Pubdate: Sun, 14 Aug 2005
Source: State, The (SC)
Copyright: 2005 The State
Contact:  http://www.thestate.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/426
Author: Ron Morris

DRUG POLICY ADDS LESSON TO PUNISHMENT

IT IS INTERESTING what a little digging beneath the surface often reveals.

On the surface, South Carolina's recently released four-step drug-testing 
policy for athletes seems lenient and designed primarily to keep those 
athletes eligible for competition. A closer look reveals that the policy is 
geared toward educating athletes about the abuse of drugs, and the policy 
is perhaps as stringent as any in the country.

Before we get into all the details of USC's policy, understand that 
athletes at most NCAA institutions are the only students who are tested for 
use of recreational drugs such as alcohol, marijuana and cocaine. Of the 
24,000 members of USC's student body, only the 450 or so scholarship 
athletes are forbidden from partaking in recreational drugs.

Other students do so at the risk of getting caught in possession of such drugs.

Understand also that schools such as USC voluntarily conduct drug testing 
for their athletes. There are some NCAA schools, mostly private, that do 
not test. That changes during postseason tournaments when the NCAA conducts 
drug testing, presumably to ensure level playing fields by preventing the 
use of performance-enhancing drugs.

The reason athletes are tested for drugs, and band members, cheerleaders 
and other scholarship students are not, is because those who compete are 
"held to a higher standard." At least that is the speculation of USC 
athletics director Eric Hyman, who helped create USC's new policy.

That being the case, drug testing for athletes is inherently 
discriminatory, and therefore any policy is punitive. The problem with 
USC's previous policy, according to Hyman, was that it was long on being 
punitive and short on being educational and beneficial to the athletes.

Previously, USC athletes were dismissed from their respective teams after 
two failed drug tests. Hyman, and the committee that studied USC's policy, 
concluded that a two-strikes-and-you're-out policy did not mesh with the 
athletics department goal of educating athletes and preparing them for life 
after college.

I look at every student-athlete as somebody's son or daughter," Hyman says. 
"How would I want my own to be treated?"

Hyman's concern with the policy is that every one of his athletes starts 
from a different and varied background. For an athlete who was reared in an 
environment where recreational drugs are a part of life, it did not seem 
fair to return him or her to that setting without adequate education and 
counseling about drug use and abuse.

So, USC came up with a new policy. After an initial failed drug test, the 
athlete now receives a face-to-face warning from Hyman and is instructed to 
attend educational seminars and counseling for drug awareness.

I want to be able to explain the consequences of what they're doing," Hyman 
says of his warnings. "I want to try to guide them for their future."

Also, a certified letter detailing the failed drug test is sent to the 
athlete's parent(s), and the athlete is automatically subjected to drug 
testing every seven to 10 days for a one-year period. Following a second 
failed drug test, an athlete is suspended for 25 percent of his or her 
team's regular-season games. A third failure results in the athlete being 
suspended for an entire school year, and a fourth failed test earns a 
dismissal from school.

It is important to know that under the new policy a team's coach has the 
discretion to dismiss an athlete following any failed drug test.

Beyond that, USC believes its administration of drug tests is among the 
most stringent in the country because of its number of tests, its low 
tolerance level and its ability to head off tampering with urine specimens.

Rod Walters, USC's assistant athletics director for sports medicine, 
conducted a study of 20 randomly selected colleges and found that USC's 
1,500 tests in the past calendar year was the second-highest total. One 
school conducted 149 tests during a school year.

The NCAA screens for marijuana at 50 nanograms and confirms a failed drug 
test at 15. USC screens for marijuana at 20 and confirms at five. Walters 
said many schools are lowering their tolerance levels to that of USC.

Finally, USC is one of few schools that uses a refractrometer, which 
assures that a specimen is of normal volume and has not been diluted, 
according to Walters. In other words, it is much more difficult to use a 
masking device to beat a drug test at USC.

My guess is that, other than the military academies where you get one 
strike and you are out, this is the most restrictive policy I know of," 
Hyman says.

As with any policy, it must undergo the test of time. It could be that five 
years from now USC realizes the policy is too lenient and will make 
changes. For now, when examined closely, the policy appears to have the 
proper balance of being punitive as well as educational.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth