FLAWED DRUG POLICY

Madison's Plan Could Be Worse, But That Isn't Saying Much

The superintendent of Madison City Schools has worked hard to come up
with a fair and rational drug testing policy for students. His
efforts have eased some concerns, perhaps even most concerns. But the
proposed policy remains flawed. It may not violate basic
constitutional protections, but it pushes government power right up
to the very edge of individual liberty.

If passed, the policy would apply only to students - middle and high
schoolers - who drive to school or participate in extracurricular
activities. The test involves a saliva sample, which removes the
humiliation of having to urinate in a jar, as some programs require.

The tests would be given at random. A student and a student's parent
or guardian would have to give permission ahead of time. Where the
student or parent refused to give permission, the student couldn't
get a parking pass or take part in covered activities.

So what happens if a student refuses the test or has a positive
result? Nobody calls the police, and the student is not expelled or
suspended. Instead, depending on the number of positive tests or
refusals, the student would be subject to a series of penalties
relating to extracurricular activities and parking.

For a fourth positive test or refusal, the student would be banned
from activities and denied parking privileges for as long as that
student attends Madison schools. A system would be in place for a
student to re-enter the testing program and regain lost privileges.

The policy would treat refusal to take the test the same way it
treats a positive result. It wouldn't matter if the student refused
merely because he or she objected to the policy. The outcome - and
the resulting stigma - would be the same.

At the same time, it would be possible for a student to be a heavy
drug user or even a drug dealer and still be in the school system
unless other circumstances (possession, sale or evidence of use) came
into play.

Superintendent Dee Fowler and other officials have built in a number
of safeguards against false positive results and so forth. They are
very specific in the application of the policy only to students in
extracurricular activities or who drive to school. But that is not
because a broader policy necessarily offends officials'
sensibilities. Rather, it's because the U.S. Supreme Court has drawn
the line at such testing.

One-way street

Nothing in the policy provides any treatment for those who test
positive. Fowler has said treatment isn't the school system's role.
Indeed, it is not, but neither is it the system's role to try to
combat every alarming trend in society as a whole or to attempt to
overcome the effects of negligent parenting. Even if testing were
necessary or desirable, wouldn't treatment or counseling meet the
same standard?

Editorials on this page have supported drug-testing for cause. Random
drug testing of students goes too far. The provisions applying it to
extracurricular activities and to parking are merely legal cover.

If parents relinquish this power to the system of public education,
what might they relinquish next? Without evidence of wrongdoing, the
erosion of both rights and the individual's privacy hurtles society
down what history has shown all too often to be a one-way street.

What the Madison school board proposes could be worse, but that's
hardly a recommendation.

By John Ehinger, for the editorial board.