for 15-54 year olds in 1999.  The prevention and rehabilitation priorities of Tough on Drugs made opiate deaths plummet by 67% (or a massive 750 opiate deaths per year), where they stayed for 7 years until a new Federal Government scrapped them.  In the decade following, with the ‘safe use of drugs’ message again prioritised, opiate deaths skyrocketed 260% with other contributing polydrug-use illicit drug deaths increasing 210-590% as can be very clearly seen in the graph above.  Harm Reduction’s ‘safe use of drugs’ ideology has very demonstrably added many, many thousands of opiate deaths to Australian mortality tolls and heavily weights any set of balances against a few lives saved by ‘drug checking’.  Drug Free Australia has no problem with law enforcement continuing to publicise contaminants or adulterants in seized drugs, maintaining the message that drug use is not acceptable, rather than allowing drug-normalisating NGOs to take that role. 

Gary Christian
PRESIDENT
Drug Free Australia
0422 163 141

This email is sent on the understanding that it is every Australian organisation’s right to inform and petition their political representatives.

** Of the 392 MDMA related deaths between mid-2000 and mid-2018 in Australia, pill testing fails to address the real causes of such pill deaths in this country.  Pill testing cannot identify those who will die from allergic-like reactions (14%), or those who will co-use ecstasy with other legal or illegal drugs (48% of deaths), or those who are accident-prone while intoxicated (29% of deaths).  There have only been 3 ‘bad batch’ deaths over those years, implicating MDMA as the drug responsible for almost every Australian ecstasy death. Yet Pill Testing GREENLIGHTS (p 11) MDMA in a pill, giving the thumbs-up to a killer drug.  This will keeping adding to our mortality toll.

The AFL Illicit Drugs Policy finds itself at a crossroads that could define the integrity of Australian sport for generations to come. With Sport Integrity Australia’s chief executive David Sharpe warning that “all Australian sport has reached a crossroad in dealing with illicit drug use, player mental health and wellbeing and criminal infiltration of sport,” the spotlight has never burned brighter on the AFL’s controversial “three strikes” illicit drug policy.

The Numbers Don’t Lie – But They Tell a Troubling Story

The AFL’s own figures paint a picture that would make any statistician raise an eyebrow. In 2013, out of 1,998 tests conducted, just 15 players tested positive to illicit substances – a detection rate of merely 0.75%. AFL General Manager Mark Evans declared this policy “continued to be effective,” but the mathematics tell a different tale entirely.

Consider this sobering reality: with an estimated 5-10 tests per player annually, a player using illicit substances faces roughly a 1 in 10,000 chance of being detected before facing suspension. That’s not deterrence – that’s a statistical lottery where the odds overwhelmingly favour continued drug use.

When Protection Becomes Permission

The AFL Illicit Drugs Policy, operational since 2005, runs parallel to the World Anti-Doping Authority protocols but operates under vastly different principles. Where WADA focuses on immediate consequences and fair competition, the AFL’s approach relies on a graduated response system that, in practice, creates an almost insurmountable barrier to meaningful intervention.

Under the current system, a player must test positive three separate times before facing serious sanctions. The first detection brings a £5,000 fine and counselling. The second makes their name public with a four-match suspension. Only the third triggers a 12-match suspension that could threaten their career.

But here’s the mathematical reality that makes this policy more fiction than deterrent: even with consistent drug use over a decade, a player tested 10 times annually has less than a 1% chance of reaching that crucial third strike.

The Duty of Care Dilemma

Sporting organisations have both legal and ethical responsibilities to protect their athletes’ health and safety. This duty of care extends beyond simply having policies on paper – it requires those policies to be effective in practice.

Early intervention has consistently proven more protective against harmful drug use than attempting to minimise damage after serious harm has already occurred. Yet the AFL’s current system, with its extraordinarily low detection rates, effectively nullifies the benefits of early identification and intervention.

