News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: OPED: Drug Testing Won't Work |
Title: | US CA: OPED: Drug Testing Won't Work |
Published On: | 2002-12-31 |
Source: | Visalia Times-Delta, The (CA) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-21 15:59:40 |
DRUG TESTING WON'T WORK
Picture this. Johnny, a straight-A student and captain of the chess club,
is sitting in calculus class one day when a high-school administrator
enters the room.
The administrator says he'd like to speak with Johnny. Not having much
choice in the matter, Johnny goes to the nurse's office - where the young
scholar is informed that he is to be drug-tested.
The problem with this situation is that Johnny doesn't play sports. He is
only involved with the chess club.
So, why is Johnny being drug-tested?
According to a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June, Johnny's high
school has the right to drug-test any student involved in competitive
after-school activities or teams such as the chess club or mock-trial team.
But the court is wrong.
First of all, drug-testing by schools is not a solution to the drug
problem, it is just a Band-Aid to stop the bleeding for a short time. I
cite the practice of drug-testing athletes, which has been done for years
in the Visalia Unified School District.
I have overheard numerous athletes claim that random drug-testing causes
them to stop using drugs - but only while the sport they play is in
competition. Once their sport season is over, it is back to "hitting the pipe."
The only thing drug-testing prevents is education in the classroom. When an
administrator calls a student to the nurse's office in person, or by a
pass, it distracts other students.
Another problem with drug-testing students involved in extracurricular
activities is that attendance in these programs will decline. Tests will
scare off students who may want to be involved.
I was under the impression that after-school programs were meant to keep
kids off the streets and off drugs - not push students away.
A drug-testing policy such as this would also cost money that could be
spent elsewhere. Instead of using money for drug-testing, schools should
create programs to educate students on the dangers and consequences of
drug use.
In the long run, education would be a more effective way in getting rid of
the drug problem.
The Supreme Court's decision on drug-testing students involved in
competitive, extracurricular activities has good intentions. But random
drug-testing isn't the answer to getting kids to stop "doping up."
Picture this. Johnny, a straight-A student and captain of the chess club,
is sitting in calculus class one day when a high-school administrator
enters the room.
The administrator says he'd like to speak with Johnny. Not having much
choice in the matter, Johnny goes to the nurse's office - where the young
scholar is informed that he is to be drug-tested.
The problem with this situation is that Johnny doesn't play sports. He is
only involved with the chess club.
So, why is Johnny being drug-tested?
According to a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June, Johnny's high
school has the right to drug-test any student involved in competitive
after-school activities or teams such as the chess club or mock-trial team.
But the court is wrong.
First of all, drug-testing by schools is not a solution to the drug
problem, it is just a Band-Aid to stop the bleeding for a short time. I
cite the practice of drug-testing athletes, which has been done for years
in the Visalia Unified School District.
I have overheard numerous athletes claim that random drug-testing causes
them to stop using drugs - but only while the sport they play is in
competition. Once their sport season is over, it is back to "hitting the pipe."
The only thing drug-testing prevents is education in the classroom. When an
administrator calls a student to the nurse's office in person, or by a
pass, it distracts other students.
Another problem with drug-testing students involved in extracurricular
activities is that attendance in these programs will decline. Tests will
scare off students who may want to be involved.
I was under the impression that after-school programs were meant to keep
kids off the streets and off drugs - not push students away.
A drug-testing policy such as this would also cost money that could be
spent elsewhere. Instead of using money for drug-testing, schools should
create programs to educate students on the dangers and consequences of
drug use.
In the long run, education would be a more effective way in getting rid of
the drug problem.
The Supreme Court's decision on drug-testing students involved in
competitive, extracurricular activities has good intentions. But random
drug-testing isn't the answer to getting kids to stop "doping up."
Member Comments |
No member comments available...