Pubdate: Wed, 26 Jun 2002
Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (PA)
Copyright: 2002 PG Publishing
Contact:  http://www.post-gazette.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/341
Author: Ruth Ann Baker

DRUG POLICY CAN DO ONLY SO MUCH

Leaders of the Shaler Area School District are wondering what to do about 
human nature -- specifically, the unpredictable, curious and secretive 
aspects of human nature usually contained in the teen-age size of the species.

They're also wondering how much to spend to control it. Their efforts are a 
microcosm of a struggle facing school districts nationwide. But what if 
they're missing a bigger problem? At its last meeting, the Shaler school 
board discussed how broadly to apply a proposed drug-testing policy for the 
district. Do we test only our athletes? Do we test all kids involved in 
after-school activities? Do we randomly test the entire student population? 
Should the tests be voluntary or not?

After a decade or so of fitful subsidence, drug use is rising pretty much 
everywhere. School board members -- some of whom are themselves subject to 
random workplace drug tests -- know how much drug abuse costs both the 
individual and society.

A newly proposed policy, sent back to committee for further review, calls 
for weekly random screenings for the district's 400 athletes in grades 
seven through 12. The tests would cover only a portion of that population 
in any given week and would cost $20,000 per year.

Right now, the district relies on observation and referrals to figure out 
who needs help and discipline. When kids use drugs, "their grades, their 
attendance, their personalities are somehow going to be altered," says 
Shaler Superintendent Donald Lee. "Sometimes it's parents who call us. They 
say, 'My child has a new group of friends. They're not interested in the 
things they used to be. Can you help us out?'"

Teachers and staff are trained to look for such symptoms, and "as they see 
a change in the student's behavior or performance, they report it to the 
Student Assistance Program team, they have meetings to talk about it and 
look into indivdual situations."

But the costly tests proposed as another tool for helpful intervention 
won't be able to detect this and every district's biggest drug problem: 
alcohol. The tests detect "steroids or marijuana or opiates, but they can't 
get at alcohol," Lee said. "Alcohol is a bigger problem. Alcohol 
consumption by people under 21 is a big concern everywhere."

Underage drinking is the most popular form of drug abuse among teen-age 
athletes, Lee said. "Sometimes we learn through arrests made in the 
community at a weekend party. That's how we resolve alcohol problems with 
athletes."

Shaler's current policy uses a "sliding scale" to determine punishment -- a 
week's suspension and some counseling for a first-time offense, four to six 
weeks' suspension and more substantial counseling or intervention if a 
second infraction occurs within a year of the first. "I'm assuming the new 
policy will have a similar approach," Lee said. But in the three years that 
Shaler's current policy has been in place, only "two or three kids have 
gone to the second level" of discipline, Lee said. "We've never had to ban 
anyone from a sport."

That could mean that Shaler athletes aren't abusing alcohol and drugs much 
at all, or it could mean that the authorities aren't finding out about it.

It seems that there are two different student groups school board members 
need to consider here: kids involved in sports and other extracurricular 
activities, and everybody else. It makes sense that the school would want 
those who represent the district on various teams to be drug-free, and the 
random testing policy recently proposed makes sense.

But if alcohol abuse is the bigger problem and the tests don't detect it, 
then another remedy has to be considered. Either school officials must test 
for alcohol use -- an invasive blood test -- or they must ask parents to 
cooperate with a district-wide policy against allowing kids to attend 
unchaperoned parties.

(Any sensible parent isn't going to allow a teen-ager to attend such a 
party and isn't going to take the kid's word for it, either, but apparently 
there's a shortage of sensible parents.) At almost no cost, the district 
could have athletes, band members, debaters, other young district 
representatives and their parents take a no partying pledge.

And for kids who don't participate in after-school activities? They tend to 
find after-school activities of their own. Endless research shows that the 
hours from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. are the hours teens get into all kinds of 
trouble. If Shaler's money were mine to spend, I'd put it toward finding a 
way to make sure that all teens are busy and under the influence of caring 
adults during those hours of greatest need.

Other than changing the structure of the American school day and the 
realities of human nature, though, Shaler's current drug policy does just 
about everything it can do. The rest is up to the parents.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Alex