FOURTH AMENDMENT UNDER FIRE?

A Chance To Choose Wisely On Random Drug Testing

Late last month, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a
state's responsibility for maintaining discipline, health and safety in
children outweighs the Fourth Amendment guarantee of reasonable grounds for
search and seizure.

The court's 5-4 vote upheld the student activities testing policy adopted
by the Tecumseh, Okla., School District, which required all middle and high
school students "to consent to urinalysis testing for drugs in order to
participate in any extracurricular activity."

With this decision, a portion of America's youth have been stripped of a
fundamental Constitutional right. Moreover, such drug testing is quite
likely to discourage participation in activities proven to be effective
drug prevention tools.

Fortunately, school districts have a choice about whether to wield this
power; they can "just say no" to authorizing random drug tests without
probable cause that a drug violation actually exists.

There are many good reasons to make this decision. Research shows that
participation in extracurricular activities helps reduce student
involvement in risky activities, such as drug use, by reducing their
after-school free time. Extracurricular activities are also shown to lessen
the drop-out rate and reduce incidence of juvenile crime.

Many teens say that if random drug testing is initiated, they would quit
these valuable programs. This is not because they use drugs and are afraid
of being caught, but they simply object to the arbitrary wielding of power
by the school system. They rightfully ask why they are being singled out
when their teachers and administrators are not subjected to such testing.

Students are not alone in questioning the wisdom of this policy. Taxpayers
may well ask if the enormous cost of individual drug testing -- $30 to $60
dollars per kit per child -- is worth straining school district budgets and
if this allocation will compromise the goal of a well-rounded education for
their children. Extracurricular activities are traditionally vulnerable at
budget crunch times.

Ultimately, school districts will realize that random drug testing does not
address the No. 1 drug school kids use -- alcohol. Nine out of ten students
experiment with alcohol before graduation from high school. Many of these
experiences result in drunk driving and sexual activities. Some students
will advance from experimentation to dependence to addiction.

Parents can only hope that existing alcohol- and tobacco-use prevention
money will not be diverted to drug-testing kit purchases. "Pee tests" (as
kids call them) do not test for alcohol or steroids or nicotine -- all
harmful substances used by many teens.

Any expanded drug-testing programs should test those kids who we firmly
believe have substance-abuse problems. Once identified, we should use
additional funds for treatment of both the student and family.

While it is surely good to have drug-free schools, it is equally important
that families and communities also be drug free. Healthy growth for
children begins with adults modeling appropriate behaviors.

The Supreme Court ruling offers school districts a powerful but potentially
destructive tool. May they learn to use it -- or refuse to use it -- wisely.