Kansas student body to be drug-tested

But they won't be breathalyzed
EL DORADO, Kan. (AP) - Random drug testing of student athletes has become as routine as study hall and lunch at many high schools across the country. But this factory town outside Wichita is taking testing to the extreme.
It is instituting random drug screening for all middle and high school students participating in _ or even just attending _ any extracurricular activity. That includes sports, clubs, field trips, driver's education, even school plays.
Those who don't sign consent forms cannot attend games, go to school dances, join a club or so much as park their car on school property.
Administrators insist the district does not have a drug problem, and say the new policy _ one of the toughest in the nation _ is aimed at keeping it that way.
Already signed up:

• 425 of 600 high schoolers
• 215 of 315 middle-schoolers

Hat tip to reader kg!

Comments

[G]

What a crock of you-know-what.

I hope students have the courage to refuse to sign that crap, and that their parents back them up.

[kg]

Welcome to Gattaca.

Leave your privacy expectations behind. Thank you.

[kg]

For review class:

Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

What's a cup of pee go for these days?

[JC_in_KC]

I did not realize random drug testing violated the civil rights of students. They have the opportunity to say no. So it is not forced on them.

[joel]

bravo kg! took the words right outa my mouth

[JD]

This is not a current violation of these kids' civil rights. At any given point their parents could take them to the doctor, have their blood drawn, and have it sent in for testing. While I disagree with the entire student population having to submit to testing to attend school events, it would be an infraction to impose such testing on the athletes or the drama club alone. My question is how this is being paid for...Kansas already has enough issues regarding education funding....how many millions are they putting into this new drug testing program? Can they provide any research as to how this will benefit the kids' education? How many textbooks were not ordered this year so that urine specimens could be gathered? The kids will have to pass drug testing to participate in athletics at the collegiate level, so this could deter a number of athletes from using performance enhancing drugs prior to graduation. I see that I am now rambling, but while I am not opposed to the drug testing, the scope is unreasonable, and where is the funding coming from? Oh wait, Kansas doesn't need new textbooks as the only book they apparently need to teach is the Bible....Evolution never happened and now we're afraid all the good Christians are on drugs????????

[KC Brougham]

They're doing pee tests, with the cardboard strips that turn a certain color if the person is clean. The company that makes them is in San Diego and the product can be purchased at Savon. All the clinics who test for employers use them.

If someone wanted to step up against this, they would easily win. If enough people stepped up, it would go away quickley and quietly. The question is, are the people of El Dorado going to stand up for their rights or fold like a house of cards.

The numbers indicate that the majority has folded.

[Reality Check]

"I did not realize random drug testing violated the civil rights of students. They have the opportunity to say no. So it is not forced on them."

Signing the consent form is not mandatory, otherwise there wouldn't be a need for a consent form. However, students who refuse to sign are prohibited from attending or participating in ANY extra-curricular activity, and some activities that are within the curriculum (field trips, driver education).

Can't be in the school play, or watch friends or family in the school play. Can't play sports, or watch friends or family on an athletic team. Can't join the debate team, or watch friends or family competing on the debate team. Can't go to a school dance. Can't join the foreign language club, the National Honor Society, Future Business Leaders of America, the cheerleading squad, the dance team, Model United Nations, math club.

Hell, these kids can't even join SADD without signing the consent form allowing the district to give them a whiz quiz.

What gets me is that students under 18 are legally unable to enter contracts, and therefore the consent forms shouldn't be worth the paper they're written on.

I know. I know. We should all just shut up and do what we're told--it's for our own good.

[Art]

joel wrote
My question is how this is being paid for...Kansas already has enough issues regarding education funding.
------------------------------------------
We evidently have no problem in education funding.
Ask Gov. Sebelius. We have enough to pay for the college education of illegal aliens.

[SOWHAT]

If a person has nothing to hide, then why not just submit to the test. If I was a student, I would be glad to not have to deal with or worry about drug users/abusers at extra-curricular activities. It seems like a lot of the time (not all the time!!) the folks who cry foul about their constitutional rights being violated are the same folks who want to take advantage of those rights in order to do something illegal and avoid the consequences.

[joel]

Art, actually that was JD not me.

[Reality Check]

Sorry, SOWHAT, I don't buy it. I'm kind of a solitary person, I like my privacy, and don't want any agent of the state crawling up my backside or into any of my affairs with a microscope.

You want to let the state check me out? Fine. There's a process they need to take. It's called a search warrant. And they need something called "probable cause" in order to get one. Sunday's Constitution Day--why don't you take some time to read it and think about what the words actually mean?

