Source: USA Today Contact: Pubdate: 12 Jan 1998 A DRUG-TESTING BLUNDER VS. WHY NOT TEST STUDENTS? USA TODAY'S EDITORIAL POSITION When Miami schools decided to crack down on drug abuse, they instead found a way to squander money. School districts around the country are watching Miami this week as the nation's fourth largest school system puts the finishing touches on an ill conceived program to randomly drug test its high school students. Miami school officials are pushing the $200,000 plan as a bold new way to fight teen-age drug abuse. Too bold, in fact. The drug testing plan presents a flagrant threat to the personal liberties of 82,000 mostly law-abiding Miami high school students. So to head off predictable legal challenges, school officials are watering down their testing procedures to the point of uselessness. They're asking parents to okay drug testing for all high school students, not just those suspected of abusing drugs. And to prevent charges that the program discriminates, children will be selected for the urine tests randomly using a lottery. The absurdity of the program doesn't stop there. To ensure that students provide their own urine samples, parents must accompany their kids to drug testing sites. And in the cruelest irony, students who test positive for drug abuse won't be offered follow-up treatment. Officials say the school district can't afford to get into the drug rehab business. In fact, only parents will know if the student failed. School officials will be given cumulative results. In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled it's legal for high schools to require student athletes to undergo random drug testing. Until now, though, school districts have wisely avoided testing overall student populations because the programs are ineffective and hugely expensive. Instead, most school districts are fighting the drug problem using established anti-drug educational programs. Districts administering drug tests, have found programs most cost-effective when offered voluntarily to students suspected of abusing drugs who can be helped through school-based programs. Like other urban districts, Miami schools have plenty of problems. An Edcation Week study released last week found; 10% of Miami high schoolers drop out every year, students score below the national average on standardized tests, and the area's inadequate schools are the major reason businesses refuse to locate in Miami. None of these flaws will le corrected by the school system's expensive entry into the drug testing field. And until the school system can come up with a cost effective way to help students with drug problems, there are better ways it can spend its money. - ------ OPPOSING VIEW by Renier Diaz de la Protilla ( a 26 year-old Miami-Dade County School Broad member) Why not test students? OUR PROGRAM WILL GIVE PARENTS, SCHOOLS INFORMATION WHILE HELPING STUDENTS HELP THEMSELVES. In sports, business, industry and government, drug testing is an increasingly com-mon weapon in America's fight against drugs. That is why it is perplexing and dis-turbing that our children, who are the most vulnerable to drug use and its attendant evils, are largely left out. The pilot drug and alcohol testing pro-gram I proposed to the Miami-Dade County School Board targets abuse among high school students. No student will be tested without parental consent. None will be punished for opting out. Only parents will get results of the random tests, along with information on where to get help. Research shows testing will deter students from using, as well as leading those who test positive to help. The program will cost less than current anti-drug programs. Last year, for example, Miami-Dade America's fourth targest school district spent $4.5 million in anti-drug education and peer counseling programs whose effectiveness is hard to evaluate. The numbers gathered confidentially through the drug-testing program will be invaluable in guiding future anti-substance abuse programs. Although parents can test their children without school involvement, it is erroneous to assume that parents have the time or the resources to do so. Critics may challenge this flexible policy with privacy or constitutional arguments. But what about a parent's right to information? I seriously doubt there are court rulings which deny a parent's right to know if his or her child's life is in danger. Consider the 15-year-old Miami girl, pregnant and already a longtime drug abuser, who drowned in her bathtub after smelling glue. And a Miami boy, age 17, who shot himself in the head after years of alcohol, marijuana and LSD abuse. Both since 1995. Both could have been saved if their families had detected drug use earlier. "Just Say No" and other 'rah-rah" campaigns no will longer cut it. More aggressive and pro-active measures are needed if we are to save more of our children.