Banning Smoking among High School and College Students in Texas
Introduction and purpose statement- Example: The purpose of this paper is to propose a change to Florida Statute XXX to require that all ambulatory surgery centers to employ a nurse who is a licensed risk. This will be accomplished by- One paragraph
Select a population health issue of interest to you and identify the population affected by the issue.
1-Describe your selected population health issue and the population affected by this issue. My topic is ban smoking among High school an colleges and public places One paragraph , or you can choose any other good ideas
2-Summarize the two advocacy campaigns you researched in this area- I am attaching two articles , describe the article ( article –one Teenage smoking behaviour following a high-school smoking ban in Chile: interrupted time-series analysis and second one is Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young People in India:Project MÏÏRI) –Write short description of article
3-Explain the attributes that made those campaigns effective.-( With measurable outcome Here is an example of measurable outcomes: Ninety percent of those who took the nurse lead class on antidepressants reported a medication compliance rate of seventy-five percent or greater when interviewed two weeks after the class ended. Twenty percent in the control group, who read a brochure, reported a medication compliance rate of seventy-five percent.)
4-Develop a plan for a health advocacy campaign that seeks to create a new policy or change an existing policy with regard to the issue and population you selected. Be sure to include in your plan:I live in Texas , Texas does not have a law to ban the smoking in the school , My proposed solution is to ban smoking in the campus , or if you think any other ideas you can write under this section you must have to cover
a) Description of the public health issue and proposed policy solution
2) One or two objectives for the policy you want to be implemented
b) The means by which you will convey information to various stakeholders on the need for this policy change
c) Be sure your proposed need is substantiated by data and evidence- I am attaching other article for This section
d) Methods of establishing support for the policy, including how to influence policymakers
5) Explain how the attributes of the effective advocacy programs you researched could be applied to your Proposed advocacy campaign
6)Explain whether your proposed policy could be enacted through a modification of existing law or regulation or the creation of new legislation/regulation. Be sure to cite and reference the statute or regulation using primary references or cite and reference the section of the law where you might insert new policy
7)Explain how existing laws or regulations could impact your advocacy efforts. Cite and reference primary Sources which mean statutes. Administrative codes or other regulations
8) Provide an analysis of the methods you could use to influence legislators or other policymakers to support your policy. In particular, explain how you would use the “three legs” of lobbying in your advocacy efforts. Do not define the three legs- apply them
9) Summarize the obstacles you anticipate arising in the legislative process and how you could overcome these hurdles
10) Explain any ethical dilemmas that could arise during your advocacy campaign, and how you would resolve them.
11) Describe the ethics laws and reporting requirements that are applicable to your advocacy campaign.
12) Evaluate the special ethical challenges that are unique to the population you are addressing
13 ) Summary of the paper -refers back to your purpose statement. The purpose of this paper was to….
I attached two sample paper ,plz pay close attention to these two questions.
1. Describe how your policy could be achieved: new legislation, or a change in an existing law or regulation.
2. State how existing laws or regulations influence how you proceed in advocating for your proposed policy
Developing a Health Advocacy Campaign: Banning Smoking among High School and College Students in Texas
Name
Institution of affiliation
Developing a Health Advocacy Campaign: Banning Smoking among High School and College Students in Texas
Introduction
According to Lovato et al. (2013) tobacco smoking among adolescents is a major public health burden in the U.S. Tobacco is one of the causes of preventable diseases that kill many people in the US. Studies show that one in every five deaths is related to tobacco use (WHO, 2014). However, in the state of Texas, less effort has been made to compact tobacco use among the youth. Research reviews show that most people pick up smoking during their school years. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to propose a change in the Texas Tobacco Law for it to ban smoking in educational institutions in Texas. This will be accomplished through intensive advocacy for changes to be made in the law. The changes will be implemented by qualified health care providers through the collaboration of policymakers, health, education and media sectors.
Population Health Issue
Data from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that close to 4,400 people per day aged between 12 and 17 initiate cigarette smoking in the United States. Two thousand of these young smokers become addicts of cigarette smoking. The report also states that eighty percent of adult smokers began smoking before they left high school. The CDC also reported that 22% of young adults aged 18 to 24 in the U.S are smokers. The trend of smoking among college students was at its peak in 1999, and has decreased throughout the 2000s. However, Seo, Macy, and Torabi (2011) reviewed that 18% of the students in college were smokers. Texas health reports show that preventable diseases are the leading causes of deaths in Texas, and the U.S. Tobacco contains various chemicals that cause cancer and have toxic effects on many organs of the body. The risks of secondhand smoking that affect people around smokers include heart disease, chronic lung diseases like bronchitis in children and a higher risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) (WHO, 2014). The lifestyles led by college students puts them at risk of secondhand smoke in bars, college buildings, and clubs. A study done in Carolina showed that 83% of the students were recently exposed to secondhand smoke (Seo, Macy, & Torabi, 2011). Research findings suggest that smoke-free laws are associated with the reduction in heart attack cases (Berman & Snyder, 2012). Evidence from tobacco-free high schools, colleges and public places show that policies are an effective way of reducing smoking behavior among the people (Seo, Macy, & Torabi, 2011).
