Drug Testing High School Athletes

[festus]

Test 'em all. Test thuh teechers. Test thuh cusstoadiuns. Test thuh koaches. Test awl athuhletes. Test the entar stoodent body. I thank thats the only fare way ta git it dun.

Edited March 2, 2004 by festus

[coachdude]

While it does sound like a good idea... the constitution and its ammendments can't be ignored.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

The Fourth Ammendment applies to high school athletes, too. In the end, it lies on our parents- not the schools- to make sure we're making the right decisions.

 

The key word here is unreasonable. Is it unreasonable to expect that young people who represent their school and Community be held to a higher standard that insists that they be drug free. Many would say this is a wonderful idea. There is a huge difference in officials going door to door and doing random drug tests on Joe Blow and the rest of the population. High school athletes are set apart into a representative group, and can be held accountable for their actions. This practice of drug testing them is not illegal, as it goes on every day in different schools around the country.

 

If an athlete thinks that they cannot pass the tests, then they can either refrain from participating or clean their act up. Furthermore, if an athlete and/or his/her parents just don't think they can tolerate the testing on principle, then they should be encouraged to take a stand and not play!

[OSHSman]

The key word here is unreasonable.

Unreasonable meaning without probable cause, not in terms of YOUR moral code. Random tests do not have probable cause. Just because it goes on in schools across the country every day does not mean it is in accordance with the IV amendment, the Supreme Court dropped the ball in this one. You do not abandon your constitutional rights when you enter a public school.

 

Also, if you were to test the entire student body, you'd really run into legal trouble. You couldn't even hide behind the claim that you were testing those in after school activities.

Edited March 2, 2004 by OSHSman

[ClintonDragnz32]

Athletes should be tested for drugs... but ALL extracurricular activities should be tested too... its only right

[ELA]

All you would have to do is have the students tested when they take their physicals in the fall. It would cost an extra $35 and the test would be done at the doctors office. No coach or school administrator would know why the student didn't pass the physical and no one's privacy would come into question.

[spanarkle]

For or against it several schools are doing it. We drug test all athletes, cheerleaders and coaches. We have been doing this for 5 years now and I see that it has helped a couple of kids stay off of the drugs. Now after they graduate who knows what some do but while they are in our care they are drug free. We do a complete drug test at the beginning of each year and we have 4 random tests throughout the school term. No one in our school knows when or who the hospital will come and test ( not me or the principal) (they do about 20% of the athletic population)so there is no hiding or fixing any test. If a student tests positive he or she may request another test....if they fail that one then they have to pay for that test and are ruled ineligible for 6 weeks. Another drug test is given to them at that time and if they pass they play. While they are out they must attend all practices and games and be with the team. Our Community really supports this and it makes my job a lot easier. So yes I am for it, save one kid and it is all worth the time.

[OSHSman]

ELA, I think if you have to give in to this evil, your idea is best in that it doesn't single the student out. I'm still against testing of all kinds, but that idea is at least a middle ground.

 

Another reason I don't like it is that most school cut corners as others have said. I know when I was in school, the only thing the county tested for was pot because it cost to much to test for narcotics and steroids (I always came up clean, btw, and would have even if they had tested for all substances).

[festus]

Also, if you were to test the entire student body, you'd really run into legal trouble. You couldn't even hide behind the claim that you were testing those in after school activities.

If ya run inta leegal problums for testin thuh entar stoodent body, then furget drug testin. If ya caint test thuh entar stoodent body, teechers, cusstoadiuns, koaches, an everbody else, then dont test nobody. Agree with me, OSHS man??

[dynasty03]

I think that the drug testing of an athlete is not necessary at all. Lets be realistic, what will a drug test accomplish? If a student fails the test, is he going to stop doing the drugs? Drug addiction is much deeper than a varsity team, its a personnal choice that will not be altered by a test. Drug abuse involves no dependence therefore, a student can quit if he wants to play bad enough just to pass the test, then he can start to use again. Or if he fails the test, then why stop now? He isn't addicted. The test would not be affordable for the majority of schools. The lack of a booster club in alot of schools to go along with it not being feesable individually would keep a person from paying for it out of their own pockets. If a person wants to do drugs, they will, simple as that. A high school student will and can make whatever choices they want, and for that reason the money could be spent on a SCHOOL WIDE drug awareness program for the younger kids to try and stop a problem before it ever starts, then it will not be to late. I do not want this to seem like I am condoning the use of drugs, but what i'm saying is, there is a way around all tests and no matter what there are going to be athletes who are on drugs, rather it be weed or crack. Its the real world and no drug test will stop it.

[coachdude]

Unreasonable meaning without probable cause, not in terms of YOUR moral code.

 

I understand your point, and it is a very good one. However, (and I will admit my inability to dazzle you with my knowledge of constitutional law now) if I were an employer I would have the right to screen you for drug use at my discretion because your employment with me is voluntary on your part. Now I know that going to school is not voluntary, which is why I do not support testing an entire student body. But participating in sports is. And it could easily be made part of a student's eligibilty for participation that he/she agree to the possibility of testing. Then, they may choose to participate or not. This is not randomly violating one's person without probable cause, because they went in with eyes wide open. You are correct in saying that just because something commonly occurs doesn't mean it is constitutional. However, I don't think testing in this regard could ever be struck down by the courts because of the free will aspect. Playing sports is a privilege not a right. So if a student was willing to meet school policies of attendance, GPA, conduct, etc., then it's no stretch at all to say that they should meet the standard on drug use also. That's the difference in regular students and athletes here. Education is considered a right, while athletics is considered a privilege.

[Stokomo]

Coachdude, I could not have said it better myself. That is why the Supreme Court has allowed drug testing under the current guidelines. YOU, as a citizen of the United States of America, have the right to try-out for any extracurricular activity a school offers. That is YOUR option to play within the rules set forth by the administration or coach. IF YOU do not agree with ANY of the rules that YOU must abide by, then YOU have the RIGHT not to associate with the activities. So it is your choice to get tested or not.

 

 

:justwrestle:

[coopster]

Absolutely correct dudes. Legally you can test as long as it's extracurricular and random. Students give up their "right" to privacy when they voluntarily decide to be involved. You can't test 'em for doing something they have to do (like attend school). I'm for it - in the long run it would make all sports and activities safer - sure would wake up A BUNCH of parents!! The real issue is - what do ya do with the ones that do test positive?? Counciling? suspension? Zero tolerance already has dumped a bunch of kids into nowhereland...I'd hate to see what massive random testing would do. Even so, I really think we need it. By the way...they do drug testing now for new hires (teachers).