I've got no problem with the policy, although I'd prefer it be mandatory for all students. Some is not as good as all, but better than none.

A question for those that have said they favor drug testing all students, strictly playing devil's advocate. I'm not sure I don't favor it as well.

 

What use would it serve to do this in a public schools because there is no action you could legally take? As has been pointed out a public school is leagally bound to take all students. Could you suspend them for testing positive? Mandate drug counseling? What if the parents don't cooperate? Is there really any consequence that you could use as an incentive for a student that doesn't participate in any extra-cirricular activities?

 

If a student is an athlete or allowed some privelege (band, driving to school, etc.) you can take that away from them.

I've got no problem with the policy, although I'd prefer it be mandatory for all students. Some is not as good as all, but better than none.

 

:thumb:

At my high school they also have the drug testing policy that mandates random drug testing for anyone who participates in any extracurricular activitie along with any student who drives. We also have random drug testing for all staff members from the superintendant on down, if you work for the school system you can be drug tested. I think this is great for several reason. One, it shows the kids that the falculty is held to the same standards as they are which helps the trust issue tremendously. Also, it helps us field serious athletes or band members or beta club members etc.... and helps make sure that we have teachers, aids, cooks, bus drivers and even administrators that aren't performing their duties under less than proper circumstances. I like the system we have in place.

 

As for testing the entire student body. I don't think it is legal to force students to be tested. This is why the policy stipulates students who drive and/or participate in extracurricular activities. These students still do not have to agree to be drug tested but, if they don't they have these privilidges revoked until they agree to be put in the random selection process. I support it 100%

Thoughts?

Pretty much the same policy as Pike Co.

 

A couple of BOE members want to test every employ and student, but the super. and a few others did not like that idea.

I will give the same opinion here that I had when I served on the Local BOE here....Denying a kid who HAS THE PRIVILEDGE of driving,playing sports,etc that same priviledge for refusing to be tested may be legal,but at some point SOMEONE is going to sue for discrimination.And although,the case may not carry in court,the board and it's attorney are going to have to tie up time and money to defend it.

My most important point,though,is this...The kids that drive and play sports are the LEAST likely kids in school to use anyway. So just what effect has this had on the drug problem in ANY school.

The entire staff can be randomly tested because they are in charge of the students and responsible for their safety..But,does the staff not deserve the same promise of coming to work knowing that some student wiped out on meth isn't going to kill them??

Test them all or none!!!

I will give the same opinion here that I had when I served on the Local BOE here....Denying a kid who HAS THE PRIVILEDGE of driving,playing sports,etc that same priviledge for refusing to be tested may be legal,but at some point SOMEONE is going to sue for discrimination.And although,the case may not carry in court,the board and it's attorney are going to have to tie up time and money to defend it.

My most important point,though,is this...The kids that drive and play sports are the LEAST likely kids in school to use anyway. So just what effect has this had on the drug problem in ANY school.

The entire staff can be randomly tested because they are in charge of the students and responsible for their safety..But,does the staff not deserve the same promise of coming to work knowing that some student wiped out on meth isn't going to kill them??

Test them all or none!!!

Absolutely 100% WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!! And the the head in the sand thinking that allows teenagers to get by with things that no one thought they would be involved in.

 

Not legal to test all, so that argument is moot.

 

And while we are on drug testing, let me add something to the argument that have been discussed among teachers.

 

 

WHAT about tests for HIV, Hepatitis, etc? These kids sleep around like crazy. Then there are fights in school where blood is all over the place and you want me to step in the middle and stop it when they are doing all sorts of things outside of school that could give them a communicable disease?

I know it was legal for us (BBall team)to get tested while we were in school anytime they wanted. They never did though. It was a private school FYI.

We had it but it did no good... They always "randomly" picked the kids who didn't do drugs and the ones who did continued to slip by for whatever reason...

I think they need to drug test those not playing sports.

I have a question...

 

It's not one's "right" to take drugs. So, why is it a violation of rights to be drug tested?

PADUCAH, Ky. (AP) _ Students in a western Kentucky county who want to drive to school, play sports or participate in extracurricular activities will have to do more than keep their grades up.

 

The Graves County school board unanimously passed a mandatory drug testing program last week that will go into effect this fall. Under the plan, students who want to play sports, join a club such as the marching band or drive to school will have to pass a drug test first.Thoughts?

 

To add to this, parents at Graves can also sign a waiver to include their kids in the drug testing. If its found out that the test was positive due to a prescription drug, then the parents have to provide proof of said drug and the testing lab will be contacted.

 

I think the biggest benefit I see to it is to keep the honest kids honest, give them another reason to avoid peer pressure. But I think the teachers and administration should be tested as well, I believe it was Trigg County that had the teacher that was doing Meth, :scared:

I have a question...

 

It's not one's "right" to take drugs. So, why is it a violation of rights to be drug tested?

 

I too am interested in this line of thinking, I was talking to a friend and he said he was against this drug testing at school and he said it is a violation of a persons rights. But I ask, "Isn't school grounds public property?" Whats the difference in a kid on school grounds or me in the courthouse?

I have a question...

 

It's not one's "right" to take drugs. So, why is it a violation of rights to be drug tested?

Because A) it's done on a specific group of individuals within a population and B) it doesn't determine if the kid is high at the time of the test, only if the kid has taken drugs during a certain period of time.

 

I'm not defending the drug users. I would probably sign a waiver to allow my child to be tested. However, why the concern for the jocks but not the rest of the student body?

I have a question...

 

It's not one's "right" to take drugs. So, why is it a violation of rights to be drug tested?

 

Maybe "just cause" issues? Like when you're pulled over for a traffic violation a policeman must have some reason to search your vehicle, the same logic behind search warrants.