Hi people! I wanted to get an opinion on what y'all think is right in this situation. My brother's high school is a random drug testing program in which they pull the student out of a class during the year (at random) and test for drugs - but parent's permission is required for enrollment in the program with the school packet turned in at the beginning of the year. Would you all enroll your children in this?
At one end - the drug test is done at random and it has its benefits. On the other hand, I would think that the child might feel the parents don't trust him/her and it might entice the child to do drugs that he/she might not or cause other psychological rifts. On one hand - the child would either know he/she is enrolled in the program or the parent can keep it a secret from the child by going to the school after the packet is turned in and enrolling them in the program this way so the child wouldn't know until he/she is pulled from the classroom and *if since it is based on "random" - but I don't know what is the right decision in this situation and wanted some of your advice...thanks in advance. :)
I don’t really agree with this. I would understand if it was a requirement of students taking specific classes. There are classes that students could injure themselves and others if they are not careful. I imagine being trashed on drugs and working in wood shop might be dangerous. I can't believe they let me use a huge electric saw SOBER, when I was 13. I'm surprised I didn't cut my finger off.
Is this a private or public school? If it is private school they can require what ever they like and the market place will decide if they can keep enough students to be profitable.
If it is public school No pee tests unless there is a reason such as being court ordered on a case by case basis, not everyone in the school.
Public. And it is legal and a program as long as parents sign the form.
I'm sure that school districts come up with programs like this.
What is your view on the subject?
I know from some of our conversations you are willing to give up personal rights for a perceived protection.
I am personally unsure. While it may be invasion of privacy, minors are not granted the constitutional rights of privacy. I have been thinking a lot and haven't decided whether the pro's outweigh the con's. I am getting there though.
Not surprised in your answer, you are consistent.
Your brother will never trust you the same way again.
As a psychology major why do you always lean towards a legal justification for things rather than how people think?
You are leading us to believe you were above this temptation not your brother. He doesn't deserve the trust you got?
I have said I am "not sure" yet. I will let you know when I come to a conclusion of my advice. And this program wasn't in my school when I was in high school, so I can't say whether my parents would or would not have enrolled me in this program or not since they never had the choice..
And I do base it both on psychological and legal principles. Psychologically I know that this can create a rift. At the same time, psychologically I do know that he has a narcissistic personality and high sense of self-worth and the pressure to keep his ego high due to his narcissism and impressing other people might make him fall into peer pressure. Therefore - I am analyzing this based on my brother's psychological profile and what I know of him more than legal justifications per-say.
Well, I think it is a violation of trust, and whilst, as you argue that kids have less rights, people should teach children what it's like to be an adult as early as possible. In real life you're not going to have someone checking that you're doing everything right.
Also I doubt random tests will even effect the amount of people who get into drugs, and really, if they're just searching for weed, it's pointless anyway, weed is good
Another point to think about is what drugs are being tested for? I believe the standard drug tests are looking for the usual line-up of illegals, marijuana, cocaine, heroic, etc. Since marijuana stays in the body and can be detected for a long time, some kids might use other (possibly more dangerous/addicting) drugs if they are out of the body faster to avoid the possibility of detection. I'm not sure of the validity of this but I've read it from multiple sources. Worth considering.
If I had kids, yes I would. I don't feel like it should cause a trust issue or drive the kid to actually do drugs. My parents made it clear that they didn't want up doing drugs, and guess what... I never have, nor have I ever considered doing so. Trust? When my employer has had a random testing policy, I never felt like I was being signaled out, nor did I loose any 'trust'. Heck, I had to be tested on two separate occasions with the same employer. Perhaps a kid may try to shift the blame in these ways if they have a guilty conscious. But in those cases, it's the kid at fault, not the parent.
I would hope that I did everything I could to educate my hypothetical kid. But no matter how you raise them, they can do stupid things. I think of it more as a redundancy check, just in case. Kids can be prone to randomly doing things out of character. So I may trust them 99% of the time, but still realize that given the right pressures they may do something I would never expect from them.If it were a parental request to definitely test your kid I would agree that you certainty don't trust them. But with it being random, I feel that it's less a trust issue and more of a 'just in case' thing.
But if we were to take the trust thing further, should a parent ask to see their kid's report card? Or does not simply taking their word for it concerning their grades also mean that you don't trust them as well?