I am a member of Hatrack, but have chosen to start a new identity for this thread.
My child came home from school today (the first day of school) with a form. This form stated every child in an extra-curricular activity must submit to random drug testing. This is all new to us and we were not told about this before hand. Below is the text from the letter.
XXX Public School Drug Use Testing Consent Form
Statement of Purpose and Intent: Participation in school sponsored extra-curricular activities in the XXX School District is a privilege. Students who participate in these activities are respected by the student body and are expected to hold themselves, their fellow students, their parents and their school to set the highest possible examples of conduct that includes avoiding the use or possession of illegal or performance enhancing drugs.
Participation in Extra-Curricular Activities: Possession or use of illegal or performance enhancing drugs of any kind is incompatible with participation in extre-curricular activities on behalf of the XXX School District. This District has adopted the Student Extra-Curricular Activity Drug Testing Policy and Drug Use Testing Consent form for use by all students participating in extra-curricular activities 6th-12th grade level. Each student and the parent or custodian shall sign and date this consent to test before the student shall be eligible to practice or participate in any extra-curricular activities.
Consent for Drug Testing: The consent shall be to provide a urine sample: a) as chosen by the random selection basis, and b) at any time requested based on reasonable suspicion to be tested for illegal or performance enhancing drugs. (No student shall be allowed to practice or participate in any extra-curricular activity unless the student has returned the properly signed Drug Testing Consent Form.)
Student Athlete/Parent/Guardian: For the safety and health of students, the XXX School District enforces the rules applying to the possession or consumption of illegal or performance enhancing drugs. It is understood that upon determination of a violation, the student in violation will be restricted to participation of any extra-curricular activities, as outlined in the policy.
I/We have read and understand the XXX Public Schools "Student Extra-Curricular Activity Drug Use Testing Policy". I/We desire that the student named above participates in Extra-Curricular programs of the XXX School District,and I/We hereby voluntarily agree to be subject to its terms. I/We accept the method of obtaining urine samples, testing, and analysis of such specimens and all other aspects of the program. I/We further agree and consent to the disclosure of the sampling, testing, and results as provided in this program.
There are a large number of questions I have about this. Invasion of privacy? How do I know the samples will not be tainted?
Do you think I should fight this?
Posts: 4 | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have you read the testing policy? I assume some safeguards are in place to limit the possibility of samples being tainted and to limit what they are allowed to test for. In the grander scheme of things I am supportive of efforts to discourage the use of performance enhancing drugs, and illegal drugs in minors.
Posts: 644 | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
As am I. I don't even watch baseball now because I am sick about steroids.
No, I have not read the testing policy. It is not on the district website and was not provided. This form is the first I have heard about it.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your concerns aren't completely clear. Yes, it's an invasion of privacy. It's up to you whether to submit to it though. It's unlikely that the testing will have false positives (if that's what you mean by "tainted").
You should fight it if you think that the presumption of innocence and respect for the kid's privacy are more important than making sure kids aren't using the drugs, or being able to participate. You shouldn't count on getting the policy changed, although you can fight for that - the most likely result will be that your kid doesn't get to play.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
See that's my concern. I don't want my kid to be the one whose parent is causing such a stink, but I am concerned for her well being. This child is pretty shy and is scared about having to pee in a cup with a nurse right outside the door. This is a seventh grade student and is in music. I'm told this all started because the state mandated performance enhancing drug testing for athletes and people said it wasn't fair to the athletes to be singled out. I see that too.
I think my concerns aren't completely clear, because I don't exactly know why this doesn't feel right.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know in my state, this has been challenged and upheld - and all students (band/music included) have to submit to the screening or they cannot participate. My daughter has been involved in marching band for two years, and has been tested once. Of course, it was negative, and she didn't find it embarrassing or intrusive - they usually pull a group out at a time and so no one student is singled. My daughter and her friends all think it's rather funny...and made jokes to me about how they're such "druggies" they need to be tested all the time. It is funny how the randomized sample works - none of the kids I know that have been tested this year are at all what I might consider high risk for drug use while some I certainly wish they WOULD test never seem to get pulled!
