Pubdate: Fri, 12 Jul 2002
Source: Daily Item (PA)
Copyright: 2002 The Daily Item
Contact:  http://www.dailyitem.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1045
Author: Observer Dispatch, Utica, N.Y.

RANDOM DRUG TESTING

The Supreme Court recently gave its approval to random drug testing of 
public high school students involved in extracurricular activities. By a 
vote of 5 to 4, the court ruled that local school officials can require 
drug tests of students in the band or on the debate team.

If we really believe demanding urine samples from the Chess Club will stop 
drug use, why not test all students? Why just the ones participating most 
fully in school life?

Why not? Because mandatory drug testing for all students begins to sound as 
invasive, excessive and unnecessary as it is.

The case the high court heard was brought by Lindsey Earls, a former 
Tecumseh (Okla.) High School student who is now an undergraduate at 
Dartmouth College. She said her constitutional rights were violated when, 
in order to join a competitive singing group, teachers required her to 
urinate into a cup while they listened nearby to prevent cheating.

When tight budgets mean school districts are fighting for the very 
existence of extracurricular activities not to mention some academic 
programs it is not the time to introduce costly measures aimed in the wrong 
direction: at kids who are involved in wholesome activities.

In fact, one of the ways experts including the Partnership for a Drug- Free 
America (the this-is-your-brain-on-drugs people) cite over and over as a 
way to keep kids away from drugs is to involve them in adult-supervised 
activities after school. P) Children are not adults. Still, they are not 
undeserving of some of the rights afforded to adults under the Constitution 
including an expectation of some privacy and protection from unreasonable 
searches. - Observer Dispatch, Utica, N.Y.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth