Why staff at European schools abstain from enforcing smoke-free policies on persistent violators

Abstract

Summary Secondary schools in European countries increasingly implement comprehensive smoke-free school policies (SFSPs) that prohibit most or even all adolescents from smoking during school hours. Consistent enforcement of SFSPs is essential for realizing optimum effectiveness. A main challenge represents adolescents who persistently violate the rules. We studied how staff in European countries respond to these persistent violators and why they may turn a blind eye. We used interview transcripts from 69 staff members at 22 schools in 6 European countries to identify cases in which staff turned a blind eye. We then applied thematic analysis for identifying the considerations as to why they turn a blind eye. Turning a blind eye on persistent violators happened among school staff in all six countries. Three considerations were identified. First, staff believe their primary role and duty is to support all adolescents to develop into well-functioning adults, and sometimes it is best to accept smoking. Second, staff expect that applying stricter disciplinary measures will not stop persistent violators and is more likely to create more severe problems. Third, staff do not feel supported by relevant actors in society (e.g. parents) in influencing adolescent smoking. We conclude that staff’s considerations stress the need to support school staff in enforcing the increasingly comprehensive rules on the most persistent smokers.

Are Danish vocational schools ready to implement “smoke-free school hours”? A qualitative study informed by the theory of organizational readiness for change

“…In many secondary schools, STPs are not well implemented [ 22 – 25 ]. A systematic review found that key contextual factors for successfully implementing tobacco- and substance-use interventions in secondary schools are a positive organizational climate, adequate training, and teachers’ and students’ motivation [ 26 ].…”

Are Danish vocational schools ready to implement ‘smoke-free school hours’? A qualitative study informed by the theory of organizational readiness for change

“…26 Moreover, the discourses can be said to echo a broader health-political debate concerning which means and models are most appropriate for health promotion and tobacco control. 44,45 As with other research on STPs 22,24,26 , we identi ed staff and managerial perceptions that students' smoking behavior is a less important issue to address than other health behaviors, such as students' well-being, as a barrier to change commitment. Moreover, in line with other research 17,19,40 our study shows that enforcement is seen as a practice that might negatively affect teacher-student relations.…”

“…In many secondary schools, STPs are not well implemented. [21][22][23][24] A systematic review found that key contextual factors for successfully implementing tobacco-and substance-use interventions in secondary schools are: a positive organizational climate, adequate training and teachers' and students' motivation. 25 Barriers to implementation include heavy workloads, budget cuts and lack of resources or support.…”

Der Zusammenhang zwischen schulischer Tabakkontrolle und der wahrgenommenen Raucherprävalenz Jugendlicher

“…Eine Möglichkeit zur Erhöhung der Effektivität der Durchsetzung des Rauchverbots würde in der Einbindung schulexterner Fachkräfte bestehen, da das interne Schulpersonal aufgrund begrenzter Zeitressourcen und anderer Prioritäten im Schulalltag dies schlichtweg nicht allumfänglich zu leisten vermag [32]. Qualitative Studien verweisen darauf, dass Lehrer*innen aus Gründen der Skepsis gegenüber der Effektivität von sanktionierenden Tabakkontrollmaßnahmen und eines priorisierenden Fokus auf die Persönlichkeitsentwicklung der Jugendlichen eher davon absehen, die schulische Tabakkontrolle strikt umzusetzen [33,45] [7,8,16]. Jüngere Trenddaten für Deutschland zeigen zudem eine Persistenz von SES-Unterschieden in der häuslichen Passivrauchbelastung auf [13,18].Diesbetrifftebenso andere private Kontexte wie die toxische Tabakexposition im Automobil [36].…”