A DRUG-TESTING BLUNDER VS. WHY NOT TEST STUDENTS?

USA TODAY'S EDITORIAL POSITION

When Miami schools decided to crack down on drug abuse, they instead found
a way to squander money.

School districts around the country are watching Miami this week as the
nation's fourth largest school system puts the finishing touches on an ill
conceived program to randomly drug test its high school students.

Miami school officials are pushing the $200,000 plan as a bold new way to
fight teen-age drug abuse.

Too bold, in fact. The drug testing plan presents a flagrant threat to the
personal liberties of 82,000 mostly law-abiding Miami high school students.
So to head off predictable legal challenges, school officials are watering
down their testing procedures to the point of uselessness.

They're asking parents to okay drug testing for all high school students,
not just those suspected of abusing drugs. And to prevent charges that the
program discriminates, children will be selected for the urine tests
randomly using a lottery.

The absurdity of the program doesn't stop there. To ensure that students
provide their own urine samples, parents must accompany their kids to drug
testing sites.

And in the cruelest irony, students who test positive for drug abuse won't
be offered follow-up treatment. Officials say the school district can't
afford to get into the drug rehab business. In fact, only parents will know
if the student failed. School officials will be given cumulative results.

In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled it's legal for high schools to require
student athletes to undergo random drug testing. Until now, though, school
districts have wisely avoided testing overall student populations because
the programs are ineffective and hugely expensive.

Instead, most school districts are fighting the drug problem using
established anti-drug educational programs. Districts administering drug
tests, have found programs most cost-effective when offered voluntarily to
students suspected of abusing drugs who can be helped through school-based
programs.

Like other urban districts, Miami schools have plenty of problems. An
Edcation Week study released last week found; 10% of Miami high schoolers
drop out every year, students score below the national average on
standardized tests, and the area's inadequate schools are the major reason
businesses refuse to locate in Miami.

None of these flaws will le corrected by the school system's expensive
entry into the drug testing field.

And until the school system can come up with a cost effective way to help
students with drug problems, there are better ways it can spend its money.

OPPOSING VIEW

by Renier Diaz de la Protilla ( a 26 year-old Miami-Dade County School
Broad member)

Why not test students?

OUR PROGRAM WILL GIVE PARENTS, SCHOOLS INFORMATION WHILE HELPING STUDENTS
HELP THEMSELVES.

In sports, business, industry and government, drug testing is an
increasingly com-mon weapon in America's fight against drugs. That is why
it is perplexing and dis-turbing that our children, who are the most
vulnerable to drug use and its attendant evils, are largely left out.

The pilot drug and alcohol testing pro-gram I proposed to the Miami-Dade
County School Board targets abuse among high school students. No student
will be tested without parental consent. None will be punished for opting
out. Only parents will get results of the random tests, along with
information on where to get help.

Research shows testing will deter students from using, as well as leading
those who test positive to help. The program will cost less than current
anti-drug programs.

Last year, for example, Miami-Dade America's fourth targest school district
spent $4.5 million in anti-drug education and peer counseling programs
whose effectiveness is hard to evaluate.

The numbers gathered confidentially through the drug-testing program will
be invaluable in guiding future anti-substance abuse programs. Although
parents can test their children without school involvement, it is erroneous
to assume that parents have the time or the resources to do so.

Critics may challenge this flexible policy with privacy or constitutional
arguments. But what about a parent's right to information? I seriously
doubt there are court rulings which deny a parent's right to know if his or
her child's life is in danger.

Consider the 15-year-old Miami girl, pregnant and already a longtime drug
abuser, who drowned in her bathtub after smelling glue. And a Miami boy,
age 17, who shot himself in the head after years of alcohol, marijuana and
LSD abuse. Both since 1995. Both could have been saved if their families
had detected drug use earlier.

"Just Say No" and other 'rah-rah" campaigns no will longer cut it. More
aggressive and pro-active measures are needed if we are to save more of our
children.