Of course, your daughter may be different. But, I wanted to reassure you that for my daughter it hasn't been a big deal at all.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
My child has a biological parent that smokes (not in the house) and was concerned that cigarettes would show up because they are sometimes around this parent when they go outside to smoke.
I feel this was just sprung on us without warning. I'm a pretty concerned parent and stay very involved, but have not been to school board meetings. I guess I should in the future.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Check the website of your state dept of education, or your school board. Often policies are available online for public review and you can read the policy in its entirety.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
My high school started requiring all clubs to agree to everything and sign standard of conduct requirement. This was due to an actual incident with my team mates on the nationally ranked Academic decathlon team (if we had signed our year, we would not have been able to compete nationally).
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I understand it's meant to encourage kids to stop doing drugs, but the sad truth is that most kids who do drugs don't really have great judgement in the first place, and will probably choose drugs over extracurriculars. What about them?
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Funny timing, my husband called a little while ago and said he was brought in for random drug testing at his job (he's a firefighter/paramedic for a large city fire dept.). He read the consent form, and noticed that according to it he was giving permission for them to keep his DNA and release it various agencies if requested. Well, nothing for his job requires any DNA be collected or used in any way, so he told them he refused to sign if the DNA part was in there. They told him they only had one form, and if he gave consent for the drug test he had to use that form. So he signed the form, but crossed out all the DNA references and wrote in that he was only consenting to the drug test.
So, schools aren't the only places that put up with this stuff.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to do it for my job, and also provide them a list of all prescription drugs I take. It seemed very intrusive and scary to me at first, but after having done it several times I got over that feeling and now it's just routine. I told myself during the first round that I had always wanted to be an astronaut, and if I had gone through astronaut training I would have to endure a great deal that was more personal and invasive than that.
I'm not sure how I would feel about my child having to do it. I think maybe I would be glad for another source of information assuring me my child wasn't doing any illegal drugs.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by concerned_parent: My child has a biological parent that smokes (not in the house) and was concerned that cigarettes would show up because they are sometimes around this parent when they go outside to smoke.
This will not be tested for on a drug screen. There isn't any direct test for exposure to secondhand (regular) cigarette smoke -- although if the items are marijuana joints, that could possibly show up, depending on how much the child inhaled. But regular cigarettes isn't something that could be tested for directly in this sort of screen.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What sort of performance enhancing drugs are they worried about band kids taking? Are they worried they'll take some sort of drug that will expand their lung capacity for those strung together whole notes?
And in general, what sort of academic performance enhancing drugs exist?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Adderall comes to mind as an academic performance enhancing drug. It was rife over my college campus.
quote: I don't want my kid to be the one whose parent is causing such a stink, but I am concerned for her well being. This child is pretty shy and is scared about having to pee in a cup with a nurse right outside the door.
concerned_parent, I think I would tell my kid to suck it up, and learn to pee in a cup on demand. I mean, that's a pretty standard medical procedure for any number of tests. It's like getting blood drawn (which I have to do every couple of weeks): unpleasant, but a part of routine medical procedures.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by concerned_parent: See that's my concern. I don't want my kid to be the one whose parent is causing such a stink, but I am concerned for her well being. This child is pretty shy and is scared about having to pee in a cup with a nurse right outside the door. This is a seventh grade student and is in music. I'm told this all started because the state mandated performance enhancing drug testing for athletes and people said it wasn't fair to the athletes to be singled out. I see that too.
I think you ought to take the first step of going down to the school, and speaking with the asst. Principle or the Athletics director about this. IF he/she doesn't address your concerns to your satisfaction, push a little harder. But start out by talking.
I had a little private personal policy when I worked in recreation and there was always the possibility of "random" drug testing. I promised myself I would submit to the test, and that once the results were known to be drug free, I would quit the job. In this way I would show that I was of sound mind, and chose not to work for a company that would invade my privacy. It never ended up happening.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: What sort of performance enhancing drugs are they worried about band kids taking? Are they worried they'll take some sort of drug that will expand their lung capacity for those strung together whole notes?
Some parents are doping their kids with illegitimately acquired 'academic enhancement' drugs like adderall in an attempt to keep them 'ahead of the curve' in school and extracurricular performance.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wrestled all through high school. It was a stupid waste of my time. The very existence of sports at the high school level seems like a bad idea. You have dirt broke school systems spending money on athletic equipment. You have students held to lower standards because coach/faculty wants them to play You have a class-like culture that encourages the athletes to dominate and bully the obviously much less important academically oriented kids Now you have kids hacking their own endocrine system to compete.
What’s the up-side again?
Of course it is natural and healthy for kids to get together to play games. Maybe we should just keep the adults away.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KDB: I wrestled all through high school. It was a stupid waste of my time. The very existence of sports at the high school level seems like a bad idea.
The participation in sports has been shown to improve the development of certain students, socially as well as personally, if not academically as well.
However, I agree that school-run or school administered athletics has many downsides. I am in favor of club oriented, non school run athletics. I went to a high school with a typically corrupt and overweighted sports program, and the school suffered for that. I don't see why sports should be funded by schools, but I think club teams can serve all the positive functions of high school sports.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
DOMA's invading non-net life? Click here to sign away all rights we think are a bother?
Actually bureaucrats and small governments are cowards at heart. They do this because its safer for them than not doing it. If you complain about it, not enough to jeopardize your child's chances of being involved, but enough so that they know this is a problem, it will be addressed.
Just make sure you know what you want them to do. Drug testing all kids? Drug testing only kids that are suspicious? A warning that this type of drug testing requirement is coming?
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just for fun, you could ask the school district if they have a drug test requirement for all staff (most likely they do). Then ask them how many coaches, teachers, principals, assistant principals, etc are tested every year. The answers will most likely be "yes" and "none". You can follow up with if you don't test the coaches or other staff why would you test the students?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Down here in the SW most districts are pay-to-play, so kids who really need some help getting to college and are athletic dont get the chance to even play let alone stand out and excel. Personnally I found the academic favoritism appalling, one teacher even gave out extra-credit to students who brought in and showed him a copy of Rudy, not to mention that twenty percent of the semester grade depended on weekly free form projects based on what part of U.S. history we were on (rich kids had diaramas and got extra credit, poor kids had construction paper.)
But you cant stop school funding for sports without following suit for all other programs, even though sports commonly gets far more money than the arts. If you were ever in band, choir, debate, drama, or play production than I dont think that you would want kids to miss out on those experiences. While I dont think that school sports really bring out many admirable qualities in kids, there are plenty that do but dont understand why I had so much fun building stages and will always be a techie at heart.
And I guess that they want to drug test kids in programs that dont use drugs to make sure that they dont even try it just once, for fear of a random testing ruining thier extra-carricular career. Whats really creepy is that I had school documents that asked me for my e-mail... and I still dont know why.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would have had an issue taking a drug test for band, and I remember that when I was in school some people wanted random drug testing for the student body.
I had never done an illegal drug, or abused a legal one, but I found the idea insulting, degrading, and a complete invasion of privacy.
I still do, and my kids will probably miss out on all sorts of activities because of it, I guess.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most jobs require peeing in a cup on demand (and some actually do tests on a regular basis). Insulting or not, that is just a part of life. So, I would tell my daughter to suck it up.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just because something is normal, accepted, and "just a part of life," doesn't say anything about whether or not it is right.
Posts: 2880 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Most jobs require peeing in a cup on demand (and some actually do tests on a regular basis).
How are we deciding on "most?" I've only ever held one job with any company that insulted its employees that way.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: any company that insulted its employees that way
is it always an insult to submit to a drug test? Are there jobs you think employees should have to submit to a drug test?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, to be fair, most of the people I talk to about their work have security clearance of some sort, so that might skew my view. I think that it is perfectly legitimate for them to be subjected to drug testing. My firefighter brother also does drug testing, though I think some of the other medical requirements are far more invasive. But I think that they are perfectly legitimate requirements for a fireman.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Most jobs require peeing in a cup on demand (and some actually do tests on a regular basis).
