Helping Students with Problems - An Argument in Favor of Random Drug Testing

By CAMERON STECKLER

In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of allowing random drug testing in America’s schools; both public and private.  According to this legislation, students involved in extracurricular activities, sports included, can be tested without suspicion.  Random drug testing is an effective measure that does not violate any privacy concerns, is cost effective, and is successful in deterring students from abusing drugs.

The need for drug testing in schools is already present, but has yet to be filled.  With increasing drug abuse among high school teenagers, solving the problem has become less a responsibility for the parents, and more one for the schools.  The reason is because teens have learned how to better hide their drug problems from parents.  A teenager will come home “high” so often that his parents begin believe this adverse behavior is normal and simply part of being a teenager.  If the parents cannot detect their child’s drug issue, then the schools are the second best line of defense.


The main problem lies in the approach taken in helping teens overcome drug abuse.  Drugs, illegal as they are, are commonly associated with punishment.  For those who face drug problems, the fear of a punitive response only causes teens to hide their problems; they learn how to cope with the problem.  Instead, it is important that teens be taught how to live without the problem.  Most think of random drug testing as a plot to expose and punish student drug abusers; its real service is in finding teens with a problem who are in need of help, as well as to deter students on the edge of becoming faithful drug addicts.  As Advanced Studies Program director Michael Ricard said, “If you test someone as a school and they come back positive, then you do need to have some level of punishment. Otherwise, why are you testing?  But you better have a support structure in place.  Whatever the response is, it should simply be non-punitive. That person is not going to get the help and support he needs otherwise.”  

In order to classify the intentions of the random drug testing, the U.S. Department of Education stated that the practice “must be part of a comprehensive drug-prevention program in the schools served, and provide for the referral to treatment or counseling of students identified as drug users.”  The key here is not punishment, but rather amnesty.  A student who tests positive is removed from his extracurricular activity, given counseling, retested, then with a negative result returns to the activity.  The furthest form of punishment lies in the temporary suspension of the student’s extracurricular activity.  Law enforcement is left out of the picture.    

The legal side of drug testing is one plagued by Fourth Amendment concerns.  Is random drug testing an invasion of privacy?  The short answer is no.  Children are not granted Fourth Amendment rights.  Their parents protect their privacy; therefore, the random drug testing should be carried out with parents having a choice of opting out.  Since parents are viewed as the protectors of their children’s rights, this only makes sense.  The parents are informed of the testing however the children are not, leaving the same level of randomness intact.  

The effectiveness of the drug testing also makes sense.  Cost-wise, drug testing has become much more affordable with advancements in medical science.  For over five years, the Skagit County School District in Washington has been able to conduct the random drug testing of one quarter of its middle to high school students in extracurricular activities for $20,000 annually. For a district of 10,000 plus students, this is very affordable.    

Federal estimates in 2002 put the number of schools doing random drug testing at somewhere between 500 and 2,000, or a top-end figure of about 3.5%.  Moving forward to 2007, that figure increased to 7%.  In terms of effectiveness, the drug testing gives students a powerful reason to say no to peer pressure.  A student who is offered drugs among a group of friends can say “no” to the situation with the excuse that his school is conducting random drug testing.  In this sense, random drug testing does more than just help students overcome drug problems; it prevents students from developing them in the first place.

It is not vital that random drug testing spreads overnight; each year more and more schools are implementing the policy.  It is important that the parents, schools, and students all realize that random drug testing is to protect the children, non-punitively.  If one of these groups of people do not cooperate, the drug testing will be rendered useless.  What people realize after implementing the drug testing is that they are truly making a powerful change.  The future of America is in its youth.  It is time to protect both America’s youth and future with such health measures as random drug testing.