Pubdate: Thu, 16 Oct 2008
Source: Arkansas Times (Little Rock, AR)
Copyright: 2008 Arkansas Times Inc.
Contact:  http://www.arktimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/583
Author: Gerard Matthews
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Testing)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?225 (Students - United States)

SCHOOLS CONTINUE DRUG TESTING

Clarksville High School will spend $7,000 this year on  random drug
tests of students. The school is one of  more than 100 in Arkansas
that administers such tests.

Don Johnston, Clarksville School District  superintendent, hasn't seen
studies that suggest such  tests are effective. In fact, two studies
by the  University of Michigan suggest that random drug tests  do
nothing to reduce student drug use.

Studies or no, Johnston says he believes the drug tests  work in
Clarksville, and that parents, for the most  part, support the program.

"I think it gives students another opportunity to say  no," Johnston
says.

Bruce Plopper, a journalism professor at the University  of Arkansas
at Little Rock, begs to differ. "There are  just no studies out there
that say this works," he  said. "But schools are spending money on it
anyway."

One drug test can cost anywhere from $14 to $30, and  tests that check
for steroid use can cost as much as  $100.

Plopper, a Conway resident, became a student of the  issue after the
Conway School District adopted drug  testing.

Plopper, who in a 2001 survey found that Arkansas's  schools tested
for drugs at a rate 13 percent higher  than the national average, sued
the Conway School  District in 2002 and 2003 over the testing on 
constitutional grounds. The case did not make it to  court before the
district suspended its student  drug-testing program. Plopper says, at
best, his  efforts "may have been indirectly related to that 
suspension."

Conway abandoned drug testing in 2007. Superintendent  Greg Murry said
it's difficult to tell if dropping the  policy has made a difference,
but he said the decision  by the School Board was the correct one.
"The community  had the opportunity to speak to the board about it,
and  the board made what they felt to be the appropriate  decision,"
Murry says. "I think the community's input  did have something to do
with the deci-sion. I mean,  that's what democracy's all about."

Arkansas school districts create their own policies on  random drug
testing, so it's difficult to know exactly  how many are testing, how
many plan to test or, like  Conway, how many have abandoned testing.
The practice  is opposed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and 
one national survey found 83 percent of physicians  disagreed with the
policy as well.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that random drug  testing is
constitutional for student athletes and  students participating in
extra-curricular activities.

Critics oppose random drug testing for a variety of  reasons -- saying
it creates an atmosphere of mistrust  and suspicion, violates privacy,
and fails to fully  address the needs of students in trouble.

Cathy Koehler, National Education Association director  for the state
of Arkansas, says there are better ways  to respond to perceived drug
problems.

"Mandatory drug and alcohol testing of students,  without probable
cause, is an unwarranted and  unconstitutional invasion of privacy,"
Koehler says.  "Why would you assume that, let's say, an entire high 
school football team, is abusing drugs or other  supplements? I think
that a lot of parents would be  offended that you made the assumption
that their child  was an abuser. And since we can't prove that every
one  of them is abusing drugs or other supplements, then  it's an
invasion of their privacy."

Cases involving drug testing are often based on the  student's right
to privacy and the school's  responsibility to provide a drug-free
environ-ment.  Where that balance lies depends on state law. Some 
state constitutions offer greater protections against  searches and
seizures than does the U.S. Constitution.  Richard Peltz, professor at
the UALR William H. Bowen  School of Law says Arkansas is one of those
states, and  school districts considering drug testing policies 
should keep that in mind.

"We don't have a lawsuit to tell us what the Arkansas  Supreme Court
might think about it. The U.S. Supreme  Court found that drug
test-ing, as a condition of  extra-curricular participation, was
permissible at  random, without individual suspicion," Peltz says. 
"Going beyond that, would be dangerous for a school's  policy."

Legal challenges to drug testing policies are common,  and can present
problems to small schools forced to  fight cases in court.

Holly Dickson, staff attorney with ACLU Arkansas, says  that over the
last couple of years her office has  received several complaints
related to student drug  testing, some regarding the policy itself,
some  concerning practice.

"We've had questions about what parents can do to have  a more
sensible drug policy at their child's school,"  Dickson says. "And
basically the answer is to take the  scientific research and share it
with their school  board and ask them to re-evaluate what they're doing."

The Arkansas School Board Association (ASBA) does not  offer clients a
model drug policy, as it does with  other issues. Kristen Gould, the
staff attorney for  ASBA, says that a good policy should be community 
based.

"If schools do have a student drug policy, it should be  done
reflectively rather than reflexively," Gould says.  "It's a policy
that you need to think through carefully  and one that you probably
need to do a lot of  ground-work with your community on in order to
build  support."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin