On a bright Tuesday in early September, Ban Nawang School’s multipurpose hall in Takhian Tia, Chon Buri, became the scene of something more inspiring than the usual round of school assemblies: local leaders, educators, police and health officials gathered to sign a bold pact aimed squarely at one of the most stubborn problems facing young people today — drugs and other harmful vices.
A united front: who showed up and why it matters
Deputy Mayor Wachira Sujoe signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on behalf of Mayor Mitchai Prabsattham, marking a formal commitment between Ban Nawang School and the Takhian Tia Subdistrict Municipality to create “Drug-Free and Vice-Free Educational Institutions.” The room was packed with the practical heavyweights of community safety: Mansruang Menanet, Director of Ban Nawang School; Police Sub-Lieutenant Suriya Klaharn, Deputy Inspector of Bang Lamung Police Station; and Phromthep Ngernmag, Acting Director of Takhian Tia Subdistrict Health Promotion Hospital. Their presence sent a clear message — tackling youth risk behaviors is a whole-community job.
What’s in the MOU? A quick tour of the plan
The agreement isn’t just ceremonial. It names the problems — drugs, alcohol, gambling, violence, smoking and pornography — and lays down a practical, one-year blueprint for addressing them. The goal is straightforward but ambitious: turn the school environment into a safe, supportive space where students can learn and grow without the shadow of substance abuse or illicit activities.
Key strategies outlined in the MOU include:
- Early identification: Screening methods (referred to in the documents as “Re-X-Ray”) to find students who might be at risk, allowing for timely intervention.
- Preventive education: Anti-drug and anti-vice campaigns that speak directly to students’ realities, not just to abstract rules.
- Curriculum integration: Weaving drug prevention and life-skill lessons into everyday learning so safety becomes part of the school culture.
- Monitoring and evaluation: Systems to track progress and tweak programs — because good intentions need measurable results.
Why parental confidence matters
One notable focus in the project is boosting parents’ trust in the school’s capacity to protect their children. That’s smart: parents who feel supported are more likely to cooperate, participate in prevention activities, and spot warning signs early. The MOU emphasizes visible, tangible outcomes — not vague promises — to show that the partnership is producing real change.
Community power: more than just officials
Beyond the formal signatories, this initiative leans on involvement from teachers, students and families, as well as the Takhian Tia Subdistrict Public Health Division. That mix — law enforcement, health professionals, school leadership and the wider community — creates a safety net with multiple layers. Police bring enforcement and prevention insights, health teams provide screening and counseling resources, while teachers and parents supply daily observation and care.
What students can expect
Practically speaking, students at Ban Nawang can expect a more proactive and supportive school environment. There will be targeted awareness campaigns, lessons that help young people navigate peer pressure and risk, and monitoring that aims to catch problems early and route students to help rather than punishment. Ideally, the campus will feel safer and more focused on learning — not on policing.
Keeping it real: measurement and accountability
Promising to fight drugs is one thing; proving progress is another. That’s why the agreement’s emphasis on monitoring and evaluation is important. Regular check-ins, data on screenings and outcomes, and an openness to refine tactics will determine whether this initiative is a short-lived gesture or a lasting shift in how the community protects its youth.
How you can help (yes, you)
If you’re a parent, teacher or neighbor in Takhian Tia, your role is central. Attend meetings, join awareness activities, talk to young people without judgment, and encourage participation in healthy alternatives — sports, arts and clubs. Community momentum is contagious; a few active voices can change expectations and create a culture that makes risky behaviors less appealing.
According to The Pattaya News, the MOU will run for one year, giving partners time to launch activities and gather early results. If this first year shows real promise, the model could become a template for other schools in Chon Buri and beyond.
At its core, this isn’t just an anti-drug campaign — it’s a local community deciding that students deserve a safe passage through their school years. With clear targets, committed leaders and parents ready to pitch in, Ban Nawang School and Takhian Tia Subdistrict Municipality have taken a hopeful step toward protecting the next generation.
This sounds like a real community effort and I appreciate the focus on prevention rather than punishment. Schools need clear plans and measurable goals if they want to make a difference. I hope they follow through beyond the first year.
Putting police and screenings inside schools sounds like it could criminalize kids instead of helping them. There is a real risk of turning small mistakes into lifelong labels.
I get the concern about labeling, but the MOU seems to include health and counseling, not just enforcement. If it’s done with care it can steer kids to help early instead of punishment.
