WASTE OF TIME

Cindy Richards' March 27 column was right on target. The U.S. Supreme Court
will review an Oklahoma school district's drug-testing policy on
constitutional grounds, but there are compelling health reasons to oppose
the invasive policy. Student involvement in extracurricular activities has
been shown to reduce drug use. Forcing students to undergo degrading drug
tests as a prerequisite will only discourage such activities.

Drug-testing may also compel smokers of relatively harmless marijuana to
switch to harder drugs to avoid testing positive. Despite a short-lived
high, marijuana is the only drug that stays in the body long enough to make
urinalysis a deterrent. Marijuana's organic metabolites are fat-soluble and
can linger for weeks. Synthetic hard drugs are water-soluble and exit the
body quickly. A student who takes Ecstasy, OxyContin, or meth on Friday
night will likely test clean on Monday morning. If you think students don't
know this, think again.

The most commonly abused drug and the one most closely associated with
violent behavior is almost impossible to detect with urinalysis. That drug
is alcohol, and it takes far more lives every year than all illegal drugs
combined. Instead of wasting money on counterproductive drug tests, schools
should invest in reality-based drug education.

Robert Sharpe, program officer, Drug Policy Alliance, Washington, D.C.

DON'T PRE-JUDGE KIDS

I was glad to see "Just say no to drug tests" by Cindy Richards [column,
March 27]. I hope more people begin to realize that drug-testing students
serves little purpose other than to discourage troubled kids from joining
extracurricular activities.

Martin Luther King Jr. said he dreamed of a place where children would be
judged by the content of their character. More and more, we judge young
people by the content of their urine. What would King think about that?

Stephen Young, Roselle