STUDENT DRUG TESTING GAINS SUPPORT

Columbus Schools' Policy Receives Favor Of Parents, Court

COLUMBUS, Kan. - Ken Jones may have breathed a sigh of relief in June when
the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that drug testing for students in
extracurricular activities doesn't violate any Constitutional freedoms.

Jones is superintendent of the Columbus School District, which has
performed random drug testing on students for the past two years. The
policy covers students in grades seven through 12 who participate in any
extracurricular activity, even school dances.

"We had a long discussion with the board about a year ago, when the 10th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the policies," Jones said. "We
realized if we were to continue the policy, it could be an issue we would
not win, if challenged in court. When the Supreme Court did rule, it was a
big relief to all of us."

As the district prepares to start drug testing for the third year, the
board made minor changes to it recently, setting a deadline of Sept. 1 for
students to return their consent forms.

The Columbus policy may be the most extensive in the area. Jones said
because every student who volunteers to participate in any extracurricular
activity must consent to the drug test, almost every student is included in
the testing pool.

Nearly every week, the names of three to five students are randomly
selected for testing at the high school and at the junior high school.

The urine tests determine whether students are using a number of illegal
drugs or alcohol, but not performance-enhancing drugs or steroids.

"The issue with steroids is the cost," Jones said. "It is substantially
more expensive to test for those. We have not had any indication of steroid
use."

Jones said the urine tests also may not be effective in determining alcohol
use, because alcohol leaves the body more quickly than other drugs.

Staff from St. John's Maude Norton Memorial Hospital in Columbus administer
the tests, and the samples are tested at St. John's Regional Medical Center
in Joplin.

Jones said the hospital staffers are very discreet. He often doesn't know
when they have conducted the tests, he said.

The policy states that the specimen be collected in a restroom in a closed
stall, with a laboratory employee or school employee of the same gender
outside the stall "to listen for the normal sounds of urination in order to
guard against tampered specimens and to ensure accurate chain of custody."

The policy also states that the monitor should verify the warmth and
appearance of the sample.

If a sample tests positive, a second test of the sample is conducted. Only
if the second test is positive is the result reported to the parents, the
school principal and the sports coach or activity sponsor.

The policy calls for the principal to conduct a conference with the
student, parents and the coach or sponsor to solicit an explanation of the
positive result. The student is allowed to present evidence that the
positive was caused by something other than alcohol or drug use, but the
policy states that the school district will rely on the opinion of the drug
laboratory.

A first offense results in suspension from athletic and extracurricular
activities for two weeks. The suspension includes all games, competitions,
practices and meetings. A second offense results in suspension for 18
weeks. A third offense results in a permanent ban from all activities for
the rest of the student's school career. A student may come forward to
admit drug or alcohol use without punishment, but the district will
consider the student to have committed a first offense. School officials
will recommend treatment programs.

Jones said the cost to the district is about $22 a test, or around $6,000
per year. The district tests about 250 students during the school year, but
Jones said because the tests are random, a student may be tested more than
once.

Jones said when the policy began, a parent of an eighth-grade student chose
not to allow her child to participate in activities because she opposed the
policy. The policy allows that action.

Other than that example, he said parents seem to support the policy.

Parents reached for this report tend to agree.

Mike Bowman's son is a high school junior involved in sports.

"It is definitely a problem in the school system," Bowman said. "Not just
in the school, but in society today."

Bowman said his son hasn't been tested, but he has been in class when
friends received the call to submit their samples.

He said he was surprised to discover how many students the policy covered.

"I think it's good," Bowman said. "We should do a little more of it."

Mike Ellis said his son was tested when he was a freshman. He is a junior
now. He said his son didn't mention being embarrassed, but that his friends
were aware he had been tested.

"It wasn't a bad experience, and of course he tested negative," Ellis said.

Ellis began by saying he was "wishy-washy" on the policy, before expressing
support.

"I think it's a good thing," Ellis said. "It's a major deterrent. I'm glad
they do it, and it's probably a positive influence on the kids."

Ron Holmes said one or both of his children have been tested under the policy.

"I think the drug-free school makes for better learning and a better
atmosphere for the students," Holmes said. "It maybe helps deter some
students from being on drugs."

High school Principal Steve Jameson and junior high Principal Bobbi Thomas
say the policy gives students another excuse not to use drugs or alcohol.

"I believe this policy has helped our students in giving them an option to
say no to drugs," Jameson said. "It gives us a way to help them."

Jameson said five or six students at the high school have tested positive
in the past two years. Thomas said she is unaware of any junior high pupils
ever testing positive.

"I think there was a perception in the community we had a real drug
problem," Thomas said. "That perception has been dismissed."

She said many parents have told her they are in full support of the policy.

"Parents are grateful," she said. "It helps them as parents as well."

Jones said based on the small number of positive results, he thinks the
policy is working as a deterrent, or the tests are not being administered
to the right students.

With two years of experience behind Columbus, other schools may look to the
district as they develop their own drug testing policies.

Tim Burns, Baxter Springs superintendent, said such a policy is in the
"talking stage" in his district. He said the Supreme Court ruling in June
opened the door for the district to consider a policy.

"I think our coaches and administration would like us to investigate that,"
Burns said.

He said board members have copies of the Columbus policy, and it is likely
that if Baxter Springs pursues its own policy it will include elements of
the Columbus policy.

Jones said other districts also have consulted with him.

Thomas said she thinks the policy would benefit all area school districts.

"I know there are several districts looking into the policy," she said. "I
think it's a great preventative method. If we're worried about the safety
of our students, this is a way we can protect them."