Summary of Advocacy Campaigns
High School Smoking Ban in Chile
A study carried out by Feigl, Salomon, Danaei, Ding, and Calvo (2015) was aimed at evaluating the effects of banning smoking on smoking behavior of Chilean high school students. Feigl et al (2015) used an interrupted time-series analysis for conducting the study. Data used was sourced out from Chile’s school population survey carried out from 2000 to 2011. The population sample was between the age of 12-18, and the control population was of individuals between 19-24 years. Smoking behavior treads were assessed using Poisson regression models. The models were also used after the program changes were finished. The measures used were self-evaluation on the occurrence of smoking habits by giving feedback on the number of times one had used tobacco in the last four weeks, and the rate of using tobacco by informing if one smoked 15 days or more per month. The study found that since 2005 to 2011 there has been a 6.8% descent in smoking prevalence among the learners compared to 3.6% annually in the control group. The decline in the target population was at 2.9%. Feigl et al. (2015) estimates show that 5 to 6 years after implementing the law, there will be a 13.7% smoking prevalence in the schools. The group also found that the declines in smoking prevalence were mainly driven by students grade 8 to 10. Additionally, Feigl et al. (2015) established that the ban did not change the rate of smoking among the students. Therefore, the researchers concluded that the smoking ban was productive in reducing the smoking prevalence in high schools and recommended that interventions that targeted the adult community and frequent smokers should be implemented.
The Project MÏÏRI in India
A study by Perry, Stigler, Arora, and Reddy (2009) focused on reducing tobacco use among adolescents in urban areas of India using a 2-year multicomponent school-based approach. Perry et al’s (2009) study involved 32 students chosen and recruited from the urban areas of Delhi and Chennai. The students were randomly assigned to an intervention group. Two cohorts of the 6th to 8th grades were used to collect the initial, intermediate and outcome data in 2004. A total of 14063 students participated in the research and finalized a survey either in 2004, 2005 or 2006. The interventions employed during the program were behavioral classroom courses, parental involvement measures, and peer-based activism. The measures used in the study to figure the outcomes included a self-reported use of tobacco, chewing tobacco, hand rolled flavored cigarettes, and future intentions in engaging in smoking or chewing tobacco. The findings of the research by show that students who engaged in the intervention group were likely not to increase smoking during the 2 year study compared to the other group. Additionally, the students in intervention groups had a lower probability to have an intention to use tobacco in the future. Perry et al. (2009) concluded that school-based intervention programs have the capacity to reduce tobacco use among the Indian population by using multistrategy approach of smoking reduction among the youth.
Attributes that made the Campaigns Effective
Feigl et al. (2015) research shows that the smoking prevalence among high school students between 2000 and 2005 rose from 37.4% in 2000/2001 to 38.6% in 2004/2005. The research did not observe any significant reduction in smoking prevalence among the control population over this period. In the period after 2005 Feigl et al. (2015) reported that there was a decline in the prevalence among the target group that was recorded to be 24.9% in 2010/2011 among the students. It is conclusive to note that smoking prevalence declined significantly in the target group compared to the control population after the ban on smoking. Also, stratified analysis shows that the intervention had the greatest effects on students among the lowest grades that led to an annual improvement of 7.2% in the smoking tread of the study population compared to the control group. Additionally, Feigl et al. (2015) noted that the ban was least effective among students in the highest two grades. According to the research, before the ban was implemented the rate of smoking among the study population declined at an annual interval of 2.5%. After 2005, the difference observed in the smoking patterns of the study group and the control group was not noteworthy to draw any conclusions.
The attributes of Perry et al. (2009) study shows that in the initial data collected, the number of people involved in the use of tobacco was equivalent in both the intervention and the control group. During the two years of the intervention, there was a significant difference with the control group having an increase in use while the study population reduced the frequency of smoking. The increase in the control population was by 68%, while the control decreased by 17% in two years. An analysis of the intentions and psychological factors shows that in the initial investigations, there were no differences among the groups. After implementing the intervention, the intention to chew or smoke tobacco changed over time with a 5 % increase in the monitoring group and a 28% decrease in the people enrolled in the program. The study also found that there was a significant difference in the social environment and intrapersonal factors. For instance, there was a difference in knowledge of the repercussions smoking has on someone’s health, reasons why one uses or does not use tobacco, the prevalence of tobacco use, advocacy skills, and means of tobacco control policies as well as social susceptibility.
Proposed Policy Solution
According to the Texas Department of State Health Services (2013), 18.5% of the people in Texas are adult smokers while 42% of the youth between grades 7-12 were found to have started using tobacco by the age of 13 years. Texas lacks a comprehensive statewide smoking ban. The efforts made to ban smoking are directed to municipal workplaces, private working stations, restaurants, and bars. However, a statue that monitors smoking in education institutions has not been developed (Texas Department of State Health Services, 2013). Therefore, there is a need to develop a policy that will monitor smoking in educational institutions because they have been identified as the areas where most smoking habits begin.
Objectives for the policy
To impact a ban on smoking in all Texas education institutions that include high schools and colleges and also lead to implem...