Pubdate: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 Source: News & Advance, The (VA) Copyright: 2005 Media General Contact: http://www.newsadvance.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2087 Author: Amy Coutee Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Test) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth) DRUG TESTING POLICY REVIEWED In 1990, Lynchburg City Schools became the first school system in Virginia to test high school athletes for drugs. Fifteen years and roughly $600,000 later, some think it's time to reconsider drug testing. "You can make an argument that it is not the most effective use of $40,000 (annually)," said Mac Frankfort, Lynchburg City School Board vice chairman. "It's not a totally bad program, but for the effect that it is having, it is way too expensive," he said. "I've always wondered how effective it really is; it's hard to tell. "You are testing an awful lot of kids that are not doing any drugs and that's annoying to them. It's insulting. Kids that age already have a basic distrust of adults and this policy really isn't helping with that." School Board Chairwoman Julie Doyle said that the board will begin talking at its meeting Tuesday about where cuts can be made in the 2005-06 schools budget if the board does not receive all of the funding it requested from the city. A proposed city budget unveiled last week would give the schools about $2.7 million less than the board requested in additional money. Drug testing is one of the issues that Frankfort is going to suggest eliminating or scaling back. He would like to replace drug testing with drug education, or find a way to decrease the program costs. "Given the budget crunch, I think everything is at least worth discussing," said School Board member Al Billingsly, whose son and daughter have gone through the drug-testing ritual in order to play sports. School Board member Charles Hooks said, "I certainly want to give our teachers a raise and that means we've got to look in every nook and cranny in the budget to find that money." Drug testing costs the Lynchburg City School system roughly $40,000 annually. Last year it cost $43,179 to pay for 1,636 drug screens on urine samples, two drug-testing coordinators and drug education for student athletes who test positive. Each drug test - which identifies alcohol, cocaine, amphetamines, phencyclidine (PCP), cannabinoid (marijuana) and opiates - costs $25 to process. Drug education for student-athletes that test positive costs $200 per student. Money isn't the only cost. Teachers and students pay for drug testing in the form of class time. In 2002-03, the majority (53 percent) of students missed an entire class for drug testing while 27 percent missed 15 minutes or less. A handful missed two or three classes. The program also is time-consuming to administer, said Jennifer Petticolas, Lynchburg City Schools' supervisor for instructional improvement, who oversees the program. But Petticolas said it is worth the effort. "If I really did not believe in this program, I would say so because the time would not be justified," she said. At both Heritage and E.C. Glass, athletes, regardless of gender or sport, could be tested up to three times each season. For those who compete year-round, that can mean leaving class for a drug test as many as nine times a year. "Drug testing is a waste of my time and other people's money," said Natalie Wilson, a senior on the track team at E.C. Glass. "I would rather spend that money, and I think it's a lot, on upping teacher salaries or something that will benefit more people." Her teammate, Erin Ruhf, doesn't like it either, but for a different reason. "If marijuana use is that big of a concern, why not test the entire student body rather than testing a select number of those who chose to do athletics?" said Ruhf. Mallory Dunn, a softball player at Heritage, appreciates the policy, though, and Carson Crowder, a student at Jefferson Forest High School, thinks students at JF should be tested, too. "I think that it does keep a lot of players out of trouble," said Dunn. "It keeps a lot of players straight." Petticolas said there is no way to measure the program's effectiveness - - other than to count the number of positive drug tests and look for a decline - because she may never know if a kid said "no" to a drug at a party for fear of being selected for the random test. Petticolas said there has not been a single positive drug test this school year. However, the school system has turned up 24 positive drug test results over the past four years. School officials don't know how many athletes are staying drug-free only seasonally, or how many are not joining teams because of drug testing. While Petticolas said it is impossible for students to outfox the system, others say some are getting around it. Some feel kids are getting around the system though. "Alcohol is a major issue with athletes," said Debra Jefferson, substance abuse coordinator for Central Virginia Community Services. "They drink very heavily. We have a huge number of teenage alcoholics in our community." Savvy student-athletes, she said, know when to drink so that it will get out of their system by the time a drug test might happen. Ed Landis, football coach for E.C. Glass, said drug testing has merit, but it's not perfect. "If we are really trying to do what is best for these student athletes, we need to treat them as athletes year-round," said Landis, who doesn't want athletes cleaning up for just his football season - he wants them to have motivation to stay clean all year. Rose Flaugher, E.C. Glass athletic director, said she doesn't know if scaling back drug testing to save money would make the program any less effective. The current cost is definitely worthwhile though, said Flaugher. "How do you put a price tag on a life?" she asked. "If it provides a younger person with a means to say no, then it's done what it's supposed to do." She worries about the ramifications of changing the program. "It was put here for a purpose, obviously a need was identified," said Flaugher. The need was identified about 15 years ago, said Petticolas. "Just talking about it was not making an impact" on student drug use, said Petticolas. In 1989, a survey revealed that the drug education in place was not curbing drug use. At the time, the School Board felt drug testing would make an impact, and since the law, and money, prevented the board from testing the entire student body but allowed them to test students involved in competitive extracurricular activities, the board decided to implement random testing of athletes. Heritage and E.C. Glass only give drug tests to student-athletes. Other students on campus, whether they are involved in activities and clubs or not, are not tested. Since 1990, when the program began, only three other school divisions in the state have followed Lynchburg's lead, according to the Virginia Department of Education. It's a safety issue, said Petticolas. Athletes, she explained, are involved in contact sports. An athlete on drugs is at greater risk for injury and injuring the opposing team. Also, she stressed, drug testing is not a "we caught you" program. It is a "we found someone who needs help" program. But Jefferson, the substance abuse coordinator, said helping only athletes is not good enough. "Substance use is running rampant in the schools," said Jefferson, whose daughter attends E.C. Glass. "My concern is that the athletes are the only ones who are getting the opportunity to change." - --- MAP posted-by: Derek