Pros & Cons of Drug Testing in Schools
Laws exist that allow drug testing for students under categories of "cause or suspicion." Beyond that, random drug testing for all students has remained unconstitutional. Many supporters of random drug testing believe that the potential deterrent it offers outweighs the legal justifications against it. Objectors to random drug testing often use these legal justifications to defend the privacy of students, and, in the past, have always won with this defense. However, the tides are beginning to shift politically as the incidences of substance abuse among adolescents remains disturbingly high. Thus, the problem of drug abuse in schools remains while the moral and ethical continue to battle the legal and empirical.
The Controversy
Drug testing within public and private school environments has long been debated. The controversy seems to stem from the basic issues of personal privacy under constitutional law and the question as to whether random drug testing is, in fact, an effective deterrent to drug use.
In a study cited in the Journal of Drug Education (2005), several test groups of adolescents, ranging from kindergartners to 12th-graders, were asked to voice their perceptions of random drug testing for extracurricular activities. Researchers discovered that students were more likely to advocate drug testing if they were involved in an after-school activity and not using drugs and/or alcohol. Most students also believed that drug testing would not affect participation in extracurricular activities.
However, upper-level high school students were hesitant about mandatory drug testing as a prerequisite for extracurricular activities. These same students had less apprehension when it was suggested that all members of the school (students, administrators, teachers, coaches) had to undergo drug testing.
These results would seem to indicate that the controversy over drug testing in schools for students exists more with the inherent violation of privacy than with the fear of being caught for drug abuse. The moral, ethical and legal controversy over mandatory drug testing in schools is a valid argument; many legislators and school administrators are hesitant to enforce random drug testing because it infringes upon the individual's right to the presumption of innocence, as well as the right to be free from unreasonable and unwarranted searches.
So, if there is so much protest against the implementation of random drug testing, why the debate? What is the other side of the argument that keeps this issue at the forefront of educational and constitutional platforms?
Pros
Despite the tremendous and costly effort by local and national drug-prevention programs, the incidences of drug-use in schools remains high. Dr. Oscar G. Buckstein, a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh and psychiatrist with the Western Psychiatric Institute, relays that random drug testing is being considered by schools out of desperation for an alternative solution.
Nothing seems to be working--all the education and "scare tactics" do not seem to have any statistical affect on the use of drugs among adolescents. This desperation forces schools to make imperative, and often controversial, choices to combat suspected drug use. Dr. Buckstein notes that while "the random testing of all students is unconstitutional, the Court recently held in a five-to-four decision that a mandatory drug-testing program for students involved in extracurricular activities is permissible." This has wide-reaching implications for the future of random drug testing in schools, and it seems to suggest a shift in the logic behind the existent laws. Supporters of these laws feel that the benefits that random drug testing can provide, such as a reduction in drug use as well as early intervention for identified substance abusers, far outweigh the potential negative litigation surrounding the issue.
Cons
The main objection to random drug testing in schools continues to be the violation of constitutional rights: laws of presumable innocence and laws that free individuals from unwarranted search and seizure. Many students feel that their civil liberties are at risk and that if random drug searches are allowed, this potentially opens a flood-gate for other forms of surveillance and monitoring that infringes upon their rights at citizens.
Many school administrators feel the same way; quite frankly, many school administrators fear the legal ramifications of even attempting to implement a random drug testing policy. A firestorm of individual legal battles could result, which would cost the district tremendously, in both time, reputation and finances.
In addition, little to no evidence has been published to actually validate the effectiveness of measures such as random drug testing.
Dr. Buckstein observes that because "until recently the constitutionality of random drug testing was uncertain, there has been little time to implement studies of its effectiveness." Many experts, including Dr. Buckstein, feel that the issue of random drug testing has less to do with empirical evidence of its effectiveness in combating drug use and more to do with political agendas. Dr. Buckstein concludes his article by asserting that "government and school districts should continue to focus on evidence-based practices rather than politically expedient ones."
Compromise
While the issue of random drug testing for all students remains unconstitutional, educators and parents should focus on what is permissible by law, to help those students most at risk for drug abuse. Student drug testing has always been allowed for those adolescents who fall under the category of "cause or suspicion," and it is often determined on a referral basis by students, teachers, parents or administrators. Most schools have Student Support Teams, which are groups of trained educators, psychologists, guidance counselors and administrators who can initiate and manage such requests. These requests often require a parent signature of permission in order to test the minor.
Experts agree that the one aspect evidence does support is that early intervention of suspected drug abusers and early referral to substance abuse programs helps the student overcome substance abuse. While the political, legal and moral debate over random drug testing continues, parents must cooperate and communicate with other teachers, coaches, administrators and students to monitor the warning signs of substance abuse and intervene without hesitation when a child exhibits these signs.
Public Opinions
When asked about random drug testing in schools, a mixture of positive and negative responses were voiced--proving, once again, that the controversy remains as fevered and relevant as ever.
"Students must be tested for drugs, due to increase in the level of addiction among students and I think this will help most of the worried parents."
"Students drug testing is very important as it is the students who are addicted at an alarming rate, and we should first save our younger generations."
"Random drug testing is bad, but maybe a random drug test of the whole school or college, not just individual students. Although a mammoth task is fairer and less of an invasion of personal privacy if it is recognized as an official event."
In an article published by the Beaufort Observer, the North Carolina Court of Appeals called into question the drug-testing policy of the Beaufort County Schools. An attorney representing the teachers and community in the legal debate voiced his concerns in a simple analogy: "For those who are not into legal mumbo-jumbo, let us close with an analogy. Beaufort County's policy, and that used by Graham County Schools, is analogous to you going to answer a knock on your door one day and a law enforcement official is standing there. He says to you, 'We have decided to search every fifth house on this block, and yours is the 10th house. Open up and we're going to go through your stuff.' When you ask what they believe you have done wrong they say, 'Oh, nothing actually, we just want to see if you have any illegal controlled substances in your house.' Let's hope they don't find something in your house they can charge you with."
Tags: drug testing, random drug testing, random drug, drug testing, extracurricular activities, substance abuse
