Should there be random drug tests for students in school?
1. Young children are exposed to drugs like cannabis, which are gateway drugs, and this can harm their developing brains.
2. Adults responsible for actually allowing their children to take drugs can have their children taken off them and they can go to a loving family.
3. This can prevent drug use as young takers can then be educated on the consumption of drugs.
4. They will have no threat to pupils who take drugs as they will have nothing to fear.
5. It will also ensure the school will take the necessary actions to protect their pupils from the use of drugs.
Most children will use drugs as a result of many things but mainly these:
1. Peer pressure
2. Bad parenting/background
For example if a child's life is broken with no support at home they can resort to taking drugs as they may feel they have nothing left in the world and may as well waste it taking drugs. Equally there parents wont care and in some cases could even supply there children with drugs that they many even use or grow themselves.
Peer pressure has a big part to play. If groups of kids think the use of drugs is 'popular' or 'cool' they may force others to get involved with it so they can 'hang around with them'. Children can be peer pressured into taking, distributing or even selling drugs on a regular basis which could result in lengthy prison sentences if it was to continue into adultery or even if they were to get caught when they were young.
This needs to become mandatory in schools across the globe.
Thank you to jacobstokes for providing this debate. It looks to be a fun one.
Pro provides many interesting statements, yet provides very little objective information to back them up. Also, a few of the statements that Pro makes don’t even fit the argument. For example, he does not say in numbers 1 and 2 how, exactly, implementing random drug tests in schools would prevent children from being exposed to drugs, or how random drug tests would prove that adults let their kids take drugs.
I do not understand number three, as I doubt that random drug tests would have any strong way of “educating” pupils who take drugs.
Point number four (in the form that I assume you meant to write) is clear, as random drug tests will obviously not matter to those who do not take drugs.
Objections to Random Drug Testing
My primary objection to random drug testing is that it has not been shown to have the desired effectiveness.
One study, aptly titled The Effectiveness of Mandatory-Random Drug Testing, examined 7 districts that were awarded grants from the DoE’s Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools to implement mandatory-random drug testing. This evaluation involved more than 4,700 students and compared the substance use reported by the program schools with that of several “control schools.”
The study came back with several key findings:
1. The percent of tested students that reported using substances was 8 percentile points lower than the percent of students in control school that reported substance use (16 to 22)
2. There was no spillover effect to other students. The same percentage of students reported drug use from month to month in both the control and study schools.
3. There was no effect on the students’ intentions to use drugs. Of the students subject to drug testing, 34 percent of students stated that they “definitely will” or “probably will” use substances in the next 12 months, compared with 33 percent of comparable students in the control schools.
Link to study: http://ies.ed.gov...
Many other studies exist that show random drug testing not to be a good way to prevent drug use.
In response to point 3 I don't think you get where I'm coming from or rather I didn't explain it in too much detail. I'm trying to get at the fact that when drug testers are in the school students who are being tested can be talked to or an assembly can be held to educate young people.
Your point three I just don't understand logic there. How would students intention to use drugs change I simply cannot see that.
The 'NIDA' point and the 2012 study doesn't explain some things very well. How do I know how many students or schools were tested. I cannot tell. The information is almost useless.
Besides this however your argument to support the statement is weak in my modest opinion.
Lemur forfeited this round.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||2|