An Objection to Mandatory Drug Testing in High Sch Essay Example

as delayed puberty, certain forms of erectile dysfunction, and body wasting in individuals with AIDS or other illnesses.

There are notable distinctions between anabolic steroids, such as DHEA and Andro, and over-the-counter steroidal supplements in the United States. Many people acquire these supplements from commercial sources like health food stores because they believe they possess anabolic effects. A specific supplement, famously used by Mark McGwire during his record-breaking home run season, sparked controversy when he confessed to using it.

In the public education system, there exist three common methods of drug testing: urinalysis, hair follicle tests, and sweat patch tests. Amongst these methods, urinalysis is most frequently employed by high schools due to its cost-effectiveness. The average cost ranges from $10 to $30 per test. However, while this test is affordable, it also presents several issues.

The text discusses the comparison between two drug testing methods in high schools: urinalysis and hair follicle tests. One key distinction is that urinalysis tests do not detect alcohol or tobacco usage, both of which are forbidden for high school students. Another issue with urinalysis tests is the possibility of specimen tampering. Additionally, this type of test is considered the most invasive as it necessitates someone's presence during specimen collection. In contrast, high schools also employ hair follicle tests, which have a higher cost ranging from $60 to $75 per test.

The hair follicle test is restricted to identifying marijuana, cocaine, opiate, amphetamines, and PCP. It is unable to detect alcohol usage or recent drug consumption. While it is deemed a dependable drug test, it possesses drawbacks pertaining to discrimination. Individuals with dark hair are more prone to yielding positive results in

comparison to those with blonde hair, and African-Americans have a higher likelihood of testing positive compared to Caucasians.

Furthermore, the presence of drugs in the environment can lead to inaccurate results, especially when they are smoked. Additionally, high schools choose the sweat patch test as an economical drug testing method, with each individual test costing between $20 and $30. Despite its effectiveness in detecting a variety of drugs compared to other tests, the sweat patch test encounters several problems.

Currently, there is a limited number of labs in the country that can handle result processing, causing inconvenience for school districts. Furthermore, passive exposure to drugs may cause false positives due to contamination of the patch. Additionally, individuals with excessive body hair, scrapes or cuts, and skin eruptions cannot wear the patch. However, ongoing advancements in drug testing techniques aim to enhance accuracy and reduce invasiveness.

The saliva test, which utilizes an individual's DNA, is a new and dependable technique. However, it raises privacy concerns as it has the potential to unveil an individual's history and enable employers to genetically evaluate prospective employees. The University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research carries out Monitoring the Future, a continuous study analyzing the behaviors, opinions, and values of American secondary school students, college students, and young adults.

The study began in 1975, surveying around 50,000 12th grade students. In 1991, the survey expanded to encompass students in the 8th and 10th grades. Additionally, follow-up questionnaires are sent to a sample of each graduating class for several years after the initial survey.

Background and Historical Events:

In order to fully understand mandatory drug testing, it is important to examine the history and events that resulted

in its implementation for high school student athletes and participants in extracurricular activities.

For a while now, student athletes and extra-curricular participants have been undergoing testing. However, the effectiveness of drug testing has only recently become a widely discussed topic.

The Impact of the 60s During the mid-1960s, as the Baby Boom generation and counter-culture movement emerged, narcotics started to become more prevalent in American society. By the late 1960s, influenced by popular music, middle-class youths and soldiers in Vietnam began using drugs like marijuana and hallucinogens. In 1968, President Nixon was elected on a law-and-order platform that aimed to crack down on drug use.

In response to the increasing number of drug-addicted Vietnam veterans returning home, the military introduced mandatory drug testing in the same year. Additionally, as part of the War on Drugs, Congress passed the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act in 1970, which resulted in reduced penalties for drug possession. The first war on drugs was declared by President Nixon the following year.

The University of Michigan's Institute of Social Research conducted the original Monitoring the Future study in 1975 to investigate student drug use. In 1977, President Carter initially supported decriminalization of marijuana but later retracted his endorsement. By 1979, drug use had surged to its peak, prompting a parental-led anti-drug movement. This movement during the 1980s brought significant changes to US drug policy with the well-known slogan "Just Say No".

During the 1980s, there was a significant increase in the popularity of cocaine use, especially among young, white, urban professionals. In order to address this issue, President Reagan started a second war on drugs in 1982. However, despite an Arkansas court ruling in

July 1985 that declared excessive drug testing of student athletes without reasonable suspicion as unjustified, substantial and immediate changes were made regarding drug testing after the death of Len Bias on June 19, 1986. Len Bias was a basketball player at the University of Maryland who died due to a cocaine overdose.

Following Biass' death, President Reagan and the first lady launched a nationwide anti-drug campaign titled Just say no. Additionally, they enforced a drug-free workplace in federal agencies through Executive Order 12564. To showcase their dedication, the president and his advisors underwent urine tests to detect drug use. Congress exhibited its backing by enacting the Drug Free Schools and Communities Act, which provided funding to schools for anti-drug efforts. On Oct. 27, 1986, the President signed this legislation into law.

Following the death of Bias in the same year, states in the United States implemented Drug Free School Zone laws. This resulted in the NCAA endorsing mandatory drug testing for athletes. During the late 80s, illegal drug use continued to be a major concern. As a result, President Bush established the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy in 1988.

The Drug Free Work Place Act was passed by Congress in November 1988. This act required federal contractors and grant recipients to create drug-free work environments. As a result, many employers chose to introduce voluntary testing programs. However, this led to employees taking legal action, claiming that drug testing violated their privacy rights. In response, the courts allowed drug testing without needing any suspicion.

In 1989, President Bush introduces his National Drug Control Strategy, which advocates for drug testing in the private sector and state/local government. Simultaneously,

the Supreme Court upholds random drug testing with a special need that surpasses individual privacy rights, as evidenced by the case of National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab.

The 1990s witness a decrease in teenage drug use and an upsurge in drug testing policies. President Bush expands the federal drug-testing program to encompass all White House personnel. In 1991, Congress approves the Omnibus Transportation and Employment Testing Act mandating drug and alcohol testing for eight million private-sector pilots, drivers, and equipment operators.

The increase in drug use began in 1992 when President Clinton was elected. This rise is believed to be influenced by factors such as the Persian Gulf War and the media, particularly the music industry, which promotes messages related to sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll. President Clinton took action by expanding upon the drug testing measures implemented by Presidents Reagan and Bush. Initially, he authorized compulsory drug testing in correctional facilities. In 1995, the Supreme Court of the United States approved mandatory drug testing for high school athletes in a case known as Veronia School District v.

The Supreme Court ruled in Acton that mandatory drug testing in high school athletics programs was not considered an unreasonable search or seizure, nor an invasion of the student athletes' privacy. This decision was based on the justification that suspicion less; random urinalysis drug testing of high school athletes was necessary due to the epidemic levels of drug use in the Veronica school district. Over a period of four and a half years before the case, only 12 positive drug tests had been found. However, this ruling contrasted with a previous decision by the Supreme Court, which deemed a

New Jersey schools athlete drug testing program as unreasonable when 28 student athletes tested positive for drugs in a single year.

In the Veronia case, Justice Antonin Scalia, who also wrote a critical dissent in the Von Raab decision, expressed the majority opinion. Scalia contended that student athletes have fewer privacy rights than other students due to their dressing and showering in close proximity. Privacy expectations for student athletes are even lower. It is important to note that school sports are not suitable for those who value their privacy.

Before each practice or event, individuals must dress and then shower and change afterwards. However, the usual locations for these activities, such as public school locker rooms, lack sufficient privacy. This is also true for Vernonia's locker rooms, where there are no individual dressing rooms, and shower heads are lined up without partitions or curtains. Even some toilet stalls do not have doors. According to Justice Scalia, this lack of privacy can be attributed to the rise in drug use among students since athletes' drug use sets an example for others.

In relation to the current situation, $185 million was allocated by Congress to the Office of National Drug Control Policy in 2001 specifically for advertising and campaign initiatives. Nevertheless, in 2002, the administration only requested $180 million.

President George W. Bush implemented a $19 billion anti-drug plan in February 2002 to reduce drug use in the United States. The goal was to achieve a 10% reduction within two years and 25% within five years. As part of this effort, funding for the DARE program was reduced to $644 million, which is $103 million lower than the previous year. This

decrease was due to the program's proven lack of effectiveness and wastefulness. The strategy focused on treatment and prevention, resulting in a 6% increase in federal grants for drug treatment to reach $3.8 billion for FY 2003. In the same year, an important ruling by the Supreme Court occurred regarding Board of Education of Independent School District No.92 of Pottawatomie County v.