Dr Peter Harcourt, AFL Medical Director, noted that most players detected in 2013 “reported they accessed illicit substances opportunistically while socialising with friendship groups outside their clubs… almost always after significant alcohol consumption.” This insight suggests that many instances of drug use are spontaneous rather than systematic – making the argument for robust, frequent testing even more compelling.

Alternative Models: Learning from Success

The solution isn’t rocket science – it’s basic probability theory applied with purpose. Hair testing, which can detect drug use for up to three months after consumption, represents a game-changing alternative to current urine testing protocols.

Consider these dramatically different outcomes:

• Current system: With 10 tests per year at 0.75% detection rate, a player faces minimal risk
• Enhanced system: Including hair testing at 25% frequency with 10 annual tests pushes cumulative detection probability above 95% within a decade
• Robust system: Hair testing at 50% frequency virtually guarantees detection within two years

The NRL and international sporting bodies have already demonstrated that higher detection rates don’t destroy sport – they protect it.

Beyond Numbers: The Human Cost

The AFL Players’ Association’s acting CEO Ian Prendergast proudly declared theirs “the most developed illicit drug policy in world sport,” emphasising the medical approach to drug use. Yet development without effectiveness is merely elaborate window dressing.

Luke Ball, AFLPA President, acknowledged that “drugs are a very real issue within society, and that players are not immune to this.” This recognition makes the policy’s ineffectiveness all the more troubling. If players aren’t immune to societal drug issues, they deserve protection systems that actually work.

The Integrity Imperative

Elite sport exists in a unique space where athletes serve as role models for countless young Australians. The integrity of competition, the health of players, and the trust of fans all depend on robust, effective policies that don’t just look good in press releases but deliver real protection.

The current AFL approach – whether by design or accident – creates a system where illicit drug use carries virtually no meaningful risk of detection or consequence. This isn’t player welfare; it’s institutionalised negligence dressed up in medical terminology.

Time for Real Change

Sport Integrity Australia’s David Sharpe identified this crossroads moment for Australian sport. The AFL has an opportunity to lead by example, implementing reforms that other codes could follow:

1. Abandon the “three strikes” policy – the most cost-effective reform that immediately increases accountability
2. Introduce comprehensive hair testing – extending detection windows from days to months
3. Increase testing frequency – making regular use genuinely unsustainable
4. Implement immediate, meaningful consequences – ensuring early intervention actually occurs early

The Bottom Line

AFL CEO Andrew Dillon faces a defining moment for his leadership and his sport. The choice is clear: continue with a policy that sounds progressive but protects no one, or implement changes that prioritise genuine player welfare and sporting integrity.

The mathematics are unforgiving, the duty of care is unambiguous, and the time for action is now. Australian sport has indeed reached a crossroads – and it’s time to choose the path that leads to real protection, not statistical sleight of hand.

The AFL illicit drugs policy isn’t protecting players – it’s protecting the problem. For the sake of the players, the clubs, and the millions of Australians who look to AFL stars as role models, it’s time to change the game plan entirely.

Because when the house odds are rigged against detection, everyone loses – except the drugs.

(Source: WRD News)

In Australia, the regulatory landscape around Australian E-cigarette Prescription has undergone substantial changes in recent years. For those who use nicotine e-cigarettes, obtaining them through prescribed legal pathways remains a crucial yet challenging process. This becomes even more complex when considering specific populations, such as individuals who regularly use illicit drugs.

This article explores crucial data from the Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System (EDRS) and the Illicit Drugs Reporting System (IDRS). These findings provide valuable insight into e-cigarette prescription use and access between 2022 and 2024, with a focus on the unique Australian regulatory context.

Understanding Australia’s Prescription-based E-cigarette Model

The Australian E-cigarette Prescription system is one of the most regulated globally. Since October 1, 2021, Australians have been required to obtain a prescription to access nicotine-containing e-cigarettes. This regulation was introduced to restrict recreational use and ensure that e-cigarettes are used primarily for smoking cessation. Legally, these products can only be acquired from Australian pharmacies with a valid prescription.