How are we deciding on "most?" I've only ever held one job with any company that insulted its employees that way.
The only Job I had that made me take a drug test was, of all places, Target.
I have trouble peeing on demand, but have found the few times I've had to do it, it's a bit easier if I just drink a lot of water beforehand - then I have to whether or not my sub-conscious has an issue with it or not.
And surely middle/high-schools aren't testing for performance-enhancing drugs, but stuff like marijuana and cocaine, right?
The concept does feel a bit wrong to me, but at the same time, I can understand why such a program has been implemented. I have a few more years until Audrey is old enough to put me in your shoes, concerned_parent.
Posts: 382 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Most jobs require peeing in a cup on demand (and some actually do tests on a regular basis).
How are we deciding on "most?" I've only ever held one job with any company that insulted its employees that way.
Given that large companies are more likely to have such requirements (reasons should be obvious), and more jobs are with large companies than small ones, yes, most.
As far as "insulted", give me a break. It's not an unreasonable precaution for a company to take in our litigious age. And it's a fairly non-invasive one.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wish my company tested, just to get rid of the slackers and soon to be non employees quicker.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Godric 2.0: And surely middle/high-schools aren't testing for performance-enhancing drugs, but stuff like marijuana and cocaine, right?
I have read several articles suggesting that steroid use is becoming a serious problem in schools. Colleges watch football players from as early as middle school, so there is big pressure to perform from an early age. Further, the athletes are often self-medicating- buying from (and trusting) dubious internet companies, adding to the already substantial dangers associated with steroid use.
Posts: 644 | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Never encountered it here, it seems that this might be more common in the States. (And in Canada, I'm in Ontario where it seems especially uncommon)
quote:Such testing has increased dramatically in North America over the past 20 years, chiefly in the U.S., where it's done by 95 per cent of top Fortune 500 companies.
But in Canada, the situation remains legally and ethically unclear.
The federal Human Rights Commission prohibits discrimination on the basis of a disability, which includes drug or alcohol addiction. It has opposed pre-employment and random drug tests, but is reviewing those policies after recent court rulings, says its 2006 annual report, but it has yet to release new guidelines.
"Testing reveals all kinds of personal information that has nothing to do with drugs," said Murray Mollard, executive director of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. For example, it can reveal medical conditions or pregnancy, he said. As well, watching someone urinate into a cup is degrading and intrusive, he said.
...
B.C. companies test employees for drug use more than any other province, except Alberta. Drug testing is performed by 18.2 per cent of companies with 100 or more employees in B.C. That compares with 4.6 per cent in Ontario and 25.4 per cent in Alberta, said Macdonald.
One reason is that B.C. has more resource and transportation companies, such as forestry, mining, construction, shipping, rail, trucking and aviation, he said.
posted
I'm not sure how I feel about drug testing in the workplace -- I remember peeing in a cup at least twice, both jobs through a temp agency (one was even a government contract) but they were before I could even start working there. The thing is, when there is heavy equipment or a complicated job, drug use is a super duper liability. You can put other people at risk, as well as the company's resources. I can understand testing under those circumstances, I think. My dad once had to fire someone who failed a drug test, after something happened at the warehouse that ended up being fairly dangerous and costing the company thousands of dollars (this prompted the test to begin with).
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would have several serious concerns about such a program. I would want answers to the following questions.
What drugs will they be screening for?
What method will they be using to detect these drugs?
How reliable are these tests and how likely are false positives?
What methods will they employ to protect kids from being disqualified (arrested, stigmatized, etc) based on false positives?
What substances/environments/behaviors are likely to cause false positives?
Will they be collecting information on prescription drugs that could result in false positives?
In the event of a positive test, what actions will be taken?