The Supreme Court in BOE v. Earls upheld an Oklahoma school policy, which allows for random drug testing of students who engage in competitive, non-athletic extra-curricular activities. This decision, made by a narrow 5-4 majority, overturned a previous ruling from a federal court.

Justice Clarence Thomas upheld the effectiveness of mandatory drug testing in addressing school districts' concerns about drug use prevention, deterrence, and detection. Conversely, Justice Ruth Ginsburg opposed the testing program as arbitrary and contradictory because it violated the rights of low-risk students.

Problem Clarification

Mandatory drug testing is essential for protecting individuals and sports at collegiate and professional levels. However, its application in high schools has resulted in various consequences. In response to the rise in teenage drug use during the mid-1990s, public school districts adopted mandatory drug testing policies that have been deemed constitutional by the United States Supreme Court.

Research suggests that mandatory drug testing policies in high schools are not effective in deterring drug use among teenagers and may even hinder the process. These policies primarily target athletes and participants in extracurricular activities, who are least likely to abuse drugs.

Arguments For Removing Mandatory Drug Testing in High Schools

The government should eliminate mandatory drug

testing for student athletes and extracurricular participants in high schools as it has been proven to be ineffective for various reasons.

Negative Impact on Classroom or Team

An important argument against mandatory drug testing is its potential negative impact on both the classroom environment and team dynamics. It can strain relationships between students and those responsible for conducting tests, such as teachers, administrators, school nurses, and coaches. The trust between students and testers diminishes, leading to feelings of shame and resentment among students.

Whether a school district purchases drug tests directly from a manufacturer and administers them themselves or brings in an independent source to administer the tests, it is necessary for someone to be present during the student's urine sample collection to ensure it is their own. This process can be an invasion of the student's privacy and can be especially embarrassing for adolescents. The lack of trust between students and teachers or coaches caused by drug testing also creates an unnecessarily tense school environment. In this type of atmosphere, students feel unable to address their fears or concerns about drug use or factors in their lives that may contribute to drug use, such as depression, peer pressure, and an unstable family situation.

Dr. Gottfredson of the University of Maryland asserts that by creating a prison-like atmosphere, students are filled with fear and distrust of authority. Trust is further compromised when teachers, administrators, and coaches are required to act as both confidants and enforcers. It is important for schools to work towards establishing an environment that promotes a sense of welcome, safety, and trust among students.

Valuable School Financial Resources Wasted

Another reason for eliminating mandatory drug testing in high

schools is the fact that it drains valuable financial resources from schools.

The NCAA currently spends $2.9 million per year on testing their athletes, while Oklahoma State University spends between $25,000 and $30,000 annually for the same purpose. These costs also cover the expenses of drug tests that can identify steroid usage and are similar to the costs incurred by school districts in their testing of student athletes and extracurricular participants who cannot be detected for steroid use. Nowadays, school districts spend an average of $42 per student tested, resulting in a total expenditure of $21,000 for a district that tests 500 students. This amount only includes the initial drug test.

In addition to the initial expenses, there are also ongoing operational and administrative costs related to drug testing. The procedure for handling a positive test result can be quite lengthy and complex. To confirm the accuracy of the initial positive result, a second test must be conducted. Following the second test, a treatment plan and subsequent testing schedule must be implemented. Other financial considerations associated with student drug testing involve supervising urine collection to ensure accurate samples, maintaining records, keeping track of expenses, adhering to confidentiality regulations, and obtaining insurance coverage to shield school districts from potential lawsuits linked to their drug testing policy.

The Oak Mountain school district in suburban Birmingham, Alabama conducted around 2,500-3,000 drug tests on its 11,000 middle and high school students in the past year. Despite the high number of tests, there were less than 25 positive results. The cost for all these tests amounted to $65,000, averaging to $2,600 for each student who tested positive.

The school district of

Dublin, Ohio also experienced a similar situation. Only 11 students tested positive for drugs, but the district had to spend $35,000 on these tests (Appendix A). This cost can exceed what the district already spends on drug education, prevention, and counseling programs, and it may divert financial resources from other departments. Consequently, the increasing expenses associated with mandatory drug testing for student athletes and participants in extracurricular activities can undermine the original purpose of these tests.

A Potential Barrier to Participating in Extracurricular Activities

Another reason why mandatory drug testing at high schools should be eliminated is that it could potentially discourage students from joining extracurricular activities. Studies have revealed that unsupervised hours between the end of classes and parents' return from work, typically around 3 PM, often witness an increase in juvenile crime and adolescent drug use.

