Drug Testing Kids

[King Rat]

I heard an interesting on FoxNews a few minutes ago. It was a poll or something on whether kids in school should be subjected to random drug testing. I haven't thought about it enough to make my mind up yet but it sounds like a good idea.

What do you think?

[granny2young]

I am not sure how I feel about this. I lean towards NO, that it should be the parent's responsibilty if they feel it is warranted, but not the schools. Our schools are not babysitters and should not be raising our children. If the schools would focus more on teaching the children math and english instead of sex ed and drug testing, our kids might learn something; but like I said, I am a little mixed on the idea.

[King Rat]

I agree with everything you said but I am leaning toward yes. At least for kids above a certain age. That leaning actually goes against my normal way of thinking but Bill O'Rielly made the statement last night that the idea it to make it as hard as possible for kids to use drugs. That comment kinda stuck with me, I guess. I can get tested here at work and fired if I flunk so why shouldn't my kids be able to get tested at school?

Maybe it should only be if the parents give prior permission - maybe at the first of each year.

[granny2young]

well if they know they are going to be tested and when, that is no good either. I still think we should have different rules for kids than adults; and then again, what if the drug test is positive? you didn't catch them doing it, so actually there is no crime to charge them with. I don't think this pressure should be put on educators, they should stick to reading and writing.

[King Rat]

It would have to be random - with the ability to test in cases of suspected behavior (we all know the teachers have a pretty good idea who these kids are).

I wouldn't support it if the kids were charged with a crime. I think it should only be a way of getting these kids into some type of mandatory program to get them off the stuff. Maybe take some privileges away, but not criminal charges.

[Crimson]

If I'm going to reply I might as well be honest. Schools drug testing our kids is absolute bull$%*!. The schools have no right to do such a thing. That is my job as a parent. Just as it is my job as a parent to make sure my children know enough about such stuff to know better than to do it. My kids go to school to learn to read, write, etc. Giving drug tests to participate in sports is one thing... but not random drug tests just because they're enrolled. I pay taxes so that my children can go to school and become educated not so that the schools can parent my children for me.

I could understand this for repeat offenders. Problem children. Make it part of their 'educational parole' or something. Let's use the three strike law as a basis. First time you get in trouble at school you're put on 'educational probation' and are now subject to random drug screenings. Doesn't mean it will happen, but it could. If by chance you are tested and it proves to be positive then, hands down, you're expelled permanently. Otherwise, if you always test clean, you have three chances.

I do think the schools should be more strict. But I do not believe they have the right to police my children without them having first done something wrong. What happened to Innocent until proven guilty, hmm?

[King Rat]

As a parent I have the right to send my child to a public school where he/she will be safe. Some parents don't care enough about their kids to worry about their drug use. I don' t want my child in the same classroom with them.

I look at it sorta like head lice. It is a parent's responsibilty to make sure their kids don't have the bugs but many don't. And I'm glad the teachers have the authority to do random head checks and send home the kids who have it. I'm sure some ACLU types would think that a violation of a kid's privacy. I don't.

Many public schools, especially in larger cities, are so out of control that teachers simply can't teach. How can you have dicipline if you don't get rid of the drugs? Isn't it more humane to identify the kids using drugs and force them into treatment than to simply let them use drugs until they get into trouble then kick them out into the streets?

[granny2young]

That is my thinking Crimson. Rat, have you ever seen the way a child is treated that has head lice? I agree it is a serious thing and should be and has to be dealth with, but the way I saw it done, I think I would rather my kids get head lice than to be treated the way this chid was. I happened to be at the school on the day they were random checking for head lice. The teacher walked around the room to each desk with a little wire fumbling through their hair. That's fine, but when she found one little boy with head lice, she skreeched like she had saw a snake, grabbed the kid by the arm and rushed him out into the hallway, then as fast as she did that, janitoral was in there spraying his desk and pulling his papers out of his desk like they had vomit on them. The kids sitting near the little boy was asked to move to the side of the classroom and stand by the window while their seats were sprayed. The teacher then proceeded to explain to a bunch of 8 year old kids that their classmate had "bugs" in his hair. The next day at school my daughter said that he was treated like he had the plague and the kids laughed at him and no one would play with him and he even got kicked on the playground cause he got too close.

Head lice is bad, but is not something that should affect a child their entire life. Those kids will always treat that little boy differently because the teacher didn't have enough freaking defency to be discrete and handle it in a better way.

I also feel the same way about corporal punishment in the schools. I am the parent, not the teachers. I know my child better than anyone, and some decisions are mine and their father, and ours alone. I do, however, appreciate a heads up if my child is suspected of doing something, or if they were problem children, but I would never stand for treating my child like a criminal.

[TF Admin]

The funny thing is you all make good points. I have a 2 year old and I have been thinking about such things. I don't believe the school should be doing random drug testing, like Crimson said. School is not a babysitter, although many parents treat it as such, it is to get an education. If a kid causes trouble, and drugs are suspected, then why not have the parents show proof that THEY have had their kid tested for drugs, and the outcome of which, should be set in school policy, that THE PARENTS should have them retested in say 90 days. The child is on probation, until his second drug test comes back negative for anything. If it's positive, then the child is suspended until he doesn't glow on a drug test.

It's pretty simple, you empower the parents to get their act together, and THEY PAY FOR IT, not the taxpayers. I'm sick of parent's rights being stripped away by those who cannot parent worth a damn, and their ineptitude hurts those that are trying to do a good job.

TFADMIN

[granny2young]

That's a good point too TF, is the $ aspect of it. Should we, as tax payers, be required to pay for it, even if drugs are suspected? I think not. Our teachers are educators, not enforcers of the law or parents. Give them a break and let them do what they went to college and got a degree for. If drugs are suspected, call the cops! That is what they went to school and get pd for.

[King Rat]

I would be 100% behind your method, TF. I just don't see it ever being implimented, though, because it would cause such a political football. Dems would say it was punishing the poor, etc..

I, too, hate the errosion of parental responsibility and the intrusion of school authority (though I favor corporal punishment).

But we have to face reality and the reality is that drugs are destroying so many kids - and kids are our future. Look at the pitiful array of pols we have now thanks to the 60's culture.

D.A.R.E, in my opinion, is a joke - a waste of tax money. Why not rechannel that money to pay for drug testing.

I would much rather have a program in place where testing is done based on behavior instead of randomness but, again, the realism is that it would never be allowed. The ACLU would claim racial profiling. Heck, we can't even profile people getting onto airplanes.

There are so many kids out there who have really crummy parents. It isn't the kids' fault. I just wish society could come up with some way to help those kids before they become inmates. Pay the tax money to test and treat them while they are young or pay it to keep them in prison when they are older.

Maybe I'm just changing as I get older. Two years ago the rumor started that Pontotoc County schools was thinking of requiring uniforms. I was all ready to yank my kid from school and hire a lawyer. Now I'm not sure it wouldn't be a good idea. Go figure.....

[Crimson]

I don't support corporal punishment of my kid... unless I'm the one doing it. If he gets in trouble at school the school should report it to me and /I/ will deal with it. I don't want anyone whooping my kid but me (Or his mother). Thats our job as parents. I'm going to stick with the three strikes thing I talked about in my last pose.

I would like to mention, however, that I don't think uniforms are all that bad of an idea. Well, more like an enforced dress code than anything. The kids wouldn't have to wear an exact uniform but saying that they have to wear pants that fit, shirts that can be tucked in... stuff like that. Hell, long pants (jeans, trousers, cargo pants, whatever) and polo shirts or t-shirts would do. Pick your own colors as long as they're one solid color with no designs and fit properly (No f'ing underwear showing. Pull your damn pants up). And you'd have to wear shoes. No sandals. No flip-flops. No high heels. Real shoes/boots.

Sorry, I'll quit rambling now. =)

[King Rat]

I agree with your concept of a "uniform", Crimson. I was referring to uniforms that all look exactly alike.

[granny2young]

I agree. I specifically made it a point at the start of every school year to sign a paper that said I DO NOT GIVE ANYONE PERMISSION TO ADMINISTER CORPORAL PUNISHMENT ON MY CHILD. If you feel it is warranted, please contact me at this number and summons me to the school immediately. I am sure I have told of the story of my kindegarden daughter getting a paddling and recieved a big apology the next day to me and her teacher because she had a bad day, her son had wrecked her car, her husband was sick off work, and her daughter was pregnant, so she decided to beat 6 kids with a board who didn't get finished with a coloring sheet when she thought they should have been done. Needless to say she had 6 angry parents at her door the next morning, and I made sure someone having a bad day never took it out on my kids again and I meant it! DON'T HIT MY KIDS WITH A BOARD! I would get taken to jail if I done that and they are my kids! That's real bright.

When my oldest daughter was in the 9th grade she started hanging with the wrong kids and not studying and going to parties we didn't like, etc. To get a handle on her we moved her to a private school. Best move we ever did for her or we would have lost her to the world for sure. They had uniforms. It was a plaid skirt that we had to have made from a pattern, and a simple button up white shirt, black socks or hose and black or brown shoes (no open toed shoes.) For gym class they kept a pair of plain blue gym shorts, white socks, solid white sneakers and a white tee-shirt with no writing on it. It sure made my life a lot easier, and hers. She will argue that point because she claims it took away her individuality to an extent, but that is because everytime I got a call that she had broken the uniform code I would make her wear the uniform all afternoon and the following weekend. She eventually learned that sneaking that other shirt in her book bag wouldn't work (LOL.) We had one daughter in public school with no uniforms and and the other in private school with uniforms. Now that it is all said and done and over with, they will both agree that the uniforms were better because no kid was trying to "outstage" the other. It done away with the cliques that look down on the kids who cannot afford designer jeans and made the ones who couldn't have the nice things feel better about themselves and helped them to blend in. It was certainly easier on my pocketbook too, not having to keep up with the Jones' kids.

[King Rat]

My main problem with the uniforms is that I wonder if it will condition "individuality" out of our kids. The thought of the government telling me how to dress my kids, and the mental effect it might have on the kids. I can imagine a generation of young adults (future leaders) who see nothing wrong with the government making those kinds of decisons for us.

And I don't buy the "keeping up with the Jones" argument because it just delays the inevitable and, perhaps, makes it worse. Imagine a kid growing up in an environment where everyone dresses the same then gets out into the real world and realizes that there are "haves" and "have nots" and doesn't know how to deal with it. They don't know how to interact with someone who can afford a $200 pair of tennis shoes. So, since they are our future leaders, socialism to them might look like the perfect solution. After all, they would have been raised under the concept that everyone is supposed to have the same (or at least if they have more they are supposed to hide it).

But I have no problem with private schools mandating uniforms - they are not the government.

We should be teaching our kids that they are just as good as anyone else regardless of how much they can afford to spend on clothes. Not making the "haves" dress down to hide the fact they have money.

And that teacher you mentioned, G2Y, who humiluated the poor kid with head lice should have been fired. He/she has no business even being around kids.