Drug Testing and Student Rights

Imagine a drug test policy at Deerfield High School. . . I can't. Everyone would act immature, creating chaos and disruption towards the learning environment. And because our school's main goal, just like any other school,  is to educate students, many would argue that drug testing would not only violate one's privacy, but would violate one's right to education due to the disturbance.  However, a school also tries to prevent illegal drug use, and if the community has been abusing drugs, the court and school should allow and encourage drug testing for extracurricular activities and athletics.

I agree that upon "reasonable suspicion" a urinalysis test can be used on a student (1). However, what is considered reasonable suspicion? One may argue that this is too broad, but I believe that the vagueness should not matter. If student seems out of it one day due to lack of sleep and is asked to take a drug test, he or she should have no reason to argue against it because they have not consumed drugs. Also, if the behavior is caused from prescribed drugs, and the urinalysis by chance picks up the drug, the student has no reason to worry because it was prescribed. The urinalysis tests only detect the use of illegal drugs including "amphetamines, marijuana, cocaine, opiates, and barbiturates, not medical conditions or the presence of authorized prescription medications" (1). No student has the reason to argue against taking a drug test because if they are consuming drugs, they should not be.

Many students and parents in opposition of the drug test may argue that it invades one's right to privacy. I disagree because the faculty monitor does not act any differently than another student using the bathroom would. For example, one would stand outside a stall and "listen for normal sounds of urination in order to guard against tampered specimens and to insure an accurate chain of custody" (2). Therefore, these monitors are not closer to the student than any other student would be when using the rest room. The procedure is more than reasonable and people should understand that they are only taking precautions to lower drug use among students. And the information gathered from each test is kept in a file. However, there have been cases where teachers leave private information like this open to other students. This should be fixed because every student has a right to privacy and this is a violation of  that right. These results should be stored in a place where only the principal and the head of the drug test policy can access them, that way no one's privacy will be violated.

I believe the drug test will really benefit the school and community and has fair consequences. I believe students will start to stop using drugs illegally, thus helping the community as a whole. The consequence of a first positive test is that the school contacts the student's parent or guardian for a meeting and the student may continue to participate in the activity if within five days of the meeting, the student goes for drug counseling and submits a second drug test. And the most severe consequence of a third positive test is the student will be suspended from participating in any activity for the "rest of the year, or 88 school days, whichever is longer" (2). I believe these will help the community diminish the drug problem in school because if a student is passionate about a sport or activity, he or she will stop using drugs. And if they continue to use drugs, they will suffer from the consequences.

I believe the sooner one acts, the better. Although many cannot imagine their school with this type of policy, I believe it will be beneficial to the school, the students and their families, and the community. If Deerfield High School adopted this policy I believe our evident drug problem would decrease immensely because so much of the student body participates in athletics and/or extracurricular activities.

Recently, Obama passed the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act which allows one to share personal student information with state officials that are not working directly on education; these records can be placed in a state database with non-education records and private entities would be able to access the school records. Many families and schools worry that if the expansion continues, information will be shared between states without student of parent consent. I believe this is going to an extreme. Files should be open, but the documents being shared should not have be identified with a student name. I believe it is reasonable only if the student's name is not revealed. If names are not used, it would act more as a survey which would benefit school districts, the state, and the nation.

After reading the Safford Unified School District v. Redding case, I was appalled and surprised. I myself felt just as violated as the middle-schooler who was strip searched due to a suspicion of having ibuprofen. The strip search was conducted and she was down to her undergarments and at some point had to lift her bra and underwear out for the nurse to check. She was so embarrassed that she kept her head down so the nurse was unable to tell that she was crying. Redding filed against the school district and the strip search was found unconstitutional. The school had no right to conduct a strip search for a suspicion of possession of ibuprofen. It is very irresponsible of the school and illustrates how some schools violate one's right to privacy. It has been stated that once a student enters school that privacy is taken away to an extent because the school has to protect the rest of the student body. But in this case, a strip search was not necessary and found unconstitutional.