- Details
- Hits: 14
Parenting today means guiding children through a maze of pro-pot propaganda and surface-level harm reduction messages, all while facing real risks linked to family history. The parental influence on addiction, substance use, and health choices has never been more crucial. We will explore how parents can empower their children against addiction, drawing on research, real-world stats, and expert advice.
Let’s start with some good news and understand that children, their child, your child, our children have a number of Human Rights enshrined in United Nations Conventions, and one of those Conventions is Article 33 of the Rights of the Child, and one every parent/guardian should know, hold dear and wield, when it comes to protecting their children
As you continue through this article keep this in the forefront of your thinking in how this can help you, your family and community be better at delaying or more importantly, denying uptake of potential, health and well-being destroying substances.
Why Parental Influence on Addiction Matters
You might hear everywhere that "all teens experiment with alcohol or drugs". But the data tells a different story. According to the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, parental beliefs and conversations directly impact young people’s substance choices—even into college. Teens who understand their parents have a zero-tolerance policy are less likely to drink, both in high school and beyond.
Dr Maria Rahmandar, medical director at Lurie Children’s Hospital, puts it clearly:
“Youth are less likely to use alcohol and other substances when their parents have the expectation that they won’t and communicate this expectation to their children.”
The Dalgarno Institute emphasizes that the belief that drug use is wrong is the most significant protective factor against substance use. Research from the University of Illinois shows that every 'unit' increase in this belief raises the likelihood of abstinence by 39% for 8th graders, 50% for 10th graders, and 53% for 12th graders.
Declining Rates Challenge Old Myths
There’s a stubborn myth that underage drinking is universal. Here’s the truth:
- 2021: 54.1% of high school seniors had ever used alcohol; only 25.8% had done so in the last 30 days.
- 1978: A huge 93.1% of seniors reported ever drinking; 72.1% had drunk alcohol in the past month.
This decline aligns with the Dalgarno Institute's advocacy for evidence-based prevention strategies that delay or deny the uptake of alcohol and drugs. Effective drug education in schools, for example, has been shown to delay drug uptake by two years, providing a critical window for intervention.
The Role of Genetics and Family History
While parental guidance matters, genetics, or better stated ‘epigenetics’ play a role too. Dr Marc Schuckit (University of San Diego) reports genetics factors can add up to 60% of a person’s risk for developing alcohol use disorder. However, it’s vital to note that there is no single "alcoholism or drug addiction gene". It is what we like to refer to as a ‘recipe’.
The nature and nurture debate around development was settled well over a decade ago. It is not nature or nurture alone that determine developmental outcomes, but rather a unique mix - one that the Dalgarno Institute calls the R.E.C.I.P.E.
The Epigenome is the ‘coating’, if you like, on the DNA, it is not a ‘gene’ per se, but there is a vast amount of data in this space that can influence how genes express themselves. This is where the above RECIPE can influence the epigenome as much as the epigenome has capacity to influence the recipe. In short, ‘pre-dispositions’ can be created, and can be amended, but it is all found in the mix of the above factors. (see Humpty Dumpty Dilemma Resiliency Projectpar)
Framing it Honestly, Authentically, but not Romantically!
Honesty, not secrecy, is key. Jessica Lahey, author of The Addiction Inoculation, shared with her kids her own battles with alcohol:
“I told them I would not be drinking alcohol anymore because I can’t control it, and in order to be the best mom I could be for them, I had to stop.”
Children sense when things are hidden or "off". Explaining the family history in an age-appropriate way helps them make sense of their world. Michael Roeske, psychologist and director at Newport Healthcare, supports this approach. "If you’re not honest," he says, "kids fill in the gaps themselves, often with worse explanations than reality. Honesty gives them a framework for understanding addiction as a health issue."
Of course, as mentioned previously, this bio-behavioural disorder is about avoiding - preventing this non-communicable dis-ease through behavioural decisions and acts that stop or revert from the behaviours causing the health harms. This must never be lost in the conversation around this issue. Avoiding stigmatising people is important, but calling bad decisions out in view or pointing and empowering toward best practice is a key part of preventative health.
To state the obvious, prevention is far more effective than cure. By focusing on delaying or denying substance use, families can significantly reduce the risk of addiction, even in the presence of genetic predispositions.
Parental Influence on Addiction Prevention Starts Early
Substance use disorder rarely appears out of nowhere in adulthood. Most people with these issues start as teens. The research is unanimous:
- The longer a child delays their first drink or experiment, the lower their chance of developing addiction.
- Dr Rahmandar highlights, “The longer you can delay, the lower your risk.”
- The Dalgarno Institute also advocates for a unified, uncompromised message in drug education: 'Don’t uptake or quit.' (One Focus – One Message – One Voice)
This means the small everyday choices and conversations you have matter hugely. Waiting until college to talk about substance use is already too late.
Environmental and Lifestyle Risk Factors
There are far more important risk factors to focus on than a default referral to ‘genetics’ What has been labelled as Adverse Childhood Experiences is a very significant factor in potential substance use engagement.
If you look closely at the above categories, you can see how substance use is not only a key ACE in its own context but can influence every other ACE in the spectrum. That is how pervasive the harms of substance use are
Lahey suggests picturing risk and protection as a balance scale:
- Risk factors: Family history, trauma, untreated mental illness, substance-friendly environments.
- Protective factors: Mental health support, strong family connections, meaningful hobbies, supportive schools.
For higher-risk families, you need extra "weights" on the protective side. The more risk, the more robust your protections should be. The community-wide efforts are important, such as Iceland’s successful anti-drug strategy, which relies on clear, consistent messaging and robust protective factors to reduce youth drug use.
The Conversation with the Kids - What May That Look Like?
Start Open Conversations Early: The best prevention starts with honest, ongoing conversation. Begin before your child faces peer pressure. Keep your tone calm, factual, and supportive.
- Ask what they’ve heard at school or online about drugs and alcohol.
- Share family history in simple, age-appropriate terms.
- Make clear your expectations – Not threatening, rather robust, uncompromising and warm.
Example Script
“We have people in our family who’ve struggled with alcohol. That means we all must be really careful, because our bodies might respond differently. If you’re curious or worried, you can always ask me about it.”
Don’t Gloss Over Reality: Don’t hide struggles or make up stories about absent relatives or "illness". Kids notice tension, whispered conversations, or absent family members. Explaining substance use disorders as a bio-behavioural health condition can help not only with avoiding stigma but also completely de-glamorise and strip bare the real cost and harms of substance use.
Empowering Choices and Building Life Skills: Dr Rahmandar notes, “You cannot develop a substance use disorder unless you are exposed to substances in the first place.” Choice matters. Kids with higher genetic risk can sometimes escape the cycle by simply never starting or starting much later than peers. Again, we cannot overemphasise the need for all the community to be on the same page when it comes to substance use. Actors in the community who continue to demand their ‘liberty’ to use psychotropic toxins that bring harm not only to themselves, but on both passive and active levels, negatively impact communities, families and children, must be called out.
Equip Kids with Skills
- Refusal Skills: Practise saying "no" using real-world examples and role-play. A person’s NO is the most powerful protective weapon in their tool kit of resilience - teach them how to use it and help them not give it up when they are in toxic coercive or seductive environments.
- Exit Strategies: Pre-plan texts or code words they can use if they need to leave an uncomfortable situation.
- Safe Environments: Monitor social circles. It’s important to know who your kids’ friends are, but also to know about their family. You become the instigator of social events and make your home ‘The safe space’. Of course, try to avoid open suspicion of people, be discerning, ask careful questions and always balance this with trust.
- Healthy Activities: Sports, arts, volunteering, and meaningful hobbies absorb time and fill key social and emotional needs.
Your Role as a Parent Never Ends
Some parents worry that if their child experiments or struggles with substance use, that they’ve "failed". That’s not true. Michael Roeske advises, “It is this ongoing effort that is most important.” Recovery and resilience are built with many small pieces, not single big interventions.
Lahey compares recovery to a 100-piece puzzle. Piece 100 won’t fall into place unless pieces two, 17, 72, and 99 are all there. Your role is to keep putting down puzzle pieces, even if you can't see the end result. The point is that it’s the consistent and uncompromising building of best practice prevention and resilience capacities into your child's environment that will help equip them to come up and out of that dysfunctional arena.
Framing Addiction Like Any Other Health Issue
Parents often talk to kids about family risks for diabetes or heart disease. Substance use disorder is no different. "If they know they are predisposed to alcohol use disorder, that’s another piece of essential information they need to make informed decisions," says Lahey.