[Jimbo]

So SOWHAT you wouldnt mind letting the police come over and look around your house or apartment for stolen goods. Also while they are at it they want to record your phone records to see if you may be involved with terrorists. Why you havent stolen anything or talked to terrorists so why should you care? Or do you? I bet you would raise all kinds of hell if they wanted to do that.I feel I have to use an extreme example to get people with one operating brain cell to understand. Is this a clear enough example for you to understand? This is a violation of our civil rights but you seem to not understand this basic principle.

[openmind]

Great attitude SOWHAT, would you allow the police to randomly search your home? You shouldnt have anything to hide.

[AL]

Remeber what Nikita K said from Russia...we will fall from within....we're starting to crumble...the rights are going away slowly but surely....and all the lemmings in the country won't wake up until they are already going over the cliff.

[Mark]

So if you use drugs then you cant participate in extracuricular activities. I thought the mantra was to get drug users into extracurricular activities so they wouldnt have time to do drugs. Now they will have all after school to sit around and shoot up heroin instead of going to school activities. Seems like schizo logic to me to deny the ones who need it most access to school activities.

[SOWHAT]

That is exactly how I feel. I have absolutely nothing to hide. If listening in on my phone calls makes our country more secure then so be it. I would gladly let anyone listen to my phone calls if it would allow us to prevent the kind of attacks that caused the tragedies on 9/11.

[AL]

SOWHAT, just because you have nothing to hide does not mean you are not entitled to privacy. And if you think listening in on phonecalls is going to prevent another 9/11, WAKE UP! Once again, instead of trying to eliminate the reason this happened, we just try to avoid another incident. Let's eliminate the cause, not continue to medicate it. Let's not let fear motivate us to do things we will regret later.

SOWHAT, where's the proof that any of this stuff makes us safer?

BTW, I end most of my phone conversations by saying, "Death to America," as a big F.U. to the NSA (and my dad's a retired CIA official who thinks what's happened to our freedoms since 9/11 is the beginning of a long, slow slide into totalitarianism).

I felt safer in European airports 20 years ago than I do in any airport in the U.S. today. Police armed with machine guns and bomb-sniffing dogs roamed the terminals. I didn't have to take off my shoes, get strip-searched, and I could take fingernail clippers and a disposable razor in my carry-on luggage!

Screw the illusion of security we're being sold today.

[Mike]

Dearest KG,,,,

YOU need the review sir. Now go crawl into your little hole and look up the "Administrative Exceptions" to the 4th and that will take care of your 4th and 5th issues. Happy reading :P

[Kassandra]

If you want to test me fine. But honestly I want to know what they are going to do with the student's tests that show up they are doing drugs, like one guy said, they are trying to get kids off drugs but then they go and say that they don't want them playing sports? Or are you going to try and help them and then get them into sports? Or just leave them alone? This is a useless issue. It's going to pass either with us taking it or not. Most likely not.

[zena]

If you are not doing drugs or drinking, then you have nothing to worry about. Why not sign the consent form and be done with it. There is no reason to be on guard for something that is so simple. Unless you have something to hid. Drugs are illegal, and drinking is illegal for these kids. They should not be doing it, so it shouldn't be an issue. If I were their parent, I would want my child to be tested every now and then. It is not a violation, because they should not be doing things that are illegal for them anyways. The law is what we stand by, and is what America is all about.

And about civil rights for kids, they don't have any until they are 18. Until then it is only their parents that have the rights.

[RC]

Those who will give up their liberty for the promise of security deserve neither. Mark, no offense to you personally, but that sort of cowardly attitude about intrusions into our privacy has let this country become not so free these days.

[SOWHAT]

I agree with you that we have privacy rights that in an ideal world shouldn't be violated. But I am going to say that there are times when concerns for the greater good can outweigh an individual's privacy rights. I am just a law-abiding citizen that believes one of the big problems in our world today is when people don't take resposibility for their actions and take advantage of things like constitutional rights as a way for them to avoid the consequences of their actions. Believe me, I understand where all of you are coming from and I respect for your thoughts and opinions.

[Reality Check]

SOWHAT, I'm curious. Which constitutional guarantees do people use to avoid the consequences of their actions?

[G]

You shouldn't just respect our thoughts and opinions, SOWHAT, you should reflect on them a little bit. It's very scary what you would be willing to give up in order to get an illusion of security.

[Reality Check]

Mike, what administrative exceptions apply here? I'm not sure how the school district can claim with a straight face that this policy appropriately balances the interests of the district against the individual rights of the students.

The district admits they're treating a problem that doesn't exist. From the article: "Administrators insist the district does not have a drug problem..." I don't see how trying to prevent something that may or may not become a problem warrants this type of invasive search.

