| I don't like the idea because it's a viscious circle; once you're excluded it is difficult to get back on track |
You expect sniffer dogs, random drug testing and bag searches in airports but what many people don’t realise is that it happens in schools too. And if you are caught supplying drugs, sometimes there are no second chances.
This ‘one-strike and out’ option is part of the government’s plan to crack down on the growing problem of drugs in schools outlined in the Guidance on Drugs in Schools, released last year.
This gives heads of primary and secondary schools the power to permanently exclude pupils the first time they are caught supplying drugs at school, even for a one-off offence.
Stephen Twigg, Minister of State for School Standards, explains the tough stance: "We can’t tolerate someone selling drugs in schools and the head has to take action straight away, whether that is a permanent or fixed term exclusion."
We spoke to some young people from London to get their views on the new option:
"Instead of excluding young people, they could be punished. It’s a bit harsh being excluded for the first time. Teachers could talk to them," says Ghizlan, 12, from Islington.
Sonti, 13, also from Islington, disagrees: "It’s right to expel them for the safety of everyone else. If you are found with drugs and you are not expelled it could be a big mistake."
This is not a new issue. There are hundreds of thousands of young people using drugs in the UK. According to statistics from the Department of Health, in 2003, 21% of 11 to 15 year olds in England had taken drugs in the last year.
With such high rates of drug use in schools, surely using the one-strike out policy will only drastically increase the number of exclusions? How can permanently excluding young people be the answer?
In 2002/2003 alone, approximately 10,000 children were permanently excluded from primary, secondary and specialist schools in Great Britain (DFES).
Ella, 15, from Hackney, thinks exclusion is not the right option: "I don’t like the idea because it’s a vicious circle; once you’re excluded it is difficult to get back on track."
Mr. Twigg acknowledges the seriousness of permanent exclusions: "If a 12 or 14 year old is selling drugs and is permanently excluded the last thing we want is for them to end up on the streets where they’re going to get more into that kind of life. They need to go to another school or a centre or a Pupil Referral Unit (PRU)."
On the other hand, the Guidance on Drugs in Schools states Pupil Referral Units experience more drug incidents than mainstream schools and that young people who are excluded are more likely to use drugs.
We also know exclusion increases the chance of ending up in the criminal justice system. Nearly two thirds of young offenders sentenced in court have been excluded from school or truant significantly.
So is this zero tolerance policy helping our society or making the situation worse?
Kamal, 14, from North London says: "It’s alright because you shouldn’t be taking drugs at our age. It is good that people like that are getting caught at school."
Daniella, 16, also from North London, has a different point of view: "This is a very good point to make, but they can’t keep expelling children for dealing drugs because they would get other young people to deal for them."
When asked how many chances a student should receive if they are caught with drugs, Mr Twigg replied: "Obviously this covers a lot of possibilities. If someone is actually supplying drugs, dealing inside or outside school or taking them into school, then this is very serious. And I would expect they would be excluded for doing that."
Guidance on Drugs in Schools does however give heads the freedom to make exceptions depending on individual circumstances. Mr. Twiggs gives an example: "If someone possesses drugs and is caught with some alcohol and maybe a small amount of cannabis, then the head has to make a judgment about what’s best."
The purpose should be to encourage that young person from not doing it again. You can’t say immediately exclude in every case. What I’ve got to do as a politician is support that head teacher in the judgment they make."
Some of the young people we spoke to were concerned about the freedom given to heads to permanently exclude based on their own opinion:
Ella says: "I don’t think the policy is fair because everyone is subject to different rules, and it depends on your head teacher."
Ghizlan agrees: "I think everyone should have the same punishment."
Mr Twigg defends his stance: "A head is the best person to make a decision about what happens to that person not me. I’m sitting here behind my desk in Whitehall. It’s much better that a head teacher makes that choice."
The policy is still in its early stages, so we don’t know what effect it will have on drug use in schools or in society in general.
Some young people believe that it’s a fair way to address the issue of dealing and using drugs in schools, whilst others cannot see how exclusions will solve the problem.
Whatever your view, the fact is it’s now one of the many rules young people need to abide by. Let’s hope that the power head teachers have been given by the government is used wisely and rather than creating more of a problem it actually tackles serious issue of drug use amongst young people
About the team
This story was produced by Fikir Assefa, 16, Laura Arowola, 14, Joshua Hilton, 14 and Shenelle Markland, 13. It was published by Reach for the Sky website.
