District 95 is expected to reject the drug testing proposal, because so many parents have complained that they are against it. A recent survey showed that seventy-six percent of the parents disagreed with the drug testing proposal.

The drug testing proposal upset a lot of parents, because they felt that they’re parental responsibilities were being taken away from them. They also felt that it was unfair to only drug test these particular students who were involved in activities. Board member Michael Finn who showed concern for these parents stated, “It’s our job to educate, it’s the police’s job to police. It’s the parents’ job to parent.”

Finn also stated that he’s pleased that these residents will have closure. “It will end a chapter and allow us to focus on what needs to get done next,” said Finn, who had been critical of the proposal.

Many of the parents who spoke against the plan said it infringed on their parental responsibilities. Others voiced concerns about privacy, and some opposed the plan because it singled out students in extracurricular programs and were worried about their children’s privacy.

Board member, Tony Pietro who at first supported random drug testing, has now changed his mind stating that he “sees now that it isn’t a good idea.” Pietro was involved in the months of discussions and was shown the results of the most recent survey.

Doug Goldberg a board member for the District 95 said that although these drug testing may not be right for this community, the effort got people talking about teen drug use.

The participating schools are hoping that giving random drug tests will scare students from doing drugs. If a student tests positive they will be forced to seek treatment before the substance abuse gets worse in their life.

Young and teenage students who do have drug abuse problems are hurting many other people besides themselves physically. Drug abuse in schools affects the teaching environment, other students, family, friends and anyone they come in contact with.

The purpose of conducting student drug testing is not to discipline the student, but to help them. Counseling and follow-up screening would result in hopes to intervene before the drug problem gets out of hand. The positive testing drug abusers can also be refereed to substance treatment programs to start a recovery process.

Although some might argue that school drug testing could be considered harassing teenagers and an invasion of privacy, the truth is that teens are vulnerable and susceptible to drug abuse. The choices they make in high school affects their future in ways they can’t yet imagine. If a teen decides to do ingest mind altering substances, the more likely it is that student will develop an addiction or permanently damage their brain. Likewise, studies show that teens that do not do drugs are less likely to have a drug abuse problem later in their life.

Studies have been conducted and although random drug testing has not made schools 100% drug free, the numbers are decreasing.

There are several methods that schools use to test students. It is up to the school to decide what type sample collection would work best for them. The standard student drug testing method screens urine for the following five substances: marijuana, cocaine, opioids, amphetamines, and PCP. The other methods of collection are hair, sweat or a saliva drug test.

With the spirit  of prevention in mind, a pilot program in Suffolk County, New York has begun offering parents free drug tests for use at home. The standard urinalysis drug test is capable of detecting marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, Vicadin, and Xanax and are relatively simple to administer. Parents have been very receptive to the idea of drug testing simply because they want to put an end to the uncertainty. The Suffolk County drug testing program has been immensely successful and could end up providing a model for similar proposals around the country.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/parents-pick-free-drug-kits-kids/story?id=9164002

Reasonable suspicion testing is used by employers who have a legitimate reason to think an employee is using drugs. Observable symptoms of drug use, erratic behavior, or excessive absenteeism can all provide a basis for reasonable suspicion testing. Post-accident drug testing is used in the immediate aftermath of an on the job accident. This type of employment drug testing is crucial because, more often than not, on the job accidents result in property damage or personal injury. In these cases, liability becomes the main issue and determining if any of the parties involved were influenced by drugs or alcohol can protect employers from unscrupulous lawsuits or worker’s compensation claims. Return to duty drug testing is used when an employee is returning to work from a long period away, perhaps for maternity leave or a personal sabbatical. This type of employment drug testing should also be used for employees who have failed a drug test previously and have completed the necessary counseling and recovery efforts.

http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/drugs/workingpartners/dfworkplace/dt.asp