[SOWHAT]

Here is an example for you...anyone who uses illegal drugs and then cries foul on his/her constitutional privacy rights because they don't want to submit to a drug test and face the consequences of the illegal actions that they chose to do.

[Reality Check]

Huh? Can you please be coherent?

[Red]

I know I'm going to get nailed for this but it's just my opinion. I have a nephew that does not do drugs. He has a health issue and get's blood testing monthly. But anyway he refuses to play football or anything else any more his reasoning is he was tired of being treated like a criminal. He did nothing yet he was subjected to random testing, random locker searches things like that. How many children feel this way? How many have used drugs because they come up with the old saying if they're going to acuse me I may as well? These are children with a natural rebellion process to grow out of. These tests are far from accurate yet an athletes entire school career can go down the tubes from one of them. I just think it's wrong. If the school feels there is a problem notify the parents if they do nothing there are other routes they can take.

[Reality Check]

Red, you have a valid point. I haven't used drugs since I was in college, but I refuse to work for any employer that requires pre-employment or random drug screening. If I crash the company car or drive a forklift into the wall, then you've got a reason to test me. However, I should have the presumption of innocence when there's no suggestion of wrongdoing, and I do have an expectation of privacy on my own time.

If you catch me wasted on company time, feel free to fire my fat backside.

[SOWHAT]

Reality check writes...

SOWHAT, I'm curious. Which constitutional guarantees do people use to avoid the consequences of their actions?

I write...

Here is an example for you...anyone who uses illegal drugs and then cries foul on his/her constitutional privacy rights because they don't want to submit to a drug test and face the consequences of the illegal actions that they chose to do.

***************************************

Since you can't follow me, let me clarify. I think people who use drugs hide behind the constitutional guarantee of privacy by showing outrage against the thought of being drug tested and therefore attempting to avoid the test and the resulting consequences of their illegal actions.

[SOWHAT]

Hey everyone...I enjoyed the banter, but I am outta here. Everyone have a great day and please by all means avoid any pee cups that may be forced upon you!!

[jb]

I would not have signed this 'consent form' while I was in high school. Furthermore, I would advise my three daughters to not sign if a similar form were required at their school.

A high school dropout meth addict can go to a football game but if a student doesn't sign a form, too bad? I would bet this policy will be short-lived.

As for you sheep that do things because you are told: do you think this country would exist if our forefathers had your attitudes?

[Reality Check]

SOWHAT, does that mean that everyone who objects to drug testing should be suspected of using?

If that's the case, read my response to Red just above your last post for my take on that idea.

[kg]

Hey Red, very good point. Who monitors the percentage of false positives that occur and are the results determined by a third party agent?

Can they be sure that prescription meds won't affect results?

Of course not.

[John Prock]

Why be random? Test everyone, collect the DNA for a national database. I've offered my DNA to numerous honeys.

[Kelly]

They're not saying those who refuse cannot attend school - they can't attend extracurricular activities, which is a priviledge anyway - so they can require whatever they want to require. It's a choice the students and their parents must make. You're free not to be tested, but you won't be attending the school-sponsored activities. What's so wrong with that? That's their prerogative. I swear, some people will whine about anything, claiming their "rights" are being violated. Nobody these days wants to be held accountable for anything. If you choose not to be tested, you don't attend. There you go, exercise your rights all you want - just don't b*&#% about the consequences. This is America - that's what we're all about. Grow up.

[Mark]

RC
What attitude of mine are you referring to?

[MikeTheTired]

Kansas, the land of OZ. Do you think the Wizard would have passed a drug test? Opps most drugs weren't illegal then. How did our priorities get so screwed up? Educators should focus on education and investigations should be initiated when suspicion is present. Proactive law enforcement has been struck down by the Supreme Court time after time. We need to quit protecting people from themselves. I guess if we can ensure the kids are straight we’ll have someone to drive their drunken parents to school activities.

[Samona]

I think the teachers and administrators ought to be tested randomly too. What would we find....................

[OPIchabod]

OK, some people here have mentioned that if you're not doing anything illegal, then it shouldn't be a big deal to submit to the drug-testing mentioned.

By traveling throughout KC, I've noticed that most people drive in excess of the speedlimit. Clearly, our local governments should mandate that all cars have a transponder-type device that randomly transmits whether we are speeding or not. Everyone here who is a proponent of this El-Dorado testing program will need to be the first in line to receive this device for their car.

No wait, that policy wouldn't last because we'd vote the politicians out.

Someone mentioned that these kids don't have full rights as a result of their age. Let's not kid (no pun intended) ourselves - we expect our kids to go out and get a job at 16, and until they're 18, they pay taxes on the money they earn - without representation.

This is just one more example of how totally messed-up things are getting.

