Drugs designed to enhance academic performance and concentration are readily available to Oxford students, a Cherwell investigation has found.

A survey carried out by Cherwell found that while seven per cent of students who responded had taken a ‘smart drug’, 28% would consider taking these drugs, while over half would deem it cheating. However, only 32% thought academic drugs should be made illegal.

The drugs most common among Oxford students are Modafinil and Ritalin, with students at the same colleges tending to flock towards the same drugs. Whereas Modafinil is not listed under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act and is available without legal restrictions in the UK, Ritalin, which is prescribed to children who suffer from Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD), is a Class B drug. Possession without a prescription can therefore lead to a five-year prison sentence, or an unlimited fine. One fourth year finalist, ‘Charlotte’, admitted to taking Modafinil “mainly because I had heard about other people using it and wanted to see whether it would make a big difference to how I worked.”

Student users stressed the benefits of these drugs over caffeinated products such as coffee and Red Bull. Charlotte commented, “Personally, I found it really good. It didn’t really affect my behaviour or how I felt at all; it just meant that when I was reading I concentrated hard instead of going on Facebook every ten minutes.” ‘Peter’, another user of Modafinil, agreed, “I took Modafinil a few days each week last year for a period of about three or four months. It worked well for me, and in a different way to coffee, as unlike with coffee you don’t get jittery. Rather, it increases your ability to focus over a period of time.”

The unpredictable side effects of Modafinil made students unsure as to whether they would recommend it to others. Charlotte said, “One of my friends tried it at the same time and had a totally different reaction: he found it kept him awake all night and made him twitchy, as though he’d drunk twenty cups of coffee. So it doesn’t affect everyone in the same way.” The survey also reflected the varying effects of Modafinil. Whilst one student was confident that he would “unreservedly” recommend Modafinil, another commented that Modafinil was only useful for combating tiredness. “[It was] much better than coffee for keeping [me] awake, but the sleep debt does exist and it’s horrendous. Also it didn’t help my concentration at all.”  Another anonymous user was hesitant as to whether [s]he would recommend it, commenting that like many other drugs, it caused dehydration.

Weight loss appears to be another possible side effect of the various ‘smart drugs’.  ‘Patrick’, a regular user of Modafinil, explained that when taking the drug he became so focused on his work that he simply forgot to eat. Ritalin user ‘Rachel’ also commented that it worked as an appetite suppressant.  The ease with which the drugs can be purchased also seems to be a factor in students’ casual attitude towards them.  Peter obtained his Modafinil through the internet and remarked that they were “embarrassingly easy to get hold of.”

Charlotte obtained her pills through a friend, who had got them from another acquaintance to whom they had been medically prescribed. However, she also commented upon the ease with which the drugs could be bought without a prescription. She claimed, “There are people in some of the colleges that sell [these drugs]. It’s not hard to get hold of, and if you try hard enough you can get a doctor to prescribe it.”

Furthermore, there are various websites on which customers can ‘shop’ for smart drugs. Cramshop.com, a partner company to studycram.com, promotes the selling of smart drugs under the slogan, “A pill a day = straight A’s.” They also claim that the drugs on their site are “generally safer than taking aspirin – unlike borrowing Adderall or Provigil from your buddy.” Under a section entitled “famous smart drug users”, they include Albert Einstein as taking nicotine, Lewis Carroll as taking mushrooms, and The Beatles as taking LSD.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%5547%%[/mm-hide-text]

When asked how they would defend the accusation of cheating levelled at them by over half of students surveyed, the drugs users all responded in a similar way.  Charlotte argued, “It’s not like taking steroids in the Olympics, as steroids make you better at sport. These drugs don’t make you any cleverer, they just make you work harder. Loads of people are prescribed sleeping pills during the exam period to help them work better during the day, and I’m not sure it’s very different from that.” Peter said, “Cheating is when you’ve got something that nobody else can get hold of. Given how easy it is to get hold of, I wouldn’t consider it cheating – the only thing to stop someone else taking it is a personal decision.” Rachel agreed, saying, “Ritalin doesn’t make you smarter, it just allows you to fulfil your potential. I don’t see any reason why it shouldn’t be available to the wider public.” However, not all those surveyed were equally open-minded towards ‘smart drugs’.

One first year classicist disagreed with the claims above, arguing, “It is not that these drugs are inherently bad, nor am I saying that they make you ‘cleverer’ – rather, the point is that since they are not all legal, and can affect people in different ways, the level playing field of academic success is destabilised by the minority of users.“Just as in the East German Olympics of 1976, where some East German female swimmers used anabolic steroids [which mimic the effects of testosterone and dihydrotestosterone in the body and can affect fertility], here we have a group of people taking a risk that, however readily available the drugs are, not everyone is willing to take them. Just as the Olympics ought to be a test of what the human body can achieve, so should academic pursuits be a test of what the mind can do without chemical enhancement.”

Another student said, “I have no problem with it from an ethical point of view, but if you really feel you can’t cope, then you probably shouldn’t be here.”Despite their prevalence and the unconcerned attitude of the majority of students regarding the use of ‘smart drugs’, most colleges do not yet seem to have developed a clear policy regarding their usage.  Catherine Paxton, Senior Tutor at Merton College, said, “Merton is aware of ‘smart drugs’ and has begun considering the welfare and other issues which they raise. We follow the Proctors’ guidelines on dealing with drug misuse and these would apply if the ‘academic’ drugs were procured illegally. We have no other documented policy currently.” 

A spokesperson for the University of Oxford voiced anxieties concerning the use of ‘smart drugs’. She said, “We would strongly advise students against the practise of taking drugs that have not been specifically prescribed to them, as this is dangerous and can be illegal. We would also urge that they report anyone trying to sell them drugs to the police.” She continued, “Students who are struggling to cope personally or academically, or who have any kind of drug problem, will find a range of support at Oxford. They should talk to their tutors, their college welfare officers, OUSU, their GP, or the University Counselling Service.”

All names have been changed to protect the privacy of sources.

Video Report by Alishba Khaliq

Students have joined protests calling for the closure of Campsfield House, an immigration centre near Oxford where detainees are accommodated pending their case resolutions and subsequent removal from the United Kingdom.

Amnesty International have accused Campsfield of contravening international human rights. A spokesperson for Oxford University Amnesty International said, “OUAI strongly believes that seeking asylum is not a crime and people who are seeking asylum should not, therefore, be detained under immigration laws. The people detained within Campsfield House are suffering human rights abuses, and the detention centre should be closed down.”

Campsfield is one of 12 detention centres in the UK, which the UK Border Force has stated are “used for temporary detention in situations where people have no legal right to be in the UK but have refused to leave voluntarily.”

Target of a 19 year campaign to shut it down, Campsfield House has witnessed over 200 protests since its conversion from a youth detention centre in 1993. Its closure has been requested by local trade unions and the Oxford and District Trades Union Council, in addition to student, faith and human rights groups.

Local government bodies have added their voices in support of this movement, with the Cherwell District Council, the Oxford City Council and the Oxfordshire County Council also calling for Campsfield House to be closed or, at the very least, for it not to be expanded. David Blunkett described Campsfield House as “outdated” and announced its closure in 2002. However, owing to a fire at another detention centre, Yarl’s Wood, there was an “unplanned reduction in detention places” according to the Campaign to Close Campsfield website. This allegedly resulted in the decision to close Campsfield to be reversed.Campsfield has a history of suicides and hunger strikes.

A 35 year old male hanged himself in the toilet block last year when he learnt that he was to be deported. A fellow detainee who wished to remain anonymous told the Guardian, “He was normally a very quiet person … but the pressure is too much for people in here.” In 2009, staff allegedly ignored suicide threats from Brice Mabonga, who apparently attempted to kill himself with a sharpened plastic knife.

Manzambi Birindwa, fellow detainee said, “He told me one day in his home country they killed his father, his mother and brothers so he lost everything. If they send him back, he says the Government will kill him, so it’s better for him to die here. He told the guards he wanted to kill himself here, but nobody said nothing. They don’t care.”

In 2005 Ramazan Kumluca became the youngest asylum seeker to commit suicide after learning his application had failed. Another inmate, Abdulwase Kamali, told the Independent, “Ramazan said he had been told by immigration he would be sent back to Italy, and he said if he was sent back to Italy he would be used in sex films. He said he would slash himself or hang himself.”

Kumluca was found hanging to the closing mechanism of his door on the morning June 27th when other detainees tried to wake him for prayers. Later, in 2010 around 147 of the 216 detainees went on hunger strike. They released a statement that said, “Some of us detainees have been detained for over three years with no prospect of removal or any evidence of future release. There is no justification whatsoever for detaining us for such a period of time. Our lives, incidentally, have been stalled without any hope of living a life, having a family or any future.”

