DRUG SUMMIT PUSHES RANDOM TESTING OF STUDENTS

A top federal anti-drug official came to Pittsburgh yesterday to extol the
virtues of randomly testing students for drugs, a policy that few
Pennsylvania school districts have embraced and some already have rejected.

At the third of four national summits on drug testing this year, deputy
drug czar Mary Ann Solberg told school officials and community leaders that
random student testing was an effective way to stop youth drug use.

"Our children need to grow up healthy and drug-free," she told those in the
crowded room at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Coraopolis, emphasizing that a
testing policy should be nonpunitive, confidential and part of a larger
comprehensive program to prevent drug use.

In his State of the Union address this year, President Bush asked for $25.4
million in grants for schools to develop or expand drug testing programs.
Since then, officials from the Office of National Drug Control Policy have
traveled the country, holding summits for parents and educators.

Testing can give students an excuse to stay away from drugs and resist peer
pressure, and can help detect drug problems where they exist, said one
speaker, Carl Selavka, director of the Massachusetts state police crime lab
system.

He said the testing can range from around $10 to $20 per urine test to $40
for a hair-based test, and that typically 10 percent to 25 percent of a
student population is tested per month.

After students are confidentially tested, they can get help without being
penalized.

The Bush administration says prevention programs have contributed to a
decline in student drug use since 2001, and that random testing deters drug
use. It is not mandating that any school district adopt its policies, but
encourages communities to initiate drug testing.

That might not be so easy in Pennsylvania. While a U.S. Supreme Court
ruling in 2002 gave schools more leeway to implement random student drug
testing, a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling in 2003 made the legal issues
a little less clear.

It found that requiring students to undergo testing to participate in
extracurricular activities was only appropriate if schools could prove that
an actual drug crisis existed.

Since the rulings, a handful of school districts in the Pittsburgh area,
including Shaler Area and Baldwin-Whitehall, have discussed, then
dismissed, adopting a student drug testing policy. The Canon-McMillan
School District in Canonsburg abandoned its program in 2004.

A few districts have established such policies, including Seneca Valley,
which adopted mandatory drug testing three years ago. Each student who
participates in activities or athletics or drives to school must be tested
at the beginning of the school year, and then can be randomly tested
throughout the year..

Assistant Principal Mark Draskovich said he's had parents come in and say
that they've seen a difference in their children's attitudes, but he was
not able to say if the district's drug problem had receded.

Children "at least have a reason to say 'no,' " to drugs, said Draskovich.
"A lot of kids are just looking for that."

But opponents argue that testing also can drive students away from these
activities.

They say that the largest study of the issue ever done found that school
districts with testing policies had no less illegal drug use than those
that did not.

The potential invasiveness of drug testing and the costs associated with it
can hurt schools, said Tom Angell, spokesman for Students for Sensible Drug
Policy, a youth organization that opposes mandatory drug testing.

"If students are forced into bathroom stalls, it can go a long way in
damaging relationships of trust," he said. "And $25.4 million can be much
better spent on adopting more effective drug-education programs."

The duty of keeping children off drugs should fall to the parents, argued
Marsha Rosenbaum, director of the Safety First drug education program at
the Drug Policy Alliance.

"My argument is, let parents do their jobs," she said.

Some school districts have taken it upon themselves to do just that.

In a pilot program in Portage, Pa., students can choose whether or not they
want to participate in random testing.

This year, 314 students, out of a possible 402, in grades eight to 12
participated. Every month, a handful of these students are randomly
selected to be screened. None has ever tested positive.

The participants, who numbered just 35 in 2000, get incentives for being in
the program, said Debbie Fowler, president of Remembering ADAM, the
nonprofit organization that provides funding.

She found her son Adam dead from a heroin overdose in 1998. Since then,
she's been passionately crusading to prevent others from going through the
same experience.

But she is not sure if mandatory random student testing is the best way to
keep children from doing drugs.

"I'd rather see a school district aggressively support a volunteer
program," she said. "It's better communication with students when they
voluntarily come into a program."