Real-World Prevention Works
Data from schools and communities around the world show early prevention works, especially when parents, schools, and communities send unified, evidence-based messages. Dalgarno Institute argues for a prevention-first approach, criticising strategies that seem to normalise or downplay drug risks (like pill testing at festivals or drug consumption rooms).
“Empowering and equipping the emerging generation to exercise the best choice of ‘NO’ should be the strongest incentive in all messaging.” – Shane Varcoe, Executive Director, Dalgarno Institute
The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission puts it bluntly:
“The risk and harm posed by illicit drugs to the Australian community is ever-growing, which underscores the need for law enforcement and health agencies to work collaboratively to combat both the supply and demand for illicit drugs.”
Why Prevention Works
- No safe level for young brains: Science shows there is no safe level of drug use for developing brains (up to 25–32 years old).
- Protective beliefs: University of Illinois research proved that every "unit" increase in the belief that drug use is wrong raises the chance of abstinence by:
- 39% (8th graders)
- 50% (10th graders)
- 53% (12th graders)
- Economic impact: Every $1 spent on prevention saves $18 in future community costs.
The Collaborative Community Contagion: Parents, Schools, and Community Working Together
Schools cannot do this work alone. The Icelandic model of drug prevention, which saw a steep drop in youth drug use, relies on community-wide effort and clear, consistent messaging. One message - One focus - One Voice in all key community demographics. Both good and bad contagions work the same. More is ‘caught’ than taught - Kids are watching what is being not just spoken, but more importantly, what is being modelled. If the ‘talk’ of the community is stay away, but the ‘walk’ of the community is ‘do what you like when you’re 18’, then the ‘message’ being delivered creates cognitive dissonance in the child and they can all too often go the path of least resistance.
The above, right here, is the single biggest problem.
If the ‘grown ups’ want to engage with substance irresponsibly and use their ‘adult’ status to do so, then the message to the emerging adult - the child - is, “I can ‘act like an adult now’ by using this ‘grown up’ plaything”. The personal desire of the adult then trumps the child's well-being. This egocentricity is a tough one to combat on a societal level, but it can be done in micro-environments, like your family, friends, and even community settings.
One data set reveal (and disappointingly that only 44% of Australian students aged 12–17 received more than one lesson on AOD last year. This needs to and can change with AOD (Alcohol & Other Drug) Education being couched in health and human development studies with sound sociological and anthropological academic underpinnings that build resilience.
For example, the Dalgarno Institute and its coalition of educators have not only incursions but curriculum that can service this need for every year level from grade 5 in primary school up to the end of high school. Along with sporting club, community and family education sessions, an immersion protocol can be engaged to help develop a resilient student who has no need or desire to engage in substance use.
This can all help parents and families add to their resilience building toolkit and any schooling gaps can be filled by families who make substance education part of everyday life.
Practical Steps to Leverage Parental Influence on Addiction
- Open Communication: Start early, keep it honest and ongoing.
- Encourage Healthy Activities: Support sports, arts, volunteering.
- Build safe and inviting family environments for your children and their friends. Not trying to be ‘their buddies’, but environments that honour, respect and monitor recreational spaces in your neighbourhood.
- Set Firm Family Values and Rules: Be clear about your expectations on substance use. Teach your children the WHY, not just the What. This helps with...
- Teaching Refusal & Exit Skills: Prepare kids for real-life scenarios.
- Consistently Enforce Consequences: Be fair, predictable, and calm.
- Stay Connected: Stay interested in your child’s friends and routines.
- Prioritise Sleep: Poor sleep increases risky choices.
- Model Behavior: Demonstrate healthy habits and transparent communication about family risks.
- Spot Early Warnings: Address changes in mood or activity promptly.
Facing Substance Normalisation with Confidence
The era of pro-cannabis messaging and normalised substance use can feel overwhelming for parents. The ‘frog in the pot’ and the heat turned right up with first trivialising substance use – it’s not that bad. Then normalising substance use – everyone goes through this phase and it’s part of ‘growing up’. Then decriminalising to affirm cultural inevitability. Then legalise and give psychotropic toxins the greatest permission authority available – enshrined as a right in law.
However, evidence shows that parental influence on potential engagement and or addiction has a significant and measurable impact. By staying present, honest, and proactive, you can help protect your child—even if there’s a family history of addiction.
Prevention isn’t just possible; it’s highly effective.
