Posted on 03/19/2006 4:30:53 PM PST by Crackingham
Student athletes, musicians and others who participate in after school activities could increasingly be subject to random drug testing under a program promoted by the Bush administration. White House officials say drug testing is an effective way to keep students away from harmful substances like marijuana and crystal methamphetamine, and have held seminars across the country to promote the practice to local school officials. But some parents, educators and school officials call it a heavy-handed, ineffective way to discourage drug use that undermines trust and invades students' privacy.
"Our money should be going toward educating young people, not putting them under these surveillance programs," said Jennifer Kern, a research associate at the Drug Policy Alliance, a non-profit group that has frequently criticized U.S. drug policy.
Requiring students to produce a urine sample or hair sample for laboratory testing is a relatively recent tactic in the United States' decades-long "war on drugs," along with surveillance cameras and drug-sniffing dogs in school hallways.
Adults in the military and many workplaces have long been subject to testing, but U.S. courts have ruled that public schools cannot impose random tests on an entire student body.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1995 that schools can randomly test student athletes who are not suspected of drug use, and in 2002 ruled that all students who participate in voluntary activities, like cheerleading, band or debate, could be subjected to random tests.
Since then, the Bush administration has spent $8 million to help schools pay for drug testing programs. The White House hopes to spend $15 million on drug-testing grants in the next fiscal year.
As long as they test the teachers too.....
Meanwhile my 9th grade A/B student son has not diagramed a sentence since 6th grade. His grammar and punctuation stinks. Mean old Mom requires spelling, grammar and punctuation be perfect even on rough drafts.
"Show your work" is not a requirement in Algebra.
But damn--let's make sure he pisses in a cup.
Oh, give it a rest.
Many if not most the schools aren't "educating" anyway. Further, these students need intervention if they are in the "drug culture".
I think it's in the nation's best economy-mind, to do such a thing. I just wish there were a way to go after the pedophiles in pub ed before they sexually abuse the young.
Youngsters, in the drug culture, grow up to be VERY EXPENSIVE adults. And I'm not even going into discussing a wasted life. But purely, from a cost standpoint, especially in a time when the Social Security system is going bust, one might glean that proper intervention in the here and now might just prevent the SS system from going bust EVEN SOONER than projected. And SS is only one of the bleedlines.
That's the parents' job not the schools'.
I agree wholeheartedly. Finally had to get my kids into a private school because they weren't learning squat in a public one. Where are my tax breaks for private schooling!?!?
..and some of the District Administrators too. I swear some of them I've met must be high on something, if their irrational and out-of-control behavior is any indication.
Breathalyzers and tests for nicotine consumption are already in place, I assume.
/sarc
You give it a rest.
This doesn't do anything to aid in the education of kids. Just another excuse for the public schools for why they aren't teaching.
Start with teaching the kids and they won't do drugs in the first place. As it is, the public schools are an abomination of social welfare. I'LL teach my kids about drugs, I'LL teach my kids about sex ed.
Somehow, I don't think that the students who participate in after school activities are the ones using drugs.
And since you agree that "Parents should be doing this job" then pub education should not be subsidized. I'm all for vouchers. You too?
You can't nor should you have it both ways: The State and Feds are forced to be involved in PUBLIC EDUCATION by the very nature of "taxations". And now you wanna say the state/feds have no say in whether or not a child is on drugs?
And no, there are no tax deductions for private school, unless it's college (tuition). If your kids are old enough, check out on-line homeschooling.
Oh yes, they do.
You are right. As long as state and fed laws are engaged in pouring funds into: Schools, "free" medical clinics, welfare homes, Section 8, food stamps. And the Feds have "no drugs" policies, they HAVE to do these things under LAWS.
Just amazes me sometimes that some folks think of pub ed as some type of "hotel babysitting service" wherein the parent can pick and choose. It doesn't work that way.
"Student athletes, musicians and others who participate in after school activities could increasingly be subject to random drug testing..."
All those football players better tell the boys in the band that doing steroids results in small pianists... : )
it's called indoctrinating the kids into govt intrusions into private lives. when they grow up, piss police will be by their homes for a sample and they wont think anything of it.
A public school is not a "private life".
See post #7. I already pulled my kids out but I still have to pay the taxes AND the tuition.
Yes, I want my taxes back. I pay more for the private schooling than the taxes alone but basically I get screwed. i have to pay school taxes (which they don't send to the schools because my kids aren't enrolled) and I have to pay tuition as well. Essentially, taxation without representation.
Drugs are a parental issue not the schools. Teach my kids to read, write, and do math. They (public schools) aren't doing that so they have no business teaching them about drugs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.