What procedures are in place to protect students privacy in the event of a preliminary positive result?
What measures are in place to verify whether a positive result is or is not false?
What will be done with the samples and other data they collect?
Will the samples be stored so that they might be used in future test (such as DNA tests?
What precautions are in place to make sure that medical information collected (such as prescription drugs) is properly protected and destroyed once it is no longer needed?
Drug testing is fairly expensive so my guess is that most schools test only a small fraction of the samples that they collect. (This is true for drug screening in the Olympics and pro-sports, so I can't imagine that high schools test every sample they take). In fact it wouldn't surprise me if high schools don't actually test any of the urine samples they take but they are unlikely to tell you that. The secondary test that are used to verify a preliminary positive result are typically very expensive which is why they are only used in pro-sports once a positive result has been obtained on at least two samples.
The inexpensive preliminary tests they use for drug screening give lots of false positive results. You could test positive for something as simple as having a poppy seed muffin a few days before the test, from asthma medication, birth control pills or a dentist visit. You want to make sure that procedures are in place to make sure that students aren't A) disqualified because of a false positive test and B) that teachers and other students won't get information about preliminary (potentially false) positive results until they have been fully verified. You also want to make sure that any information they collect about prescription drugs is properly protected. Kids take all kinds of prescription drugs that could be potentially embarrassing or even used against them.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have serious concerns about this from the point of view of the fact that this is grade seven for music students. High school music students cannot enhance their performance significantly through the use of drugs. And this is grade seven. They are children! Why is the athletics (or academics) so serious at this age that they need drugs at all? That seems very, very wrong to me.
If kids are that worried, at age 13, about their performance, the entire schools approach to academics, arts and athletics needs a second look.
Also, say this was the later years of high school and there was a more significant, serious approach to sports, it should be the sports kids who are tested, not the music students, and only if they're participating in a serious way, like any serious athlete involved in competitive sports. Otherwise, if pharmaceutical drug mis-use is suspected among other students, that is a problem for the individual students, teachers and their parents.
I am glad that Canada is behind the US in this respect. It feels like a British thing-- a nanny state thing, although I don't think it actually occurs in Britain since athletics are not nearly so crazy intense.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmm, it looks like at least in 2006 that Britain was behind the US in that aspect but looking to catch-up.
quote: John Walters, director of the White House's office of national drug control policy, was speaking after meeting Jim Knight, an education minister. While Mr Walters said he had no authority to comment on the UK's drug policies, he made it clear that the US would continue to promote the tough line on drugs that has interested the British government. ... Up to 700 schools in the US have adopted random drug testing, he said, and one school a week was joining them. He said it was not his business to criticise the reclassification of cannabis in the UK but he believed cannabis was "a dead-end drug and a stepping stone to addiction".
This was in the context of the UK starting a pilot project testing students in Kent.
My guess is that this is not seen as a nanny state thing in the US, but as an extension of the war on drugs, which would explain the inversion of it probably being more common in the US rather than Britain or Canada.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Teshi, I suspect that Tte policy is probably from the district. It is much easier to make a rule that applies to all extracurricular activities at all levels rather then just sports or just serious athletes. I would bet that a lawyer has advised the district that all students in extracurricular need to sign an identical waiver or risk a lawsuit.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: This was in the context of the UK starting a pilot project testing students in Kent.
Thank god I never got tested when I went to school in Kent. Though I suspect they didn't test college students, what with Amsterdam being about 2 hours away by ferry...
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man, that sucks that people are pushing blackmarket adderall on their own children. Where there is demand for such a thing, there is going to be the equivalent of dope cutting and crap.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, all the prescription stimulants I was aware of being sold in my high school were sold by people who had them prescribed for themselves. A parent keen to get their kid stimulants could probably find a way to get a prescription, and anyway you can order them from overseas without a lot of trouble.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
It is funny how the randomized sample works - none of the kids I know that have been tested this year are at all what I might consider high risk for drug use while some I certainly wish they WOULD test never seem to get pulled!