The Dalgarno Institute highlights the importance of prevention-first approaches that focus on reducing demand and prioritising primary prevention. They caution against strategies that may unintentionally normalise or downplay the risks of drug use, such as pill testing at festivals, drug consumption sites that do not lead to recovery and messaging that suggests drug use is ‘manageable’ and that harms can be dealt with.
Strengthening your family’s protective factors and building resilience through community prevention programmes and professional advice can provide a strong foundation for a substance-free future. Consistent parental involvement remains the most powerful tool in safeguarding your child.
Dalgarno Institute
- Details
- Hits: 56
September 23, 2025 By WRD News Team
Victoria’s latest overdose statistics paint a sobering picture that challenges the effectiveness of current harm reduction policies. The Coroners Court of Victoria’s damning report reveals 584 fatal overdoses in 2024—the highest toll in a decade—raising serious questions about whether Australia’s emphasis on drug harm minimisation strategies is delivering the promised results.
The data exposes a troubling reality: whilst harm reduction policies have dominated Victoria’s drug strategy landscape, illegal drug deaths have surged dramatically. Illegal substances now contribute to 65.6% of overdose fatalities, up from less than half a decade ago. This stark increase coincides with years of expanded harm reduction initiatives, suggesting these approaches may be missing the mark.
The Methamphetamine Crisis Exposes Policy Gaps
Perhaps nowhere is the failure of current drug harm minimisation strategies more evident than in methamphetamine-related deaths. The report shows a staggering 183% increase in methamphetamine fatalities between 2015 and 2024, with deaths jumping 30% in just the past year alone. This crisis has unfolded despite significant investment in harm reduction infrastructure and education programmes.
The persistence of such dramatic increases raises fundamental questions about the balance within Australia’s National Drug Strategy. Whilst harm reduction policies were designed as a “last-ditch pillar” to keep addicted individuals alive whilst they exited drug use, the evidence suggests this exit pathway is failing to materialise for many Victorians.
Geographic Concentration Reveals Systemic Issues
The report’s geographic analysis reveals that drug harm minimisation strategies are struggling particularly in urban centres, with metropolitan Melbourne accounting for three-quarters of overdose deaths. Specific local government areas—Greater Geelong, Hume, and Melbourne—recorded their worst overdose death tolls in a decade during 2024.
This concentration suggests that current harm reduction policies may be inadequately addressing the complex social and economic factors that drive sustained drug use in these communities. The focus on managing drug use rather than preventing initiation appears to have created pockets of entrenched addiction that existing interventions cannot penetrate.
The Pharmaceutical Paradox
Intriguingly, whilst illegal drug deaths soared, pharmaceutical-related overdoses declined from 78% to 69.3% of total deaths. This shift indicates that regulatory controls and supply reduction measures can effectively reduce harm when properly implemented. The contrast between regulated pharmaceutical outcomes and illegal drug trajectories suggests that drug harm minimisation strategies alone may be insufficient without concurrent supply reduction efforts.
The success in reducing pharmaceutical deaths whilst harm reduction policies struggled with illegal substances points to a critical gap in current approaches. Evidence-based prevention and supply control measures appear more effective at saving lives than harm reduction initiatives operating in isolation.
New Psychoactive Substances: An Evolving Challenge
The emergence of 59 different new psychoactive substances (NPS) over the past decade presents another challenge for traditional harm reduction policies. These rapidly evolving drugs, including nitazenes that can be 1,000 times stronger than morphine, highlight the limitations of reactive drug harm minimisation strategies.
Current harm reduction approaches struggle to keep pace with the constantly changing illegal drug market, often addressing yesterday’s problems whilst new threats emerge. This reactive stance contrasts sharply with prevention-focused policies that could reduce exposure to these dangerous substances before they claim lives.
Gender and Age Patterns Demand Prevention Focus
The data reveals that males are twice as likely to die from overdoses, with those aged 35-54 at highest risk. These demographics suggest that current harm reduction policies are reaching individuals after decades of drug use, when intervention becomes exponentially more difficult and less effective.
Earlier intervention through robust prevention programmes could address drug use before it becomes entrenched addiction. The concentration of deaths in middle-aged males indicates that drug harm minimisation strategies may be arriving too late in the addiction trajectory to achieve their intended life-saving purpose.
Policy Implications and the Path Forward
State Coroner Judge John Cain acknowledged the “concerning rise in overdose deaths” despite recent harm reduction initiatives, including Victoria’s drug checking trial. This admission from a senior judicial figure underscores the growing recognition that current harm reduction policies require fundamental reassessment.