As a kid, I would feel scared if police were always around. It would make school feel like a trap and not a safe place to learn.
That ‘Re-X-Ray’ screening term already sounds invasive and vague. Who defines risk and how will they protect privacy and avoid false positives? This could easily become a tool for discrimination if not transparent.
The concerns about validity and bias are valid; any screening tool needs validation studies, clear cutoffs, and safeguards against misuse. Without rigorous evaluation and community oversight, interventions can do more harm than good.
As a parent I want my child safe but I also don’t want their records to follow them for life. How long will the data be stored and who can access it?
Exactly—there must be policy on data retention and who gets to see the results. Otherwise the screening becomes a surveillance program in school clothes.
This is another photo-op for officials. They sign things and hope problems go away. Measurement talk sounds good, but funding and training usually fall short.
They say ‘supportive’ but it might just be watching students close all the time. Teachers should help, not spy on us. Clubs and activities are better than tests.
Clubs and meaningful engagement are part of the plan, and preventive education should be youth-centered. But training teachers to notice signs without stigmatizing students is harder than it looks.
Training sounds good, but will teachers really have time and backing? They already do too much.
Stigma terrifies me as a parent; I worry that any screening could label my child unfairly. We need clear appeals and counseling options if a student is identified as ‘at risk’.
From the health side we aim to offer counseling and referrals, not punishment, and confidentiality protocols are being developed. Parents will be involved in the follow-up process to ensure trust.
Thanks for saying that, but please publish the confidentiality rules. Words are fine but written guarantees matter when trust is low.
As a parent I agree—make the rules public and include consequences for breaches so families feel safe to participate honestly.
I appreciate the emphasis on monitoring and evaluation; too many programs lack outcome data. A one-year pilot with pre-registered indicators and public reporting would be ideal to judge effectiveness.
How will students get a say in what counts as success? Sometimes adults measure the wrong things and miss how kids actually feel.
Good point, Anya; including student-reported outcomes, qualitative feedback, and measures of school climate will give a fuller picture than screening counts alone.
From policing we can contribute data on incident reduction, but I agree that youth voices and health metrics must guide what success looks like, not arrests or expulsions.
I’m cautiously optimistic; prevention through curriculum and life-skills is promising. Yet I worry about resources and whether teachers will get practical training and time to implement these lessons.
Teachers are already stretched thin. Without extra staff or time, this will become another box to tick instead of real education.
Exactly—implementation funding and realistic schedules are essential, otherwise the noble ideas will fade into paperwork.
Law enforcement involvement is meant for safety and prevention, not punishment. We hope to build trust so students report issues early rather than hiding them. Community policing can be a supportive presence.
Community policing sometimes just means more uniforms where kids already fear contact with police. Trust doesn’t magically appear from badges.
That’s a fair critique. Officers assigned to schools will receive training on youth engagement and de-escalation, and we welcome independent oversight to build credibility.
I’ve seen too many ‘pilot programs’ that vanish when officials move on. The one-year horizon feels short and politically convenient. Show me sustainable funding and then I’ll clap.
Sustainability requires local budget commitments, not one-off grants. Otherwise it’s PR, not policy.
Exactly—without a multi-year funding plan this will just be another headline and then nothing changes on the ground.
I like the idea of more clubs and lessons about peer pressure. But if every mistake triggers a screening, students will stop trusting adults. We need safe ways to talk about problems.
Yes, build safe spaces. When schools rely on tests and reports, kids just hide stuff and that makes things worse.
Maybe create student-run councils that work with teachers so peers can help each other before things escalate.
As someone involved in local governance I can say the commitment is real and we aim to coordinate across departments. Community buy-in will decide whether this is a success or a box-ticking exercise.
Please ensure teacher voices are in the coordinating committee and that training comes with compensation or time allowances.
Noted—teachers will have representation and we are discussing stipends or released time to support curriculum integration and outreach activities.
Any strategy that focuses only on students without addressing community risk factors is incomplete. Poverty, family stress and lack of youth facilities also drive risky behavior. Invest broadly or expect limited impact.
Comprehensive approaches that include social determinants of health are indeed more effective; metrics should capture community-level changes, not just school incidents.
Good, then please advocate for cross-sector budgets so schools don’t bear the burden alone.
I cheer for anything that makes our kids safer, but I’m uneasy about surveillance creeping into daily school life. Transparency, parent committees, and clear grievance processes are a must.