SHOULD SCHOOL PUPILS BE TESTED FOR DRUGS?

Five Merseyside Schools Are Poised To Begin Random Drugs Tests. David
Higgerson Considers The Controversial Plan

HUNDREDS of school-children face the prospect of being randomly
screened for drugs next term. Northumbrian-based firm Preventx
revealed it had started supplying five schools in this area with its
kits.

It follows on from trials elsewhere in the country, which have been
criticised by some for infringing on the civil liberties of youngsters.

Charity Drugscope is among critics. A spokesman said: "Testing risks
driving drug use further underground, and could result in an increase
in truancies and exclusions.

"There is no room for complacency, but it is important to acknowledge
that the use of hard drugs among young people has fallen significantly
since the 1990s, and the majority do not use drugs at all. We do not
accept that testing pupils as young as 11 is a proportionate response
to general concerns about drug use."

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which monitors social trends,
concluded that there was not yet enough evidence to determine the
impact of such tests.

But that may soon change. In Kent, 103 schools are trying out
drug-testing of up to 20 pupils each a week as part of a scheme
supporting by the Department for Education and Skills.

And it appears the Government supports the idea of such
tests.

Prime Minister Tony Blair has given his backing in the past, and the
Government's own advisor on the issue believes such tests will soon be
commonplace.

Peter Walker, a former headteacher whose school pioneered such tests,
said: "If it's properly evaluated in a positive way, it will clearly
be a model to be rolled out across the United Kingdom."

Today, the Daily Post asks: Should school pupils be tested for
drugs?

THE CASE FOR

The Intention Is To Help Before It Is Too Late

YES says Tom Fotheringham, Managing Director Preventx

PREVENTX has seen significant growth of sales to schools around the
country.

We supply a high percentage of our testing kits to public schools, but
due to budget constraints, state schools sometimes cannot afford them.

This has been helped by former education secretary Ruth Kelly clearing
the way for random drug testing of pupils.

She claimed one pilot scheme had been a "hugely effective" tool in
tackling substance abuse. Ms Kelly told a teachers' conference in
Birmingham that she had an "open mind" about extending the system nationwide.

One school Preventx supplies is Abbey School in Faversham, Kent, which
screened 20 pupils a week at random. Oral mouth saliva swabs are taken
and samples checked for traces of cannabis, cocaine and ecstasy.

GCSE results leapt significantly last year after the scheme was
introduced.

Statistics show that one in five schools will have to deal with
illegal drug use each year. As much as we would like to believe that
very few young people experiment with drugs, the available data
suggests otherwise.

Tony Blair's recent backing of drug testing in state schools could
significantly reduce substance abuse among school children. Head
teachers are now allowed to randomly test pupils suspected of taking
drugs as part of a drive to curb drug abuse among teenagers.

The intention of drug testing isn't to shame pupils, but to give help
and assistance before it's too late. If usage is detected early
enough, support and counselling can be provided to show the potential
harm they are doing to themselves and their loved ones.

More importantly, random testing also works as a deterrent from even
trying drugs in the first place.

The knowledge that a school uses random testing will help teenagers
resist peer pressure to experiment. Many teenagers don't have an
answer to coercive peer pressure, but the real possibility of testing
positive gives pupils an ideal reason to say no. Students who may in
the past have thought "well, what's the harm in just trying it' would
now have to consider the consequences of a positive test.

Preventx likes to see no child tested against his or her wishes, but
if a pupil refuses their parents should be invited into school to
discuss the issue.

Children who test positive should not be expelled but can receive
counselling.

However, any pupil who is found to be selling drugs should be
expelled.

Preventx believe school drug testing policies can identify these types
of problems before it is too late.

THE CASE AGAINST

This Plan Will Cost Too Much And Won't Work

NO Dr John Whittaker, Euro MP for the UK Independence
Party.

THE news that four schools in Liverpool and one on the Wirral will be
introducing random drug tests at the start of the new school year
raises a number of troubling questions.

Of course, all of us want our schools to have a healthy, safe
environment, where children can learn and play without the threats
presented by drug use.

However, I have some serious doubts as to whether these plans will
have the effects that are hoped for, or indeed whether they may be
counterproductive.

So far, the evidence, gained mostly from the 700 or so schools in
America that have instituted the practice and the Abbey School in
Faversham, Kent suggests that the jury is still out.

Meanwhile, there are other methods that have shown themselves to be
effective in driving down the incidence of drug use in schools.

Though random drug testing in schools should be cautioned against for
moral reasons - schools do not own the bodies of their pupils after
all - there are practical objections aplenty.

The most simple is cost. Though one test supplier is offering the
initial testing kits for free, each kit costs between UKP10 and UKP35,
which having only a 98% accuracy means that any positive result needs
to be double checked at a cost of at least UKP50 a time.

These costs will come from the school budget, putting pressure on
other school services.

Even the confirmatory tests are not 100% accurate, leaving a school
open to legal challenge from either the child accused, or their parents.

The most serious finding published by Neil McKeganey, Professor of
Drug Misuse Research at Glasgow University for the Joseph Rowntree
Trust, is that the drug that is easiest to pick up - cannabis - is the
least harmful; and that children not wishing to get caught but still
wishing to take drugs transfer usage to more serious drugs, thus
utterly undermining the whole project.

And finally it fails in its target of deterrence. As one US supreme
Court Judge put it; random drug testing, "falls short doubly if
deterrence is its aim: it invades the privacy of students who need
deterrence least, and risks steering students at greatest risk for
substance abuse away from extra-curricular involvement that
potentially may palliate drug problems."

Then there is the whole question of trust. The way in which it is done
can undermine trust between students and teachers, and between parents
and children. Trust once broken in this way is almost impossible to
rebuild - one moment a teacher is mentor, the next a policeman.