|
It is a noble attempt to curb drug use. But I think Edgewood is making more problems than drug testing solves.
I would not recommend drug testing in schools at this time. Not until all drugs can be tested, especially the harmful ones that are gaining popularity.
Also why limit the athletes? Public schools are drug free zones. How can you justify testing the least likely drug using kids and not the ones who don't do anything after school?
What Do Drug Tests NOT Measure?
The five-drug urine test used in the Federal Drug-Free Workplace Program does not detect all drugs used by young people. For example, it does not detect so-called club drugs such as gamma hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and Ecstasy, for example, although other urine tests can determine use of these drugs, and hair tests can easily detect Ecstasy use. No standard test, however, can detect inhalant abuse, a problem that can have serious, even fatal, consequences. (Inhalant abuse refers to the deliberate inhalation or sniffing of common household productsgasoline, correction fluid, felt-tip markers, spray paint, air freshener, and cooking spray, to name a fewwith the purpose of getting high.)
Source: http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/drug_testing/testing.html" target=_blank>http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/drug_testing/testing.html
Why across-the-board drug testing wouldn't work
Drug testing is inconsistent, and false positives are prevalent. A career could be damaged by a faulty test.
What is classified as "performance enhancing" in one sport might not provide an advantage in another. One-size-fits-all testing does not take into consideration the actual effects of the substance on athletic performance
Source: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-09-09-10changes-drugs-pros-cons_x.htm" target=_blank>http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-09-09-10changes-drugs-pros-cons_x.htm
From School Library Journal
Grade 5-8-This issue evokes emotional reactions in students, parents, coaches, administrators, and school boards across the country. Lawler looks at the pros and cons in an unbiased manner that is a result of scrupulous research, and sources are cited throughout. The book is divided into sections that encompass the history and methods of drug testing and opinions from students, teachers, and parents, as well as the policies of such organizations as the NCAA. Charts summarize information and add a great deal to the presentation; the full-color photos are more filler than informative. This book would be ideal for debates or reports, and is for a slightly younger audience than Lawrence Clayton's Drugs, Drug Testing and You (Rosen, 1997) and David Newton's Drug Testing (Enslow, 1999).
Elizabeth Stumpf, Clearfield Middle School, PA
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. |