BOARD OKs SCHOOL DRUG TESTING

Eventual Policy May Or May Not Look Like Initial Proposal

There was disagreement about what a drug testing policy might look
like and even on the need for it or wisdom of doing it, but that
didn't stop a majority of North Wasco County School District board
members from voting to start one at the beginning of the next school
year.

After considering member PK Swartz's draft for a possible policy, the
board resolved -- in a 5-2 vote with Wayne Haythorn and Brian Stahl
dissenting -- to develop and implement some kind of policy by September.

Though the policy the board finally adopts may or may not look like
Swartz's proposal, his draft formed the basis for the discussions,
which were punctuated by statements about the gravity of the drug
problem, philosophical objections to how the war on drugs is being
waged, and practical concerns about implementation of a testing program.

Swartz's draft -- which he said is only a "starting point" and is
"open to all sorts of modifications" -- proposes testing for alcohol,
amphetamines, opiates, and steroids starting in grade 6. It suggests
four different bases or "tracks" for testing: non-voluntary,
voluntary, parental voluntary and "upon request."

According to the proposal, non-voluntary testing would be for students
involved in one or more "cocurricular" activities (includes all
competitive sports or other non-credit competitive groups), who could
be tested on a random basis at any time during the school year.

The voluntary and parental voluntary tracks would permit students to
volunteer -- or their parents to volunteer them, so long as they are
minors -- to be in a group subject to random testing at any time
during the school year.

Finally, a student could request a test -- whether to seek help with a
drug problem, or to prove freedom from drugs -- at any time. In this
case, the student would designate a staff member to receive the result
and determine any appropriate consequences.

In general, positive test results would be sent directly to a trained
drug and alcohol counselor within the school system. Swartz said
results would not be shared with law enforcement authorities except in
the case of a court order.

Swartz said the intent of his proposed policy is three-fold: to
identify students actively using drugs and get them into treatment in
a non-punitive manner, to give students help in avoiding peer
pressure, and to provide a safe environment for everyone in school.

Haythorn said, "There's no way this [proposed policy] will not be seen
as punitive .. an invasion of the student." Instead of drug testing,
he expressed his support for "impairment testing," which is used to
improve safety in some workplaces by testing whether employees are fit
to do their job at any given moment.

Calling the Controlled Substances Act "one of the worst disasters in
American history," Haythorn said, "We've got to stop and change the
philosophy."

Rather than telling students what to do, Haythorn said, educators
should "change direction, trust people and talk about what's a
rational, intelligent decision."

Board member LeAnn Ellett disagreed. Saying there is "a big problem in
our small town with drugs," she argued that "an authority figure in
these kids' lives -- telling them what to do and right from wrong --
is not a bad thing.

"The drugs now are a lot worse than what we had when we were growing
up," she said. "They make you more violent."

Haythorn expressed concern about what the draft outlined as one of the
consequences of a positive test -- suspension of the student from the
cocurricular activity for three days. He said that would be "the last
thing I want to do," arguing that what was needed was more engagement.

"I think kids want boundaries," Ellett responded.

Board member Ernie Blatz said the board has a reponsibility to help
ensure a safe environment for students and staff. "What if a drug user
hurts someone?" he asked.

He said one advantage of a testing program is that it offers kids who
are "borderline" an "out" -- meaning a reason to resist pressure to
use drugs, based on the knowledge that they could be tested.

Stahl expressed concerns that the proposed testing policy was not
global enough, that it lacked an educational component, that language
relating to confidentiality was not strong enough, and that health
care professionals would not be sufficiently available to address
needs identified by testing.

Board members agreed on the importance of an effective educational
component to accompany any testing program, but most seemed willing to
take the step of implementing the testing policy.

Noting that previous education programs have largely failed, Ron
Stephens said, "Until we find the [right program], we should be
responsible to take some steps to make sure students don't hurt
themselves or others.

"Anything we can do that might deter someone from getting involved
[with drugs] is a positive," he said.