Pubdate: Fri, 28 Jun 2002
Source: Christian Science Monitor (US)
Copyright: 2002 The Christian Science Publishing Society
Contact:  http://www.csmonitor.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/83

SEARCHING CHILDREN'S BODIES

The Supreme Court has moved from random drug testing of athletes, when the 
suspicion of drug use was high, to testing of all students in 
extracurricular activities, though suspicions are relatively low.

It seems a short step from there to mandatory drug testing of all students. 
This trend is regrettable. It opens the door to intrusive bodily exams of 
most, if not all children in a school on the theory that that would combat 
the general scourge of illegal drug use by youngsters. Any suspicion that 
drugs are a problem locally - a suspicion in most US communities - would be 
adequate to initiate such a program, under the court's ruling.

At least two problems with this approach come quickly to mind.

First, the drug testing is not solely a pragmatic measure on behalf of 
safety and law enforcement. It's also a civics lesson. A broad program like 
the Oklahoma one approved by the court tells students they're subject to a 
government search no matter how flimsy the suspicions.

The Fourth Amendment criterion for searches is reasonableness. One 
dissenting justice noted the need to "teach by example" by avoiding 
symbolic measures that diminish that constitutional protection.

Second, the question has to be asked whether there aren't less extreme 
measures that can accomplish a school district's goal of preventing drug 
use. Effective antidrug education, with parents actively recruited and 
involved, for example, might get across a message that reaches deeper than 
the suspicion-laden, coercive atmosphere of random drug tests.

The social concerns that drove the Oklahoma school's policy have to be 
carefully balanced against the need to instill in schoolchildren entering 
young adulthood a correct regard for privacy and constitutional rights.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth