What's wrong with either of those? Again, at the risk of being arrogant if you don't want your kid drug tested don't send him/her to a school that tests.

 

He's trying to have actual discussion as to the real need for it. He fully gets the "you don't have to send your kids there" argument.

 

So let's have the discussion as to the need vs the intrusiveness vs supplementing parenting duties vs what the real goal is.

What's wrong with either of those? Again, at the risk of being arrogant if you don't want your kid drug tested don't send him/her to a school that tests.

 

I am one of those parents who would voluntarily sign my kids up, and they can learn to deal with it. What I don't like is taking away that parental right to decide. I am not a fan of schools taking over that role.

I'm fine with this. We signed our kids up for the drug free club. They asked us if we did it Because we didn't trust them. We told them we did, but it gave them a reason not to fall for peer pressure. Loved it when they came home with a coupon and an airhead.

I made a lot of sacrifices to shelter my kids as much as possible. So far it has worked out rather nicely for us.

It's a parent's job to make sure a kid doesn't cut school correct? Does that mean that schools shouldn't monitor attendance and intervene if there's an attendance issue? Most kids don't cut school on a regular basis but attendance is taken regularly.

 

I don't see this as supplanting a parent's responsibility, I see it as an enhancement of the parent's ability to help steer their kid away from drugs AND to effectively deal with it when a potential problem is identified.

It's a parent's job to make sure a kid doesn't cut school correct? Does that mean that schools shouldn't monitor attendance and intervene if there's an attendance issue? Most kids don't cut school on a regular basis but attendance is taken regularly. I don't see this as supplanting a parent's responsibility' date=' I see it as an enhancement of the parent's ability to help steer their kid away from drugs AND to effectively deal with it when a potential problem is identified.[/quote']

 

Cutting school isn't a legal or moral issue.

It's a parent's job to make sure a kid doesn't cut school correct? Does that mean that schools shouldn't monitor attendance and intervene if there's an attendance issue? Most kids don't cut school on a regular basis but attendance is taken regularly.

 

I don't see this as supplanting a parent's responsibility, I see it as an enhancement of the parent's ability to help steer their kid away from drugs AND to effectively deal with it when a potential problem is identified.

 

I completely see that side of it. I just struggle with balancing that with forcing parents to enhance their abilities in order to attend the school.

 

Again, to reiterate, my kids would be tested. I'm taking advantage of a free test, by my own choice.

If there were a machine to measure how much your underage child were drinking, I bet you that wouldn't be a mandatory test at Cov. Cath. (or anyplace else). The sheer volume of parents who have no issue with underage drinking amazes me.

If there were a machine to measure how much your underage child were drinking, I bet you that wouldn't be a mandatory test at Cov. Cath. (or anyplace else). The sheer volume of parents who have no issue with underage drinking amazes me.

 

Wholeheartedly agree. Issue at every school and CCH is included.

I completely see that side of it. I just struggle with balancing that with forcing parents to enhance their abilities in order to attend the school.

 

Again, to reiterate, my kids would be tested. I'm taking advantage of a free test, by my own choice.

 

Unfortunately there are many parents that even when confronted with evidence of their child's drug use refuse to accept that there is a problem (he's a kid--she can stop--it's a right of passage etc.) or they vehemently deny the problem (my kid knows better--she wouldn't do that) and won't seek help. This makes them seek help.

I totally love and support the program. However, I find it disingenuous to say "there isn't a known problem".

 

Kids are smoking dope at EVERY high school. Have been since the '60s. And the amount of "other" drug use (including alcohol) is probably higher than most suspect.

 

I guess folks can argue the severity of the "problem". 1%? 5%? 20%? It doesn't really matter. There are zero legal "drugs", and none are good for a developing adolescent, regardless of how "recreational".

 

Bravo to Mr Rowe.

I totally love and support the program. However, I find it disingenuous to say "there isn't a known problem".

 

Kids are smoking dope at EVERY high school. Have been since the '60s. And the amount of "other" drug use (including alcohol) is probably higher than most suspect.

 

I guess folks can argue the severity of the "problem". 1%? 5%? 20%? It doesn't really matter. There are zero legal "drugs", and none are good for a developing adolescent, regardless of how "recreational".

 

Bravo to Mr Rowe.

 

Bob is the one that said that there's not a problem.

 

He's not testing for alcohol.

 

"Smoking dope" makes me chuckle. It's true but that phrase makes me laugh. "Long hairs smokin' dope."

I see it as a safety issue in schools that do not test. All schools should make it mandatory and the KRS should be changed.

I see it as a safety issue in schools that do not test. All schools should make it mandatory and the KRS should be changed.

 

Why? What drug fueled tragic event has happened that should make this mandatory at schools? School bus drivers? Absolutely. Why do we want to start waving away privacy here? It sets ground work for all aspects of life. I don't need another babysitter.

Why? What drug fueled tragic event has happened that should make this mandatory at schools? School bus drivers? Absolutely. Why do we want to start waving away privacy here? It sets ground work for all aspects of life. I don't need another babysitter.

 

Didnt 8 people in Ohio just get assassinated due to drugs? What if the teenager that was killed was at school and they came after him there?

Unfortunately there are many parents that even when confronted with evidence of their child's drug use refuse to accept that there is a problem (he's a kid--she can stop--it's a right of passage etc.) or they vehemently deny the problem (my kid knows better--she wouldn't do that) and won't seek help. This makes them seek help.

 

No, it makes them leave the school. Parents who are in denial will blame Trinity for their tests. You can not create a mandate that changes the core of a delusional parent. They will be bad for their child whether forced to test for drugs or not.