I believe we everyone, teens included, reserves the right to be a complete idiot, but at the same time, when you're below the age of eighteen within a school system, I believe any school has the opposing right to test its students for illegal substances when they see fit. If they can locate a problem a youngster might have and report it, the kid might have a chance to get some help, as opposed to if they just went on abusing drugs.
If you are recieving money because you need help, then by all means you should get the money. However you should not use the money for drugs, some worry about the cost, if there was more testing being done the cost would be less, also the cost for drug rehab would go down.
Random drug tests can save lives by discouraging drug use in young teens. The maize school district spent 31,000 dollars in a period of 5 years which is equivalent to $18.45 a day and if they had a student body of just 1,845 they would be spending a penny on each student in each day.
Ad that's what drug testing essentially tells kids. It tells them that they are slaves, the state/school has authority over them and their freedom and that they're being watched. Im sorry, I cannot and will not accept state surveillance under any guise, but especially the nonsense of "its for the children."
Face it, its not about the children and never was. This is about supporting the police state and the prison industrial complex.
First the amount of money it would cost to have all these drug tests. Let's be real here, if you only test the kids once a year, its really not going to deter any dug use. Its unaffordable and inconvient if you drug test them too frequently. Now if they do get caught, what are you going to do to them? Suspend them? Put them in driug rehab? I really dont know. It just seems rather pointless to invest this money in drug tests. If you want to discourage drug use, the best way would be a requirement course discussing the harms of drug use this wouldbe more affective than just drug tests and cost less money.
They should only get tested if they join sports. Randomly making a student get a drug test takes up time and money. When you pick randomly you have some classifications. Here is how see it ...
Lets say you are at the store and you see 5 bracelets on sale. You really love them but you can only get 2. So then you get your favorite 4 and decide on them. You want to "randomly" Pick 2 ....But wouldnt you have some judgement on 1 ?
Firstly, chances are that the legalization of marijuana is going to far outpace schools allowing the substance, which means that there would be times that a student is reprimanded for drug use that was perfectly legal, and done outside of the schools premise. It would technically be allowing the school to reprimand kids for actions off of school campus.
Secondly, drug tests are prone to false positives, and with the number of students in some schools, that could lead to a high chance of someone getting a false positive on one of those cheap tests. What do you do then? Do you reprimand the student because that is what the evidence says, even if there is witness testimony to support the students side, or do you spend even more money on more accurate tests, or do you let the student go?
According to the Fourth Amendment, the gov't can't search you without a good reason. If a kid appears to be acting strange, it is a good reason. Randomly asking a kid to pee in a cup, no. Amendment No. 14 says the bill of rights is for all. There is no mention of "You have no rights if under 18" or "This constitution is for adults".
Those drug tests are prone to false positives. Eating Greek yogurt (which contains non-illegal hemp) can register as marijuana.
I've even heard people talk about installing the tests directly in the urinals. How will that work, and what if your pee mixes with someone else's pee?
People who are at high risk for substance abuse come from particular situations, often from disadvantaged groups, such as lgbt (especially trans). Foster students statistically also have higher substance abuse rates. Kid who come from disadvantaged background tend to use substances as a coping mechanism. If you intervene to remedy the situation, you can prevent it from happening. But if you treat a child like a criminal, or use their substance abuse in order to give them a criminal record, it is likely to follow them for the rest of their life, leaving them at a further disadvantage. Not only is this ethically immoral, but it just doesn't benefit the community. If you set up disadvantaged youth for failure, the community will have to pay more to pay for their unemployment, incarceration, and lost wages in the community. The foster system is already so bad in the states that it comes over $8 BILLION a year to help these disadvantaged kids.
Instead, taking a positive approach could be a lot more beneficial. Have strong support systems in schools for lgbt acceptance, lower wage families, and foster kids.