The evidence suggests that drug harm minimisation strategies work best when integrated with robust demand and supply reduction measures, rather than operating as standalone solutions. Victoria’s experience demonstrates that policies focused solely on managing drug use, without equal emphasis on preventing initiation and supporting exit pathways, may inadvertently enable the very problems they seek to address.
The 584 Victorian families who lost loved ones to overdoses in 2024 deserve more than well-intentioned but ineffective policies. The time has come for an honest evaluation of whether current harm reduction policies are delivering on their promise to keep people alive whilst they exit drug use—or whether they have become an end in themselves, maintaining rather than resolving Australia’s drug crisis.
(Source: WRD News)
- Details
- Hits: 108
The opioid crisis continues to devastate communities across Canada and beyond, with recent research highlighting alarming treatment retention failures that underscore why prevention must be our primary defence. A comprehensive study examining opioid agonist therapy amongst First Nations people in Ontario reveals shocking statistics that every family, educator, and community leader must understand.
The Stark Reality of Opioid Addiction Treatment
New research tracking nearly 18,000 treatment episodes reveals a disturbing truth: prevention is worth a pound of cure when it comes to opioid addiction. The study found that:
- Half of all individuals discontinued their life-saving medication within just 42-71 days
- Over 70% of people failed to maintain treatment for a full year
- Treatment success rates have actually declined over time
These statistics aren’t just numbers—they represent thousands of lives disrupted, families torn apart, and communities struggling with addiction’s devastating impact.
Why Opioid Addiction Prevention Must Be Our Priority
The research demonstrates that even with the best medical interventions available, maintaining recovery from opioid addiction remains extraordinarily challenging. This reality makes opioid addiction prevention absolutely crucial for protecting our young people and communities.
The Treatment Retention Crisis
The study revealed several factors that made treatment failure more likely:
- Living with multiple health conditions
- Previous exposure to opioids
- Social isolation and lack of community support
- Geographic barriers to accessing ongoing care
These findings highlight how complex opioid addiction becomes once established, reinforcing why we must focus our efforts on stopping addiction before it starts.
Building Strong Opioid Addiction Prevention Strategies
Effective prevention requires understanding the pathways that lead to opioid addiction and implementing comprehensive strategies to block them:
Education and Awareness
- Comprehensive drug education programmes in schools
- Community awareness campaigns about prescription opioid risks
- Training for healthcare providers on responsible prescribing practices
Community-Based Prevention
- Youth engagement programmes that provide positive alternatives
- Family support networks that identify risk factors early
- Workplace education about opioid misuse dangers
Policy and Environmental Changes
- Stricter controls on opioid prescribing and monitoring
- Enhanced security measures for prescription medications
- Community policies that reduce access to illegal opioids
The Economic and Social Case for Prevention:
The research findings make a compelling economic argument for investing in opioid addiction prevention rather than treatment alone. When treatment success rates remain disappointingly low despite significant healthcare investment, prevention becomes not just morally imperative but financially prudent.
Communities that invest in robust prevention programmes see:
- Reduced healthcare costs over time
- Lower crime rates associated with drug-seeking behaviour
- Stronger family units and social cohesion
- Better educational and employment outcomes for young people
A Prevention-First Approach:
The sobering treatment retention statistics from this research should serve as a wake-up call for policymakers, educators, and community leaders. We cannot afford to wait until addiction has taken hold—we must act decisively to prevent it.
Prevention is worth a pound of cure, and when it comes to opioid addiction, this couldn’t be more true. Every young person we protect from initial opioid exposure is a life potentially saved from the devastating cycle of addiction and treatment failure.
The time for action is now. We must strengthen our prevention efforts, support our communities, and ensure that prevention remains our primary defence against the ongoing opioid crisis.
(Source: JAMA Network)
- Details
- Hits: 92
A damning counter-policy response has exposed Australian cannabis legalisation proposals as a dangerous deception that would unleash devastating public health consequences. The comprehensive analysis of the Penington Cannabis Control Plan reveals how “health-first” rhetoric masks commercialisation that prioritises addiction-for-profit economics over genuine community wellbeing.
The document warns that cannabis control Australia advocates ignore overwhelming evidence from jurisdictions where legalisation has failed spectacularly. “Once a substance is trivialised, normalised, decriminalised, legalised then commercialised – harms will increase and the human cost in short and long-term harms, not least to the emerging generation will be incalculable,” the analysis states.
Devastating Health Evidence Ignored by Legalisation Advocates
Between 2019 and 2024, dozens of peer-reviewed medical journal population studies completed on massive populations, including 330 million US citizens from 50 states and significant populations from 14 European countries, confirm what has been known for decades: cannabis is mutagenic, carcinogenic and teratogenic.
The public health impacts revealed by these studies are substantial. Cannabis is shown to be causal in:
- 33 cancers compared to 16 for tobacco, where Cannabidiol (CBD) is the most carcinogenic cannabinoid at 12 cancers
- Cancers which make up 70% of paediatric cancer cases
- 90 birth defects out of 95 tracked in the European Union including hole in the heart, cleft lip/palate and limb deformities
- Autism, where CBD is once again heavily implicated
- Premature ageing of users by 30% at 30 years
“The studies show that cannabis provides a greater burden, in terms of cancers caused in a population, than either tobacco or alcohol,” the document states. Yet Australian cannabis legalisation proponents remain “culpably silent on the very real demonstrable costs that far outweigh its touted benefits.”
International Experience Proves Control Impossible
The analysis systematically demolishes claims that cannabis control Australia schemes can prevent harm. Evidence from legalised jurisdictions tells a different story entirely:
Cannabis Use Disorder is rising, with over 40% of schizophrenia cases in Canadian youth now linked to cannabis use. Emergency department visits among young people have surged post-legalisation in both Canada and parts of the US.
Criminal markets persist: In California, the black market remains larger than the legal one. In Oregon, cannabis-related organised crime and illegal grows have increased since Measure 110. In Colorado, youth access through diverted legal supply remains a top concern of police departments.
Regulation systematically fails: Age restrictions are routinely bypassed through social sourcing, straw purchasers, and online sales. In Colorado, over 40% of youth report accessing cannabis through someone else’s legal purchase. Potency limits are either unenforced or raised over time, under pressure from commercial operators seeking higher profits.
The document warns: “The idea that cannabis can be safely controlled through retail licensing ignores the reality of regulatory capture. As with tobacco and alcohol, once an addictive industry is legalised, it does not stay in its lane.”
Economic Claims Exposed as Fraudulent
Australian cannabis legalisation advocates suggest the policy will generate tax revenue, create jobs, and reduce enforcement costs. The document exposes these claims as “economically optimistic, but empirically empty.”
The data shows:
- In California, legal operators are going bankrupt due to price collapse and black market competition
- In Canada, tax revenues from cannabis make up less than 0.4% of total federal revenue, while mental health and healthcare costs continue to rise
- A 2024 cost-benefit analysis found that for every dollar earned in cannabis tax revenue, up to $4.50 is spent on downstream public costs, including healthcare, road trauma, regulation, and lost productivity
The analysis notes that 43% or $59 billion of Australia’s total $137 billion smoking-related costs in 2015/16 came from cancers alone. With cannabis causing more cancers than tobacco, these costs would escalate dramatically under Australian cannabis legalisation.
“Legalisation does create jobs — mostly in marketing, lobbying, and packaging — but these come at the cost of public health and workforce reliability,” the document states. “Youth daily use increases, absenteeism rises, and workplace accidents become more frequent in states and provinces that legalise.”
Australia’s Failed Medical Cannabis Framework Signals Disaster
The document highlights how Australia’s existing ‘Vote for Medicine’ framework demonstrates regulatory failure, describing it as “a very thin facade of medical legitimacy tasked to facilitate recreational use to growing numbers of uninformed customers.” This system serves as “a clear harbinger of only further harms that will be precipitated by the expansion and repetition of these current failed regulation protocols.”
Prevention Framework Offers Real Solutions
Rather than pursuing cannabis control Australia policies that have failed elsewhere, the analysis advocates for proven prevention and recovery models:
- Wandoo Rehabilitation Prison’s sub-1% recidivism rate
- Kenton County’s two-phase Strong Start program, which slashed reoffending by over 60%
- Portsmouth, Ohio models showing whole-of-community recovery through integrated housing, employment pathways, trauma-informed counselling, and wraparound services
The document emphasises that “the only model that manages to achieve control outcomes has been the QUIT campaign on Tobacco. The gold standard of ‘denormalisation’ is the key. All media, education, government and health policies and practices have only One Focus, One Message and One Voice – QUIT.”
