Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2005 > December > 28 > Entry
Who’s responsible for drug use?
I was in high school in New Jersey when the idea of drug testing for athletes gained popularity and I opposed it. But I have to admit, I applauded New Jersey’s recent decision to require random drug tests for athletes to screen for steroid use.
And yet, a column in the Christian Science Monitor says New Jersey’s plan is well meaning, but wrong, and it’s challenging my view.
Back when I was in high school, they were talking about tests for drugs like marijuana and cocaine and the idea was that students who wanted to play sports would be randomly tested to be sure they were clean. This was a pure drug prevention program designed to deter at large segment of high school kids — those who wished to participate in sports — from taking drugs. The argument in favor essentially said that giving high school kids more disincentives to take drugs was good, period.
What bugged me most was that the program singled out athletes, as if there was some evidence that playing sports made you more likely to take drugs. Some student athletes surely did, but I doubt that athletes as a group were any more at risk than anyone else. I don’t think the testing would have bothered me so much if the rule had also applied to the marching band, chess club and student government, too. The presumption of guilt, instead of innocence, seemed unfairly attached to athletes only.
Steroids, on the other hand, is mostly a problem among athletes and I think certainly much less so among non-athletes. And unlike drugs like marijuana and cocaine, taking steroids is also a form of cheating to gain advantage in sports. Like marijuana and cocaine, steroids also are dangerous to your long term health and well-being.
The CSM column argues that steroid testing puts what should be a student and parent responsibility in the state’s hands. And the author points to the small numbers of steroid takers (certainly less than 10 percent of high school athletes, maybe as low as 3 percent) and also argues the program unfairly forces on the 90 plus percent of clean athletes to prove their innocence.
CSM suggests schools employ awareness programs, which it claims do a better job of dissuading drug use among teens than testing rules and let maturing students start making these adult decisions about drug use on their own under the supervision of parents.
New Jersey’s governor says, “This is a growing public health threat, one we can’t leave up to individual parents, coaches, or schools to handle.”
What do you think are the proper roles of the state, student, parent and school in the case of drug testing?
Permalink | Comments (3) | Categories: Sports and Athletics
Comments
By Terri
December 30, 2005 11:16 AM | Link to this
Dirk, what is in your body can effect me. If it makes you more aggressive toward me, then it effects me. If it makes you unnaturally bigger and stronger than the average then you may hurt me while playing “by the rules” on the field.By Mary
December 30, 2005 12:19 AM | Link to this
A relevant argument that has been/can be made are playing sports at taxpayer expense is a privilege, not a right. New Jersey taxpayers are even paying for the drug tests. Is this an appropriate use of educational tax dollars? New Jersey taxpayers (as in all states) are also subsidizing the after school sports activities with educational tax dollars. Rights of the individual need to be weighed with the rights and interests of the citizens at large on what is essentially a non-educational, non-school day activity. Despite myths, ticket sales and pay to play do not offset the costs. Drug tests for athletes are an additional tax burden on an overburdened taxpayer. Aren’t New Jersey taxes already among the highest in the nation? “Tax and spend”. What about neglected educational needs for all the other students?By Dirk Sniggler
December 28, 2005 7:33 PM | Link to this
What is inside of your body is YOUR OWN business, at least in a free country like America used to be.