Research and studies show that students who participate in extra-curricular activities, such as athletics, are less likely to engage in dangerous behaviors and develop substance abuse issues. They are also more likely to stay in school, earn higher grades, and achieve higher education goals. The reasons behind these positive outcomes are that extra-curricular activities fill the time gap between school release and when parents return home, and students have access to mentors and peers who can address any drug-related problems. Since the Supreme Court rulings in Veronia v. Acton and BOE v. Earls, many school districts have witnessed a decline in the participation of students involved in extra-curricular activities due to the implementation of drug testing policies.

The reason is simple: student drug testing is typically focused on student athletes and those involved in extra-curricular activities because testing the

entire student body is considered unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Additionally, concerns about the invasive nature of the tests and the violation of personal privacy contribute to a decrease in participation in extra-curricular activities. The Tulia Independent School District in Texas serves as an example, as it has witnessed a decline in participation and an increase in lawsuits related to privacy issues since implementing a drug-testing program. One female student articulated this sentiment, stating, "I am aware of many students who avoid participation in sports and other activities due to the fear of being subjected to drug tests. That is one of the reasons why I am not involved in any activity."

Cause I am taking medication, I would consistently test positive, leading to inquiries about my medication and causing me embarrassment. Additionally, I would feel embarrassed if I were on my period. In the case Gardner v. Tulia Independent School District, a Texas District Court determined that the school's drug testing policy violated students' Fourth Amendment rights. However, the policy was upheld due to the precedence established by the United States Supreme Court.

Results From False Positives

One reason for opposing mandatory drug testing in high schools is the potential harm caused by false positives. If a student receives a positive drug test, it could lead to serious consequences, even if they are innocent. School districts commonly use the urinalysis test due to its affordability. However, this test may incorrectly identify students as drug users due to its difficulty in distinguishing between similar drug metabolites.

Some potential problems include the following: over the counter decongestants can yield positive results for amphetamines, codeine

can result in a positive test for heroin, and consuming food products with poppy seeds can lead to positive results for opiates. Hair follicle tests have also faced scrutiny, as there is no formal study or research to establish any connection between hair and skin color and test outcomes. Additionally, there are no national standards for labs to adhere to when conducting hair follicle tests, unlike urinalysis tests. Without consistent federal standards for hair follicle testing, it is not possible to completely rule out false positive results. In an attempt to mitigate the risk of false positives, school districts often require students to disclose their prescription medications before undergoing drug testing.

Keeping students' private information safe is crucial, as it not only infringes upon their privacy rights but also poses a burden on school districts. A notable incident at Tecumseh High School in Oklahoma exemplifies this issue. During the implementation of a drug-testing program, a choir teacher carelessly displayed students' prescription drug lists on their desk, allowing other students to view them. Furthermore, positive test results were distributed to 13 faculty members simultaneously. The combination of negligence and vulnerability to leaks in the school environment can result in the violation of students' privacy rights and expensive legal action.

Unintended Consequences - The final argument against mandatory drug testing in high schools is that it can lead to unintended consequences. One such consequence is that students may start using drugs that cannot be detected by current school tests, such as Ecstasy, inhalants, or alcohol. This can be dangerous for both the students and the community, as these substances go undetected without drug testing.

Alcohol is a prime example of

this issue as it is the most frequently abused substance among teenagers and often implicated in drug-related deaths among this age group. Another unintended consequence of compulsory drug testing is that students may attempt to outsmart the test. Concerned about testing positive, some students may take measures to deceive the test. A simple search on the Internet would yield various websites offering items such as drug-free synthetic urine, natural detox products, specialized shampoo for cleansing hair follicles, and other cheating aids for existing drug tests. An illustration of such a website is www.ureasample.com, where students can acquire drug-free urine and a kit for administering it within the body.

Students may also mock drug testing programs by shaving all their head and body hair when facing a hair follicle test in a Louisiana school district. Moreover, students are taught that they are considered guilty until they prove their innocence. According to the United States Constitution, individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty and should expect a reasonable level of privacy. However, mandatory drug testing infringes on both of these rights for students, as they are assumed guilty until they can provide a clean urine sample.

Hans York, a deputy sheriff from Wahkiakum, Washington, filed a lawsuit against his local school district after they attempted to force his son to participate in a testing program before joining the drama club. York firmly believed that subjecting his son to monitoring for usual bathroom sounds was not only a violation of privacy, but also conveyed a presumption of guilt. As someone who wears a gun every day for work, I can say that being in law enforcement often stifles conversation.

Ethical Arguments:

Kantian Ethics

The Kantian approach asserts that individuals should never be treated as a means to an end and that universal principles should be followed in order to safeguard human freedom and rationality.

Existentialism Approach

The existential approach starts with the idea that human values ultimately stem from human freedom. When societal constraints are removed and we embrace our freedom, our actions express ethical behavior.

Rawlsian Approach

The Rawlsian approach suggests that ethical decisions ought to be made without taking into consideration one's current status. This approach requires all parties involved to consider what would be best for the weakest member of society.

Rule Utilitarianism Approach

The utilitarianism approach aims to achieve the greatest happiness for the majority of people. A rule utilitarian would evaluate a specific ethical issue by examining historical evidence to determine which general action-guiding rule has consistently created the most happiness. By conducting a risk-cost-benefit analysis, one would find that the risks associated with privacy issues and false positive test results, as well as the costs of implementing a drug testing program, far outweigh the benefits a high school receives from testing its athletes or students involved in extra-curricular activities.

Objections and Rebuttals


Collegiate and Professional Levels

Some proponents of mandatory drug testing at the high school level argue that since sports at the collegiate and professional levels have mandatory drug testing policies, it should also be implemented at the high school level.

At present, all NCAA Division I, II, and III student athletes must undergo drug testing mandated by both the NCAA and their respective schools. This program of testing serves several

purposes, including promoting fair competition, upholding the integrity of the sport, and monitoring student athletes at risk of substance abuse. Furthermore, the NCAA's testing initiative has been successful in reducing drug abuse among college athletes. According to a 2001 study conducted by the NCAA, 17% of surveyed athletes reported that the fear of failing a drug test deterred them from using prohibited substances. Additionally, the study found that steroid use among football players decreased to only 3%. It is worth noting that most professional sports leagues in the United States also enforce mandatory drug testing policies.

The Olympics and the NCAA enforce drug testing policies for their athletes. Both organizations have these measures in place due to similar reasons. Collegiate athletes, who are on scholarships or receive preferred treatment, should undergo mandatory drug testing. These scholarships often cover various expenses such as tuition, housing, books, and sometimes even provide stipends. Since the universities compensate student athletes, it is reasonable for them to be subject to the respective policies and regulations set by their institutions. Similar to collegiate athletes, professional athletes are also paid for participating in competitions.

Since professional athletes are being compensated for their performance, they should be held accountable to the policies set forth by their organization and league. Furthermore, given the increasing commercialization of sports in our society, these athletes are viewed as influential figures and are often seen as role models. Consequently, their behavior can and often does have an impact on society as a whole.

Prevention and Protection

Another argument against discontinuing mandatory drug testing at the high school level is that it serves as a necessary deterrent to prevent and protect students and

athletes from falling into the traps of substance abuse. This notion is supported by a recent survey which reveals a significant rise in adolescent steroid usage in recent years.

This increase is evident in both athletes seeking a competitive advantage and non-athletic students who strive to appear stronger. School districts have a responsibility to ensure the wellbeing of their students, which they fulfill through various measures, including mandatory drug testing. Certain school districts view mandatory drug testing as a means to discourage drug use. According to Robert Weiner, former spokesperson for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, the majority of kids support drug testing as it provides them with a reason to reject drugs.

Drug testing in schools serves multiple purposes. It not only aids school districts in identifying and assisting students who are using drugs, but it also acts as a deterrent for other students. Some students claim that the fear of being caught through drug testing has discouraged them from using drugs. However, recent research has indicated that providing education and promoting drug awareness has a greater influence on preventing teenage drug use compared to mandatory drug testing. Furthermore, mandatory drug testing poses a barrier to the involvement of students in extracurricular activities, which have been proven to deter teen drug abuse. Consequently, students who may already be susceptible to drug use could be dissuaded from participating in extracurricular activities that could positively impact their lives.

Furthermore, students who are already involved in extra-curricular activities may experience a sense of mistrust, potentially hindering the positive social development they have achieved through these activities. In addition, a study published in the Journal of School

Health indicates that schools implementing mandatory drug testing do not show greater effectiveness in preventing drug use compared to those that do not.