Random drug testing in high schools

[MissTaken]

Is it a violation of civil rights?

A violation of a child's privacy?

Is it the best use of resources as described in the attached article?

http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/hey_teacher.htm

My question was what happens to those youth who do test positive? Is it treated as a clinical issue or a disciplinary issue, or both?

 

[Fly_On_Wall]

random fuck off that is so stupid that is illegal
they can't randomly come to your house and look for stashed drugs.

no they need a reason to
so I think shouldnt't they have a reason to search the kids?

 

[Zamdrist]

Is it a violation of civil rights?

A violation of a child's privacy?

Is it the best use of resources as described in the attached article?

http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/hey_teacher.htm

My question was what happens to those youth who do test positive? Is it treated as a clinical issue or a disciplinary issue, or both?

If the parents in the district support it, then I don't see a problem with it. It shouldn't be unilaterally instituted without parental approval.

It definately should be handled as both a disciplinary and clinical issue.

 

[Sillyman]

I can't get behind it. I don't give a screaming fuck if all the parents of the nation would jack off a chicken to get it, it's a violation of the child. Bad enough kids can't keep their space to themselves, now they can't even have their own bodies to themselves.

 

[MissTaken]

What about the point that the article makes in terms of the present case going through the Supreme court?

Is it "counterintuitive" to test the athletes and other youth involved in extra curricular activities?

While some use, isn't more likely that the youth standing in front of the liquor store at school dismissal time are the kids who need to be tested and treated?

 

[#1tankcomander]

Random testing....

Well if you want big brother checking out your kids and take parental control away from you,OK. Not me, thats a bunch of crap........Yes the school has the right to check lockers. It's their lockers. I don't agree in busting a kid if they have a stash in their locker though. Lockers have vents and not so secure locks. Lockers should be treated as a common area. Are you not innocent untill proven guilty?? I know, I know, possession is 9/10 ths of the law, but there are circumstances. I think the police and the school system (ie: teachers, up to the school boared) should clean their own house before trying to do it else where. I could go into great detail in my neck of the woods about corrupt school board members and local police, but I'll save you the agony..................

 

[Sillyman]

It should be treated as a clinical issue, but it will get treated as a disciplinary one. More than likely it will mean expulsion, and as much as a single usage means some kid is going to remain in terminal poverty for the rest of his life.

 

[#1tankcomander]

SILLYMAN.....

You hit the nail on the head......clintically treated with parential participation, but it is their body, their choice.......next we'll see school abortions 'cause the school board has ruled with the supreme court in forcing pregnant unwed girls to abort their babies 'cause it causes an unhealthy situation in a school environment!!!!!!

Oh shit, I forgot they make pregnant girls leave school NOW to be tutored at home so they may get their diploma..........Damn Big Brother...............

 

[Zamdrist]

Q: Where do public schools get their money to operate?

 

[Daddyslilpet]

As a parent myself, I would hope that the schools would be trying to help not hurt the children. I realize there are people running the schools and school boards, but that doesn't automatically make them wrong. I really don't know how I would react to this type of thing in my area tho. Just my thoughts

dixicritter

 

[Spinaroonie]

It's not illegal.

Wanna know why?

Cos at the beginning of the year the student recieves a "Student Code of Conduct" They have to sign it and get their parents to sign it, otherwise they get punished.

Ever read one? It basically denies students their constitutional rights. BUT since they've 'freely' waived them, the school can do what they want to.

 

[Sillyman]

It's not illegal.

Wanna know why?

Cos at the beginning of the year the student recieves a "Student Code of Conduct" They have to sign it and get their parents to sign it, otherwise they get punished.

Ever read one? It basically denies students their constitutional rights. BUT since they've 'freely' waived them, the school can do what they want to.

Yep. Used to get them myself. I know the ones you are talking about. I went through them and found huge violations in student rights and broad potential areas for abuse of power. It was a hobby.

 

[Zamdrist]

And it's the same with the Military, once you sign on the dotted line, your ass is theirs.

Life's not fair.

 

[markb325]

It's not illegal.

Wanna know why?

Cos at the beginning of the year the student recieves a "Student Code of Conduct" They have to sign it and get their parents to sign it, otherwise they get punished.

Ever read one? It basically denies students their constitutional rights. BUT since they've 'freely' waived them, the school can do what they want to.

If the code of conduct violates the constitution it is nul and void and I'm waiting for one of the rich parents out there to challange a school system over thier violations of the constitution.

 

[weed]

As a parent I find the school system can be overbearing at times although I understand not all parents are as involved as I am.
The variance in parental involvement can cause a lot of frustration on the part of school staff when they don't get the family support for a wayward child.

Howeve, I still feel, if a child's behavior in some way indicates that intervention is needed and drugs are suspected then the school's role should be to conference with the parents. The school should be able to offer suggestions and student counselling and require certain conduct if the student is to continue with classes. The ultimate decision to test should be the parents and the testing should be done within the privacy of a physician's office.

If athlete's are not giving any reason to suspect drug abuse then they should be left alone. Sports can be a kid's saving grace during the turmoil of teenage angst....to require such an invasion of privacy as drug testing could disuade some kids from trying out when they could use the discipline and teammanship of organized sports. The priviledge of playing should be based on conduct and passing grades.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Is it a violation of civil rights?

Without the parent's permission, yes.

A violation of a child's privacy?

Yes, however, children do not have an expectation of privacy from their parents when it comes to their welfare. They do have an expectation of privacy from the government and the school.

What spurious non-sequitor reasoning; lower expectation of privacy because athletes have to undress in the locker room? We all had to do that PE (well almost all of us) - does that mean we all had lower expectations of privacy? Just what in the hell were these justices thinking? They need to go back to school and take some classes in critical thinking and logic! Sheesh! Even a kid can see all the holes in that argument!

Is it the best use of resources as described in the attached article?

No - the school and the government have no business getting involved here. If the parents want/need to know whether their kids are doing drugs, they can haul them in for drug testing themselves.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

It's not illegal.

Wanna know why?

Cos at the beginning of the year the student recieves a "Student Code of Conduct" They have to sign it and get their parents to sign it, otherwise they get punished.

Ever read one? It basically denies students their constitutional rights. BUT since they've 'freely' waived them, the school can do what they want to.

I am not so sure that it is so easy to sign away your civil rights - especially if you are in a Catch 22 situation where you are compelled by law to give your kids an education, and then have to sign away their rights? I would suspect that if this were brought up in court that it would not be a binding contract. Moreover, if a student and his/her parents refused to sign said contract, could the school keep that student from attending when attendance is almost mandatory? I doubt it -especially if the parents stood up to the school and threatened to take them to court.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

To support my premise, read this article:

http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=8553

Specifically the part where "ACLU attorneys argued that Aaron should not be forced to choose between the state constitutional right to a free public education and his First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and religion."