Pubdate: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 Source: Lincoln Journal Star (NE) Copyright: 2002 Lincoln Journal Star Contact: http://www.journalstar.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/561 A CALL FOR DIALOGUE ON DRUG TESTING In contrast to some Midwestern states, the idea of widespread testing of high school students for illegal drugs has never caught on in Nebraska. Things change. Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has placed a clear stamp of approval on such programs, community discussion should be encouraged on whether the programs are worthwhile. Advocacy groups are sure to form, especially since corporations now see a new field for profit. In fact, the Drug and Alcohol Industry Association, made up of private drug-testing companies, already has scheduled a workshop in Washington on July 18 for school board members and principals, according to the New York Times. "Drug and alcohol testing has shown to be a very effective means of deterring drug use, and the nation's children need to live healthly and drug-and alcohol-free lives," said Laura E. Shelton, executive director of the association. That's exactly what officials at Tecumseh High School in Oklahoma believed when they enacted a program of random testing. So choir singer Lindsay Earls found herself urinating into a cup in a school restroom stall while her teachers waited outside. Earls filed suit, contending that the test violated her constitutional right to privacy. Her loss in court means there are no legal barriers to mandatory random testing for students in extracurricular activities. Exactly why the Pottawatamie School Board in Tecumseh established its program of drug testing remains somewhat of a puzzle. Based on the evidence, the district does not seem to have a serious drug problem. So far 797 students have been tested. Three all athletes tested positive. Today only about 5 percent of schools test athletes for drugs. Another 2 percent of schools test students involved in other extracurricular activities, according to the New York Times. Implementation of a testing program should not be undertaken lightly. Some experts argue that if students banned from extracurricular activities because of a single positive test result will find themselves shut out from positive, beneficial alternatives to drug use. Another reason is that testing will not be cheap. Drug testing kits cost about $30 to $60 per individual. Added to that cost would be the staff time needed to collect samples. One reason why mandatory drug testing has few vocal supporters locally is that the Lincoln School District has an active School Community Intervention Program in which school officials notify parents when they notice drastic changes in behavior and habits that may signal drug use. On average, SCIP teams approve about 1,000 interventions annually. Are existing local school anti-drug programs and policies enough? Or should government take a more active role in detecting and deterring drug use among students? Proactive measures by school officials to gain a sense of community sentiment would be timely. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth