Drug Testing of High School Athletes

The Supreme Court heard a case today in which the legality of testing high school athletes for drugs was questioned.

The ACLU & friends argue that it is unconstitutional and contrary to the 4th Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search without probable cause.

The school is arguing that by choosing to represent the school in athletics, students open themselves up to greater scrutiny.

Here's how I see it: I had to pee in a cup when I came to work for SAIC. SAIC doesn't want druggies working for them. That's fine. By choosing to work here, I am opening myself up to a drug test. The school does not want drug users to represent them at athletics. They are asking that athletes take drug tests. By choosing to be on an athletic team, students are opening themselves up to drug tests.

So while I support the legalization of drugs, I have no problem with drug tests, provided you are given a way to avoid them. Don't want to pee in a cup? Don't sign up to play football for your school.

What do you think?

[Sperlock]

I agree with your view. It was your choice to work for SAIC and it is a student's choice to play in school sports. As long as the conditions are laid out for the students, they should stop bitching about it. Nobody is forcing them to play in school sports.

[verbatim]

I wholeheartedly agree. I play a number of sports for our school, and i would like to see them happen. But at least extend them to the staff, coaches, etc... I really dont specifically care one way or the other, but if you are gonna do it, then do it RIGHT. Test all the atheletes, just not 'randomly' picking a few.


And as a high school soph, i have to remember that I HAVE NO RIGHTS WHATSOEVER when i am in school. So you might as well. The aclu has a lot of work cut out for itself when it comes to schools. And nobody is really willing to care, cause most of us cant vote anyways.

[Phrontistes]

High school athletes doping up? What the hell? Did I miss something? As a high-school senior, I have to say I'm shocked. Even my school has some big rivalries but I highly doubt any of our athletes use performance-enhancing drugs for a boost. The risks aren't worth the rewards, especially in high school. Jeez... I guess it won't be long till we have toddlers all hopped up on steroids so they can be the first to walk.

As for the ACLU's case, I don't think they have one. Like verbatim said, you have close-to-zero rights on campus already. Besides, by voluntarily joining a sports team, you choose to abide by the school's sports-participation regulations, which, presumably, include the ban of drugs.

[Undertoad]

Yes, and if the student wants to go to college, while preserving their rights but having no after-school acitvities on their resume, well that's just too bad for them.

They wanted to preserve their rights... or just to avoid having to pee in front of their teacher. Or perhaps they were aware of the fact that drug tests have numerous false positives and wanted to be cautious. And now that's on their permanent record. I guess this is the part of the "acceptable losses" of the drug war?

Quiz question #1: Drug tests test for drugs. True or false?

Look, no one has a right to after-school activities such as sports without drug testing. If you join up, you make some sacrifices - some of your time after school, the streak you've got going for not pissing in a cup, etc. Yeah, I want to get a job that pays lots of money and I'm in a position of trust and responsibility. I want to get that without having to take time out of my day, go down to a shitty medical clinic and fill a beaker with like 20 ounces of hot urine. But I don't have a right to a job without pissing in a jar. It's just not written that way.

I have no after-school activities on my resume. I've talked to many schools, and they have no apprehensions about bringing me on board. Wow. Big fuckin' deal, I wasn't a star quarterback or the leading scorer on my school's basketball team. They know that not all kids do that shit, and that's okay.

If you *want* to have all that goody shit on your record, you make some sacrifices. Like peeing in a cup maybe.

Everyone that has lived a life of "preserving their rights" has made some sacrifices. Sometimes they give their lives. Sometimes they turn down a job because they have to pee in a cup.

As for false positives - those are always cleared up. My sister has back spasms and was on some tylenol with codeine. She got a false positive for morphine. She told 'em she was on the pill, showed the prescription, and she got the job. Big deal.

Originally posted by Phrontistes
High school athletes doping up? What the hell? Did I miss something?

Apparently. It's not about performance-enhancing drugs. If you don't know a football player or basketball player that has smoked weed... well, then you don't know too many basketball or football players.

[jaguar]

If it was for peformance enchancing drugs (which aren't as uncommon as you'd think, even at high school level stuff, which can open directly into pro league and serious $) fine, but for recreational stuff? Worries me it might be start of a push for random drug testing of *all* students, that frankly, i find that extremely distrubing (not that i've got anyhting to hide).

Now <b>that</b> (testing on all students) I would object to. Public education *is* something that we're guaranteed to, and they can't rightfully take that away from you.

I think drug testing on all students would be shot down, simply because it's a pain in the ass and an invasion of privacy for no good reason.

[jaguar]

Hmmm i honestly don't know anymore. Some private schools here are trialing it, thinkfuly i'm at a public school (technicially) but even thethough is scary. I mean even testing athaletes for recreational drugs is a tad...questionable, i mean i can't see hwo having hte occasional joint is going to affect your peformance that is of relavence to the sport.

It doesn't have to be affecting their performance at the sport. Schools simply don't want drug users representing them at athletics. Maybe they don't want there to be a scene if the user gets caught. Maybe they don't want to lose one of their best players if they get busted. That's okay. It's their choice.

As for private schools, well, there isn't much you can do about that. There <b>are</b> many studies about drugs affecting your work and schooling. Not only that, but I personally have witnessed kids getting into drugs and drinking and then flunking out of high school. Private schools need to sell themselves. They don't need newspaper headlines like "Calvert Hall student dies of overdose" and shit like that. They just don't.

You wanna go to private school? You make some sacrifices.

[Phrontistes]

Oh... just weed. Sorry, my mistake I'm just a dumbass. Twice in my school district (once in my school and once in one nearby), the police put undercover agents in a lot of classes to catch drug dealers. I was quite surprise to hear there was no uproar about students' rights and such, except from a few radical teachers.

Lots of people do weed, but I don't see why athletes should be singled out - it's illegal for any student to be doing it, right? Why not impose the same restriction on all extracurricular activities, then you could say "Joining Chess Club is completely voluntary - if you don't want to pee in a cup, don't join!" Technically speaking, you wouldn't be denying anyone the right to public education, just excluding them from everything but going to class.

Right. But they haven't proposed that, so we haven't talked about it.

I'm not sure exactly <b>what</b> the tests are for, but I gather that it's for recreational-use drugs, not performance enhancing.

[Undertoad]

No, that's precisely what they are proposing. Testing of athletes has already been ruled contitutional; they're debating it for ALL after-school activities.

Link

I guess my quiz question was too easy? Drug tests do not test for drugs. They test for metabolites produced by the human body.

Yowza!

MSNBC's article has been edited heavily, and it now says shit about "all extracurricular activities". GG, MSNBC. Oh well.

Well, it sure doesn't change the fact that you can opt out of the drug tests by opting out of extracurricular activities. It may not be a pleasant choice to make. Shit, it might not even be fair. Unfortunately, fair is a made up word. It doesn't apply in this world. Nothing's fair. Life is tough. Sometimes you're forced to make tough choices.

I would have loved to have coasted through my first 20 years and had everything my way. I would love to never have to make concessions to get something I want - like parting with my money to build that new computer, or getting a credit card (and therefore throwing away some privacy) so that eventually I can have enough credit to get a car and a house and that sort of thing. But I made those concessions because life is too short to sit around smugly being "right". Yeah, drug tests are a pain in the ass. You don't want to take it? Fine. Don't take it. If you're in the Chess Club and they come to you and say they want you to take a drug test, then quit the club and tell them to go fuck themselves. That's a decision for you to make. Just don't sit there and bitch about how it's not fair or it's unconstitutional. There is no right to a Chess Club.

Even if drugs are legalized, there will still be drug tests. SAIC still won't want to hire heroin addicts of cokeheads. Schools still won't want their star basketball players to end up like Len Bias.

You can sit there, unemployed, and be right. You have exercised your power to <b>choose</b>. That's your choice.