Should drug testing be mandatory to participate in high school athletics?

 

Random drug test. YES!

What is the goal of testing?

What is the goal of testing?

 

Prevention first. Athletes know they will be tested.

 

Some athletes have told me that they can use it with their peers as a reason to NOT do drugs. The other kids know they are going to have to pee in a cup and some kids at least will hold off on pushing them to do it.

 

After that first initial test, they know that they are still up for random, even after the season is over. So for a soccer player, they could randomly get drawn out for a urine test in April. So, that excuse stays with them the whole year.

 

Some kids have decided to not try out because they know they won't pass the test and they don't want to stop the drugs.

 

Consequences and counseling second. If they fail, a mandatory counseling session on drugs occurs. They don't just fail and are punished. There is a program to help them find a path off of drugs.

 

Punishment last. This is the last goal of the testing. It is the one that the detractors will focus on first cause it is the one that is negative and is easy to sell.

Prevention first. Kids know they will be tested.

 

 

Prevention for all kids?

Prevention for all kids?

Yeah, if the testing is the reason that the athletes don't do drugs, than it is successful. The goal of testing is NOT to catch people but to prevent.

 

Also, there are programs that happen, at least in our school, that talks about the reasons not to be involved in drugs/alcohol. Each athlete in that season is REQUIRED to attend or they are ineligible to compete.

 

If the tests stand alone with no educational program, than I believe it is an incomplete program.

Prevention for all kids?

Random testing of student-athletes, who participate in extracurricular activities, ensure compliance with all national mandated rules and help eliminate any improper enhancements.

 

I don't think a student, attending a school taking steroids, is going to have an advantage in the classroom but have that same student participate in sports and potential advantage, plus violation of rules.

 

I hope no student would use illegal substances, regardless of participation in athletics. I can see the deterrent for student-athletes, whom drive to and from games/practices, sometimes late at night. If random testing can save or prevent one catastrophic wreck, than testing is worth the prevention.

Random testing of student-athletes, who participate in extracurricular activities, ensure compliance with all national mandated rules and help eliminate any improper enhancements.

 

I don't think a student, attending a school taking steroids, is going to have an advantage in the classroom but have that same student participate in sports and potential advantage, plus violation of rules.

 

I hope no student would use illegal substances, regardless of participation in athletics. I can see the deterrent for student-athletes, whom drive to and from games/practices, sometimes late at night. If random testing can save or prevent one catastrophic wreck, than testing is worth the prevention.

 

What about the advantage that kid has when he has a roid rage enduced fight with another student or teacher? I'm for the random testing for all students, faculty, and staff - 100%.

What about the advantage that kid has when he has a roid rage enduced fight with another student or teacher? I'm for the random testing for all students, faculty, and staff - 100%.

 

I don't think that is constitutional. Because if we are worried about the roid rage in the school hallways, why aren't we worried about it when they are walking the streets of the town.

What about the advantage that kid has when he has a roid rage induced fight with another student or teacher? I'm for the random testing for all students, faculty, and staff - 100%.

The topic was regards to athletics but I'm not sure how a random drug test, could identify a student, that may not get tested due to possibly 1,500-2,000 students.

 

The ratio of student-athletes, would be much smaller and more likely to result in a positive test and be a deterrent.

 

If a student is going to have an altercation with another student, faculty or staff, than procedures are in place for punishment.

Yeah, if the testing is the reason that the athletes don't do drugs, than it is successful. The goal of testing is NOT to catch people but to prevent.

 

Also, there are programs that happen, at least in our school, that talks about the reasons not to be involved in drugs/alcohol. Each athlete in that season is REQUIRED to attend or they are ineligible to compete.

 

If the tests stand alone with no educational program, than I believe it is an incomplete program.

 

Whe I say "prevention for all kids?" I'm asking if it is the school's desired goal to prevent drug use for just athletes or is it to prevent it for all kids?

Random testing of student-athletes, who participate in extracurricular activities, ensure compliance with all national mandated rules and help eliminate any improper enhancements.

 

I don't think a student, attending a school taking steroids, is going to have an advantage in the classroom but have that same student participate in sports and potential advantage, plus violation of rules.

 

I hope no student would use illegal substances, regardless of participation in athletics. I can see the deterrent for student-athletes, whom drive to and from games/practices, sometimes late at night. If random testing can save or prevent one catastrophic wreck, than testing is worth the prevention.

 

So you would disagree somewhat with LBBC who says the #1 goal of testing is "prevention." If I'm reading you right, you're saying the #1 goal of drug testing is fairness on the athletic field.

The topic was regards to athletics but I'm not sure how a random drug test, could identify a student, that may not get tested due to possibly 1,500-2,000 students.

 

The ratio of student-athletes, would be much smaller and more likely to result in a positive test and be a deterrent.

 

If a student is going to have an altercation with another student, faculty or staff, than procedures are in place for punishment.

 

I would argue that if you're for testing , the size of the school is irrelevant. You simply test more kids.

 

Lastly, I would argue that just like the kid who is going to be punished IF he has an altercation there is also a punishment in order for the kid who is discovered to be using drugs. Both punishments occur AFTER they have been caught, right?

Whe I say "prevention for all kids?" I'm asking if it is the school's desired goal to prevent drug use for just athletes or is it to prevent it for all kids?

 

At my school, it is an athletic department program and policy that is funding partially from the athletic department funds. So athletes.

 

I don't think it is constitutional to drug test all students, so that point is moot.

I would argue that if you're for testing , the size of the school is irrelevant. You simply test more kids.

 

Lastly, I would argue that just like the kid who is going to be punished IF he has an altercation there is also a punishment in order for the kid who is discovered to be using drugs. Both punishments occur AFTER they have been caught, right?

 

With my position of prevention is first point, the lack of being able to participate in HS athletics if you chose that lifestyle occurs before they are being caught.

So are you saying that the concept of drug testing is aimed ONLY at athletes as far as prevention and fairness? Not the student body as a whole?

I've always thought the point of random drug testing in schools, were for extracurricular activities and student-athletes. Not just for illegal drugs but for enhancements, which may elevate level of play. I'm not sure if testing all students, for the sake of testing is legal, as I've never done any research on it.

 

We all would agree that testing 200± student-athletes is much readily possible, than say a student body of 1,500-2,000. What would be the basis for testing all students and if random, how effective would that be.

 

I would be for each family, having an independent drug test for each child they own and be presented to the school, prior to beginning classes each fall. Any additional testing, could be from within the school, for extracurricular activities only.

 

I would argue that if you're for testing , the size of the school is irrelevant. You simply test more kids.

 

Lastly, I would argue that just like the kid who is going to be punished IF he has an altercation there is also a punishment in order for the kid who is discovered to be using drugs. Both punishments occur AFTER they have been caught, right?

Not sure feasibly or economical, testing more would help.

 

As for the fight incident, than it becomes a matter for the police to oversee and various legal issues.