The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
2 Points

Should there be random drug tests for students in school?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/12/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 384 times Debate No: 77586
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




R1 acceptance only.


This is my first debate; I'll do my best to do it right. Bear with me.
Debate Round No. 1


I agree with this for multiple reasons:
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.

The rest of Pro’s argument does not show how random drug tests would prevent any the causes that he mentions.

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:

Many other studies exist that show random drug testing not to be a good way to prevent drug use.

  • A study in 2012 found that students subject to mandatory random drug testing reported less substance use than comparable students not subject to such testing.
  • An NIDA-funded study published in 2007 found that some indicators of future drug use increased among those participating in the drug testing program.
Debate Round No. 2


Point number 2 I highly doubt. The use of the word 'reported' is key. This is essentially the number of students who reported using drugs, there were indefinitely others.
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.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by jacobstokes 1 year ago
You didn't exactly make concrete point either. You need to get a watch and regularly check the time.
Posted by Lemur 1 year ago
I was under the impression that I had one and a half more hours from the time of this comment to make my final argument. Dang it.

Pro did not cite any studies showing the effectiveness of his claims, and indeed most of his claims were nebulous, without any actual information to back them up.

Contrary to what the first vote said, my first point does not work against me. My first point states that students who were not drug tested felt more free to report drug usage.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Gondun 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro for not dropping a round. Pro also had the more convincing arguments and Con's point 1 actually goes against himself. Sources goes to Con for the only cited source of the round.