STUDENT DRUG TESTS IMPRACTICAL TO IMPLEMENT

Last week, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order
against a plan in the works at a technical college in Missouri that
would require all students to undergo comprehensive drug testing. The
students would be charged $50 each to cover the cost of the testing.

The college maintains there is a need for such testing at the school
because the students operate heavy machinery, so there is a valid
safety concern for the policy.

Marquette does not currently have a drug testing policy in place for
its students. But should the question arise in the near future among
administration in response to other colleges' policies, we would urge
the university to avoid instituting a similar plan.

Generally, drug testing would be unnecessary at Marquette. The most
common substance identified with such a test would likely be
marijuana, and we feel as though excessive use of marijuana by a
student would reveal itself in other ways, such as that student not
showing up for classes or neglecting their job or extracurricular duties.

Of course, such comprehensive drug testing would also be able to
identify students using harder drugs, but we are skeptical if a
student caught would actually then be obligated to get proper
treatment, or if he or she would simply be put on academic probation
or fired from a job.

It is our observation, however, that in recent years, illegal
consumption of prescription drugs has increased on college campuses,
including at Marquette. Misuses of Adderall, Vicodin and Hydrocodone -
which drug testing may or may not identify - are not uncommon.

We would allow for some exceptions to be made, despite the obvious
difficulty of drawing lines regarding who would have to be tested and
who would not be.

For example, it might make sense if students with access to heavy
machinery or dangerous materials had to undergo drug testing before
receiving such access. Likewise, a biomedical science student works
with chemicals in a lab and must inject liquid cocaine into lab rats
to study addiction, it would be fair to say he or she should undergo
drug testing first to ensure responsible conduct with the lab materials.

Additionally, many service organizations such as MARDI GRAS rely on
student drivers to operate vans full of other students. Since drug use
can interfere with one's driving ability, it makes sense to require
all student drivers to undergo a test.

Finally, if on-campus employers deem it necessary to require drug
testing before hiring a student, that is the employer's personal
prerogative, in line, of course, with university employment policies.
Drug testing LIMO drivers would be reasonable since they are
responsible for the lives of other in their line of work, and drug use
could interfere with their driving. It would be up to the student
whether he or she wished to pursue that particular job and therefore
comply with the employer's procedures.

In all circumstances justifying drug testing of students at Marquette,
however, we uphold that students should never have to pay to undergo
the testing or, at the very least, should have their money returned to
them upon receiving negative results.

While we acknowledge that this could both interfere with academic
integrity and be dangerous to students, we maintain that mandating
drug testing for over 8,000 undergraduates and nearly 4,000 graduate
students would not be beneficial to our campus.

Instead, it would foster a general spirit of mistrust between
administration and students. It could project the image to the outside
world that we have a serious drug problem at Marquette, which does not
seem to be the case. And, overall, it would be expensive and an
inefficient use of health resources.

Drug testing may have its place at some universities, but Marquette is
not one of them.