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG%%5546%%[/mm-hide-text]

Wadham student Emmeline Plews, member of Oxford University Amnesty International, stated that the prison-like atmosphere made it “really psychologically difficult” for those inside. She said, “These people are being kept here without charge. Campsfield is the equivalent of a high-category prison, yet they haven’t been charged. They’ve been locked up for an indefinite amount of time without being told anything or being given reasons, which is incredibly cruel and gives them an awful loss of control.

Oxford students have been partaking in the monthly protests with the Close Campsfield Campaign and visiting the centre to talk with inmates. Rebecca Sparrow, a third year Classics and English student, visits an inmate weekly. She said that this was mainly an “act of solidarity” to show the detainees “that they had not been forgotten.”

Plews added that the security at Campsfield makes it difficult to visit. She claimed, “Like a prison, they are very tight on the security. You have to obtain the person’s name and number and ring them before you’re given permission to go. And this means it’s often quite hard to make contact and get established as a group, but hopefully we will do so soon.”

The UK Border Association website states, “Visitors attending the centre will need to book 24 hours in advance and provide photographic ID…and a utility bill on arrival. Visitors will be subject to search procedures and fingerprinting. They will also have their photograph taken.”

Further concerns have been expressed since Campsfield House was taken over by private company MITIE, described by their website as a “strategic outsourcing and energy services company”. Bill Mackeith, joint organiser of the Close Campsfield Campaign said, “Detainees and their supporters do not accept MITIE making private profit out of causing misery and injustice by imprisoning people without charge or conviction for an indefinite period without proper judicial oversight.”

MITIE has been accused of making vast profits from enterprises such as Campsfield, paid for by the taxpayer. It costs £45,000 to hold one inmate at a centre like Campsfield for a year. Mackeith supported this accusation, saying, “Like other outsourcing companies, MITIE specialise in taking over a service and then squeezing it for profit, finding more ways to exploit staff or cut corners. In our case, a juicy ‘corner’ could be to exploit further the migrants wrongfully imprisoned in Campsfield, who provide more or less forced or virtual slave labour for just £5 a day.”

He continued, “MITIE’s chief executive Ruby McGregor-Smith was one of the 35 bosses who signed a letter to the Daily Telegraph last October, backing the government’s public spending cuts in the interests of “a healthier and more stable economy” and commenting on the “significant opportunities for the outsourcing market” that will result.

MITIE refused to comment on any allegations, directing all questions to the Home Office, who told Cherwell, “Immigration removal centres like Campsfield are vital in helping us to remove those with no right to be in the country. Detention is a last resort after all attempts to return someone voluntarily have failed. HMI Prisons confirmed last year that Campsfield continues to be a particularly well-operated centre, and that it provides a safe and secure environment for staff and detainees.”

The Home Office did not comment on the allegations that Campsfield breaches human rights, including claims that detainees are deported without being given long enough to appeal nor to the hunger strikes and suicides that have been reported at the centre over the past decade

The report of the unannounced inspection of Campsfield by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons in May last year revealed, “Health care staff received no training in recognising symptoms of torture and trauma. Detainees with low-level anxiety had no counselling services and there was little structured support for detainees with significant mental distress.” There was also “no mental health awareness training for custody staff” and detainees claimed that there was  “disrespectful behaviour on the part of some of the nurses”.

It also stated that there was a greater need for translation and interpretation services within the centre. It concluded, “Too little progress had been made in remedying areas that we had previously identified as requiring improvement, and we had particular concerns about the lack of progress in health care.”

Out of the 36 recommendations that had been made upon safety, only seven had been achieved by May 2011. 19 of the 41 recommendations regarding respect at the centre had not been achieved, and only two of the 24 recommendations made in the areas of purposeful activity and preparation for release were fully achieved.

HMI Prisons declined to state when they were planning another inspection of Campsfield. A spokesperson for HMI Prisons told Cherwell, “We routinely inspect all centres and will certainly reinspect Campsfield in due course.” They also refused to comment on Amnesty’s allegations of human rights contraventions.

Alistair Johnson, member of Oxford University Amnesty International and attendee of the latest protest stressed the danger of running an institution such as Campsfield for profit. He said, “We believe that the failure to implement recommendations calling for the improvement of conditions within Campsfield represents the danger of privatizing detention centres. Campsfield House represents human rights abuses that are happening virtually on Oxford’s doorstep, and it’s therefore really important for Oxford students to get involved.”