Drug Testing in Public Schools

[swamp]

Drug testing should come after, and only after, there has been a reasonable suspicion of drug use, and after proper due process has been followed!!!

[dbdcrazie]

Gallatin High School started drug testing in 1985. (Reported to be the first nation wide in secondary schools-major networks and news services were present to see how athletes reacted and find out the results. They were never released publicly due to "Doctor/Patient" privilege invoked when MD was the only one who knew results.)

Greeneville High School started their program in 1986.

[govolz]

I think that they should have testing as a standard across the board for all students and not just athletes. If they ever want to have some sort of control with this issue.

I believe that if they ever can get the test to be cost effective that you would probably see this in the schools.

It's sad but true that I would say all of our schools are polluted with drugs in some shape or form.

[Guest smouth]

cookeville players were tested this year. they only tested for street drugs not performance enhancing .so what is the point? are they trying to level the playing field or just testing to be testing?

[dbdcrazie]

There is a big difference in cost of drug testing when it comes to street drugs vs. performance enhancing. The way programs I have seen are set up, if an athlete is suspected of using performance enhancing drugs, the coach will consult with the team MD and determine the medical need for the test.

 

Testing for street drugs is of more importance to athletic programs because of the ready availability of these drugs and the potential hazards presented to athletes on and off the field. This is in no way saying that performance enhancing drugs are unimportant, just not as easily attainable for the average high school student.

[ELA]

The Supreme Court has ruled that YOU CAN NOT TEST THE WHOLE STUDENT BODY, however, you can test any "after school activity." The local school board should create a fair policy that is applicable to coaches, band directors, or school sponsors. I will disagree with Swamp on this one because I don't think you have to wait until there is a suspicion of drug use! I think every coach should test during the first week of his/her season, if they are going to test at all. If you can afford to test everyone (basic test strips cost about $13 each) that is the best way, if not, place everyone's name in a hat and pull out names in front of at least two other coaches. Don't say, "I think this guy may be doing drugs" and just test him, because that would not be random and that is what the Supreme Court has ruled that they must be. Testing must be fair and you should have a clearly defined policy sent to each parent before you test. If anyone fails the test or a student refuses to take the test, you must then send that student to counseling if they want to remain on the team. If they choose to stay on the team you must have them retested through their doctor with a release form which allows the doctor to give you a pass/fail response to the more comprehensive testing. As long as the student remains in drug counseling and/or passes future tests, he/she should be allowed to play. The purpose of the test should be to help students get off drugs and not to punish them.

[mikemcgee]

Tullahoma High School has been testing athletes for years. The cheerleaders are included.

[swamp]

ELA, I would contend that testing students who aren't using (or suspected of using) *illegal* drugs is punishing them.

 

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.

[govolz]

I agree with ELA. That sounds like a feasible plan. The main thing is to try and deter Drug use of any kind in athletics. At least that will be a start in the schools.

[Guest snagglepus]

I believe we could clear up many things if we would just drug test the officials!Ha!

[ELA]

The Supreme Court has ruled that it must be either inclusive of everyone on an athletic team or random. You can't single out anyone based on any other suspicion. We are not the police and all we are doing is enforcing the school or team's drug policy(s). For instance, when a boy signs up for football, we should ask him to take a list of the rules home for his parents to read. In that list of rules, there should be at least three to four releases for the parents to sign.

1. A release for emergency treatment

2. A release for providing information about the athlete to outside organizations (i.e. newspapers, internet, other schools, college recruiters.). State law now requires this release for us to even put the boy's name or picture in the football program.

3. A form saying they have read the rules and agree to abide by them in order to participate in the program.

4. A release form for the drug testing with an explanation about what happens if "little Johnny" fails the test.

 

If the form is signed and the parents are willing to go through the process if their child fails the test, it does not punish anyone. It simply identifies students who MAY have a problem and provides a program whereby they can receive help. There is a huge difference between getting help and being thrown off the team!

[TankTalk]

The problem is so much bigger these days that I have changed my stance (And trust me, I never change my stance) on drug testing.

 

I feel random testing is appropriate as long as athletes are not singled out and tested more. I feel chess-club members, swimmers, beta-club members and everyone who is involved in ANY extra-curricular activity should be tested.

 

Oh, by the way, I think random testing for teachers should be done as well. I think this is one of those "setting an example to the student" things that would be very effective.

 

Many are opposed to this and I understand why. But I just feel the problem is too severe at this time and testing should be done.