A Philosophy of Managed Despair
The analysis delivers a devastating verdict on Australian cannabis legalisation: “It has become a philosophy of surrender, where managed despair is mistaken for compassion and policy ambitions have shrunk to keeping people alive in misery rather than enabling them to live with dignity and hope.”
The document concludes: “What Australia needs is not a Cannabis Control Plan, but a Cannabis Prevention and Recovery Framework” that centres on evidence-based prevention, structured diversion programs, and genuine recovery support rather than commercial normalisation of an addictive psychotropic substance.
Australia faces a clear choice: repeat the devastating mistakes of other jurisdictions that prioritised industry profits over public health, or choose evidence-based prevention that protects future generations from avoidable harm.
Source: Dalgarno Institute
- Details
- Hits: 92
Nearly 80 per cent of South Australians back proposed South Australia alcohol reforms designed to reduce family violence and protect vulnerable communities from escalating alcohol-related harm.
Strong Public Mandate for Legislative Change
Polling commissioned by the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE) reveals overwhelming public support for stronger regulations on alcohol sales and home delivery services. The comprehensive survey reinforces calls for the South Australian Government to prioritise community safety through decisive legislative action.
Furthermore, the data demonstrates that residents want robust measures to regulate online alcohol sales and home delivery systems. Consequently, this public sentiment strengthens the case for implementing the proposed Liquor Licensing (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2025.
Clear Community Priorities Emerge
The polling data reveals compelling statistics about public attitudes towards alcohol harm prevention measures:
- 77.4 per cent believe government should prioritise harm reduction over alcohol industry profits when drafting liquor legislation
- More than two-thirds (68.8 per cent) support limiting alcohol home delivery to between 10am and 10pm as a violence prevention measure
- Almost three-quarters (73.5 per cent) endorse a mandatory two-hour safety pause between online alcohol orders and home delivery
Expert Commentary on Reform Necessity
FARE CEO Ayla Chorley emphasised the critical nature of these proposed changes. “Here is a clear example where government can make simple changes to keep women and children safe,” she stated. Moreover, the polling demonstrates that South Australians want their government to implement these essential South Australia alcohol reforms to reduce alcohol-related harm.
Additionally, Chorley highlighted the groundbreaking nature of the proposed legislation. “The proposed legislation is the first of its kind in Australia and an opportunity for the South Australian Government to lead the way in reducing gendered violence,” she explained.
Evidence-Based Approach to Public Safety
The draft legislation incorporates several evidence-based alcohol harm prevention measures, including:
- Implementation of a two-hour mandatory safety pause between ordering and delivery
- Restricting delivery times to 10.00am – 10.00pm daily
- Establishing harm reduction as the paramount objective in liquor legislation
Importantly, these reforms follow National Cabinet’s response to the Rapid Review of Prevention Approaches to End Gender-Based Violence. The review specifically identified alcohol as a key factor in escalating domestic and family violence incidents.
National Leadership Opportunity
All First Ministers have agreed to review state and territory liquor laws to prioritise violence prevention against women and children. Therefore, South Australia has the opportunity to lead national efforts in implementing meaningful legislative change.
The proliferation of largely unregulated online alcohol sales and rapid delivery services has significantly amplified harm risks. Consequently, South Australia alcohol reforms represent a crucial step towards addressing these emerging challenges.
Compelling Statistical Evidence
The urgency of reform becomes clear when examining domestic violence statistics. Alcohol involvement appears in one in three intimate partner violence incidents and one in four family violence incidents. These figures underscore the critical importance of implementing comprehensive alcohol harm prevention measures.
“We can’t wait any longer for meaningful legislative change to protect women and children in our community,” Chorley emphasised. Additionally, she acknowledged potential industry resistance whilst expressing optimism about government action.
Research Methodology and Credibility
The polling research was conducted online by Pure Profile between 9 and 22 May 2025. The study surveyed 1,013 people aged over 18 residing throughout metropolitan and regional South Australia. Importantly, the sample maintains representativeness across age, gender, and location demographics.
Future Impact and Implementation
Chorley expressed confidence that strong public support will galvanise government action on liquor law changes. “Passing these laws will set the standard for jurisdictions right across Australia and make a real difference in the lives of countless women and children,” she concluded.
The proposed South Australia alcohol reforms represent a significant opportunity to establish national leadership in violence prevention whilst protecting vulnerable community members from escalating alcohol-related harm.
(Source: WRDNews)