[Kristin]

Point well taken OP!
Drug testing on these kids... fine, let's drug test them all and not let the ones that don't pass/refuse to consent into an activities! But when their older brother and his friends go to the game high to support their old team... go ahead, let them right in! Besides, they aren't students here! (Sarcasm for those of you who didn't get that!)
Kelly.... think back! If we had never "whined" about our rights in the beginning, we wouldn't have any now for you to enjoy! Do you like voting? Someone "whined," it was changed. Do you like to be able to go to whatever church/religious establishment that you want to, or not go for that matter? Someone "whined," it was changed!
Another thing, I recall in high school having to attend certain activities that counted as a GRADE... so no, this is not just making a difference on their life outside of school, it can directly change their grades!
I'm a full-time college student, I don't do drugs, but my school doesn't need to know that one way or the other! If everyone just consents to what someone wants them to, they stakes are going to get higher... what's next?

[Bohica]

Simple fix: Don't sign the paper. Don't play sports, or anything else. The school will lose funding. Then some bright college educated person will start scratching their heads wondering "Duh... what happened here?".

The kids need to all unite and refuse to take the piss test.

[JD]

Someone needs to begin to understand that THE KIDS AREN'T THE ONES SIGNING THE FORMS!!!!!!!! If the student is under 18, it has to be signed by the parent. A minor cannot enter into any legal contract and/or give their consent for anything.

[ghost]

I understand that drug use is a problem, but I have NEVER agreed with drug testing for either a job or a education. Isn't that guilty until proven innocent? Not the American values I know.

[kg]

They're not saying those who refuse cannot attend school - they can't attend extracurricular activities, which is a priviledge anyway - so they can require whatever they want to require. It's a choice the students and their parents must make. You're free not to be tested, but you won't be attending the school-sponsored activities. What's so wrong with that?

Kelly what's wrong with it is that many of those school-sponsored activities are funded through tax dollars, and exist as normal functions of the community as well. State and local governments, which includes school boards, ARE largely free to do whatever they want, make whatever regulations they decide, up to the point where any citizen's Constitutional rights are crossed.

Another example, my kids are in band, which is a regular class in the daily schedule (different district). So ok, testing isn't a prerequisite to be in class but attendance at performances are mandatory. Failure to attend means an F for the class.

[JD]

So I suppose you would support the pharmacist that was diluting chemo drugs filling your prescriptions......or a cop patrolling while on LSD.....or an air traffic controller who's got the munchies and is too busy diggin in the bag of Doritos to see that your plane turns the right way...there are reasons for drug testing. I don't support the Kansas drug testing, however employers have every right to run a background check, a credit check, and a drug test pre-employment. As for education, I see absolutely nothing wrong with testing any collegian that is receiving a scholarship either academically or athletically. It's their money, and they only have enough for a few, so why waste it on someone who is wasted. Likewise, the schools pay for the majority of the costs incurred by the athletics, drama, and many clubs. The districts pay the coaches salaries and for a good percentage of any equipment/supplies.

[JW]

Kid's don't have constitutional rights identical to those of adults. It's really their parental units that should decide whether or not to sign the form. The thing is, especially with teenagers, it's hard for parents to really know what kind of trouble their kids are getting in to before they have a really serious problem.

Some parents are convinved that their own kids wouldn't do such a thing. These tests will open their eyes. Some opponents of testing point out the fact that they have always been clean and the tests would be a waste of time and money. For those kids, yes. Some opponents point out the fact that many kids experiment with drinking and drugs in high school and still go on to become responsible adults. They too are correct. And I'm sure there are a few people who oppose testing who still use illegal drugs and haven't had their lives completely destroyed by them so that they don't see why anyone cares if a 15 year old or such experiements with mind altering substances that could lead to problems ranging from academic difficulties to full on drug dependancy.

The fact is that parents need to know if their kids are struggling to read, skipping school, and yes, experimenting with drugs. I've got no problem sending the message to teenagers that using drugs is risky and irresponsible behavior and that choosing to use drugs risks your future and your life. And we can send that message by identifying those who use drugs, applying consequences to their personally and societally destructive choice, and getting them help as soon as possible.

[Reminder - Please sign your comments]

I say this policy doesn't go far enough. They should make drug testing mandatory for all kids to even enroll in or attend school. That way my kids won't be in the same class a dope user. Drug testing should also be mandatory for all parents of kids attending school b/c I wouldn't want my child in school with someone whos parents are doing drugs. Furthermore, these tests should be conducted every other day b/c a drug like cocaine will be out of a person's system in three days. If this is what it takes to make our school's drug free then so be it.

(Anonymous: In the future, please remember to sign your comments in the "Name" box. This keeps them from popping up in my 'delete' list. Thanks, Greg Reeves)