By: Maddy Collins
Survey relating to the following article: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/56H262C
Should we judge students on their ability to pass a State required test, a school administered drug test, both, or even more qualifiers than these? Some say that the measures, specifically a drug test, are worth it; others do not.
As hard as it is for the administration and parents alike to admit, many students DO DRUGS. This generation is not as innocent as the older generations would like to believe (the same was likely true of older generations when they were teenagers). However, should the school system hold the right to randomly drug test their students?
With as much time and effort that students devote to school, should the school have the ability to cross into that sector of a student’s private life, or should that right only be held by the parents? This is a difficult policy to maneuver, and there may be no clear-cut right answer. But if truancy laws penalize skipping school, should not districts have the capacity to assure that students are not under the influence while in the classroom? It seems appropriate that the school, an extension of the state, should penalize that which both the federal and state governments deem illegal; moreover, these schools can also provide counseling opportunities for students who test positive. But the question still remains: is this, despite the possible positives, an overreach?
Some schools in our areas have also adopted a drug testing policy as a way to ensure student safety and healthier lifestyles. Muhlenberg County High School has adopted their very own drug testing policy. It reads:
DRUG & ALCOHOL TESTING POLICY
Muhlenberg County Board of Education has adopted a mandatory random alcohol and drug safety policy for student athletes, students who participate in extracurricular activities at the high school level and students who drive to school or park on school property and hold a valid on-campus driving permit. Students who are not athletes, who do not hold an on-campus driver’s permit and/or who are not participating in extracurricular activities may volunteer to participate in the District’s drug-testing program.
All student participants and their parents/legal guardians are required to acknowledge in writing that they have read, understood, and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the policy. The student and parent/guardian must sign the “Student and Parent/Guardian Consent to Perform the Urinalysis for Drug Testing” form and be advised of the voluntary surveys for program evaluation before participating in activities or driving to school.
This policy establishes a program of education and counseling designed to deter unlawful use of alcohol and other drugs. When deterrence is unsuccessful, the policy provides for suspension and/or terminations of a student’s participation in high school extra-curricular activities including athletes and/or revocation of a student’s on-campus parking permit.
Reference: Muhlenberg County Board of Education Student Policy 09.423 (use of alcohol, drugs, and other prohibited substances
Reference: Muhlenberg County Board of Education Student Procedures 09.423 AP.1, AP.2, AP.21
After reading the policy in whole, I still had a few questions left unanswered. I was able to ask these questions via email with Muhlenberg County’s principal, Mrs. Donna Bumps.
Collins: How many years has this policy been implemented?
Bumps: 10 years.
Collins: What does the school hope to receive if all students pass their drug tests (if anything)?
Bumps: The purpose of the program/policy is to provide help and/or intervention/counseling. It is not meant to be a gotcha item.
Collins: Is this done in order to protect the students from themselves or an attempt to keep these issues (drugs and alcohol) from further corrupting the student body and allowing the school system to receive a "bad reputation"?
Bumps: No, it is done to help prevent students to turning to illegal drug/alcohol use.
Collins: If a student does not pass his or her test, are the parents alerted as well as the police, or only the parents?
Bumps: Only parents, unless the student is 18 years old. If the student is 18, the company contacts the student. The School is also notified so we can provide the counseling, but to also revoke their privileges.
Collins: Do you personally recommend that surrounding schools adopt this same policy or a modified version of it?
Bumps: Yes, as it is.
It can be inferred from her answers that Mrs. Bumps believes that by implementing this policy, the Muhlenberg County School System has somewhat lowered the drug problems within their schools.
There have been dozens of schools across the U.S to have adopted a drug testing policy. Much to the dismay of the students and their parents, policies such as these are constitutional and do not take away the student’s rights under the Fourth Amendment. In fact, lawsuits between parents and students and their school systems have been heard under the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the school districts. Perhaps one of the most profound cases dealing with the idea of student drug testing would be Board of Education v. Earls, 122 S.Ct. 2559 (2002). This case began in the fall of 1998 School District, consisting of Tecumseh public schools adopted a drug testing policy that required all middle and high school students to consent to drug testing before being able to participate in any sort of extracurricular activity (academic team, Future Farmers of America, Future Homemakers of America, any sort of athletics, etc). The schools were only to administer drug tests under reasonable suspicion and were only used to detect the use of illegal drugs among students. There were two students who, alongside their parents, pursued a case against the school district, believing that the policy did in fact revoke the rights granted to the students by the fourth amendment. However, after some deliberation, the Court ruled that this policy did not impede on the privacy of the students granted by the fourth amendment.
The safety of the students should always be the top priority of all school systems. Students nowadays experience such high amounts of stress caused by a mix of higher academic expectations, peer pressure, and the influence of social media. According to National Institute on Drug Abuse, the use of illegal drugs and underage drinking have steadily increased since 2007. These harmful issues are slowly trickling into the student body and causing physical, mental, and emotional issues among the students and their families, being an inadequate, dangerous, and harmful way to cope with these stressors. If the school has the opportunity to try and prevent these issues, but refuse/ignore that duty, and a student loses their life due to the use of illegal substances, could the school be found guilty of negligence? According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of negligence is:
“failure to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent
person would exercise in like circumstances.”
Given that definition, the school board could receive charges on the grounds of their own negligence and their failure to act.
Out of pure curiosity, I conducted my own voluntary survey via both Twitter and Instagram in which I asked if schools (both public and private) should have the right to randomly drug test their students. The results were practically split in half. The results of the Instagram poll were 45% in favor while the other 55% were against the idea of drug testing. On Twitter the response was completely flipped in that 56% of the respondents ruled in favor while 44% ruled against it. I anticipated the respondents to disagree with the idea of random drug testing, but much to my surprise...