However, the 2024 introduction of a “pharmacy-only” model marked a major change. Under this approach:

• E-cigarettes with nicotine concentrations ≤20 mg/mL no longer require a prescription.
• Sales remain restricted to pharmacies.
• Usage must still align with smoking cessation or managing nicotine dependence.

While these adjustments are aimed at striking a balance between public health objectives and accessibility, the data reveals gaps in how well these regulations are understood and engaged with.

Insights from EDRS and IDRS Participants

Study Overview

The research drew on data from two national drug monitoring programs:

1. EDRS (Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System): Focuses on individuals who use ecstasy and related stimulants.
2. IDRS (Illicit Drug Reporting System): Examines the behaviours of those who inject illicit drugs.

Data collected in 2024 included responses from:

• 740 EDRS participants
• 884 IDRS participants

Participants detailed their e-cigarette use, access pathways, and difficulties engaging with the prescription model.

Key Findings:

Low Uptake of Prescribed E-cigarettes

Engagement with prescribed e-cigarettes was extremely low:

• Only 1% of participants in both systems reported using prescribed e-cigarettes within six months before their 2024 interviews.
• This rate has remained consistently low since data monitoring began in 2022.

Usage Patterns Among Prescribed Users

For those who accessed prescribed e-cigarettes:

• EDRS Users: 82% reported using nicotine-containing products. Among these, the majority were daily users, with a median consumption of 180 days over six months. However, 55% concurrently used non-prescribed e-cigarettes.
• IDRS Users: Every prescribed user (100%) also reported concurrent use of traditional tobacco products.

Access Methods for Prescribed Users

The research highlighted where and how participants obtained their prescribed nicotine e-cigarettes:

• 90% of prescribed users sourced their prescriptions from Australian prescribers.
• 82% purchased the products from Australian online pharmacies.

Barriers to Obtaining Prescribed E-cigarettes

Despite a regulated framework providing legal access, most participants did not engage with the prescription model.

Reported Difficulties

Only 1% of respondents encountered difficulty in accessing prescribed e-cigarettes. However, the overwhelming majority indicated they had no intention of seeking a prescription:

• 90% (EDRS participants) did not attempt to obtain one.
• 94% (IDRS participants) also refrained from pursuing prescriptions.

Reasons for Avoiding Prescriptions

Participants shared their reasons for not pursuing legal access:

• Among EDRS participants:
  • 32% felt prescriptions were unnecessary as they could access e-cigarettes without one.
  • 27% stated they did not use e-cigarettes for smoking cessation.
  • 18% were unaware that prescriptions were required.
• Among IDRS participants:
  • 29% noted that they were not using e-cigarettes to quit smoking.
  • 26% lacked awareness of the regulatory requirement.
  • 25% claimed they could obtain e-cigarettes easily without a prescription.

Regulatory Knowledge Gaps: These findings underscore significant gaps in user awareness regarding Australia’s e-cigarette regulations. Limited knowledge of prescription requirements, coupled with the widespread availability of non-prescribed products, contributes to low engagement with legal access pathways.

Implications for the Future of E-cigarette Access in Australia

The data raises compelling questions about whether Australia’s strict regulatory approach is achieving its intended goals. Key considerations include:

Limited Engagement with Legal Pathways

The persistently low rates of prescription use suggest limited adoption of the prescribed model by individuals who regularly use illicit drugs. These findings indicate broader challenges in encouraging populations to engage with regulated systems.

Regulatory Awareness and Education

The high proportion of participants who were unaware of prescription requirements highlights the need for stronger public education campaigns. Informing Australians about regulatory changes could help bridge this gap, ensuring compliance and improved access to legal options.

Addressing Non-Cessation Use

The data reveals that many individuals use e-cigarettes recreationally rather than for smoking cessation. Given that all legal frameworks mandate cessation as a requirement, this disconnect warrants attention.

Ongoing Monitoring

Continued research is essential to assess the effectiveness of the pharmacy-only model introduced in 2024. Future studies should evaluate whether this approach successfully curbs illicit use, supports smoking cessation, and prevents misuse among non-smokers. (Source: WRD News)