Posted on 10/08/2002 4:35:09 AM PDT by Wolfie
New Frontier in Random Drug Testing: Checking High Schoolers for Tobacco
Breath mints won't cut it anymore for students who have been smoking in the bathroom -- some schools around the country are administering urine tests to teenagers to find out whether they have been using tobacco.
Opponents say such testing violates students' rights and can keep them out of the extracurricular activities they need to stay on track. But some advocates say smoking in the boys' room is a ticket to more serious drug use.
"Some addicted drug users look back to cigarettes as the start of it all," said Jeff McAlpin, director of marketing for EDPM, a Birmingham drug-testing company.
Short of catching them in the act, school officials previously had no way of proving students had been smoking.
Testing students for drugs has spread in recent years and was given a boost in June when the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed random testing of those in extracurricular activities. Tobacco can easily be added to the usual battery of tests.
"I agree with it," said 16-year-old Vestavia Hills High School junior Rosemary Stafford, a member of the marching band. "It's illegal, it's addictive. Maybe the punishment shouldn't be as severe, but they should test for it."
In Alabama, where the legal age for purchasing and smoking tobacco products is 19, about a dozen districts, mostly in the Birmingham area, test for nicotine along with alcohol and several illegal drugs, including marijuana.
In most cases, the penalties for testing positive for cotinine -- a metabolic byproduct that remains in the body after smoking or chewing tobacco -- are the same as those for illegal drugs: The student's parents are notified and he or she is usually placed on school probation and briefly suspended from sports or other activities.
Alabama's Hoover school system randomly tested 679 of its 1,500 athletes for drug use this past school year. Fourteen high school students tested positive, 12 of them for tobacco.
Elsewhere around the country, schools in Blackford County, Ind., test for tobacco use in athletes, participants in other extracurricular activities, and students who take driver's education or apply for parking permits.
In Lockney, Texas, a federal judge recently struck down the district's testing of all students for the use of drugs, alcohol and tobacco.
In Columbia County, Fla., the school board will vote Tuesday on a testing policy that would include tobacco. Teenagers who take part in extracurricular activities or apply for permits to drive to school would be screened.
"Tobacco does and will affect a larger majority of the students than alcohol or drugs," said Gloria Spizey, the county's coordinator for Safe and Drug-Free Schools. "Tobacco use can be devastating. We felt it needed to stand with the other drugs."
Screenings can detect cotinine for up to 10 days in regular smokers of about a half a pack, or 10 cigarettes, a day, McAlpin said. Experts say it is unlikely that cotinine would collect in people exposed to secondhand smoke.
"Tobacco is illegal for them to have -- it's also a health and safety issue," said Phil Hastings, supervisor of safety and alternative education for schools in Decatur, which recently adopted a testing program that includes tobacco. "We've got a responsibility to let the kids know the dangers of tobacco use."
While random drug testing overall is being fought by the American Civil Liberties Union and students' rights groups, the addition of nicotine testing has drawn little opposition.
Guidelines published last month by the White House drug office do not specifically address tobacco testing.
"On tobacco, we have the same policy as on testing for drugs -- it may not be right for every school and community," said Jennifer de Vallance, press secretary for the office. "We encourage parents and officials to assess the extent and nature of the tobacco problem."
Shawn Heller, executive director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy in Washington, said tobacco use by teen-agers is a major problem, but testing for it is just another step in the invasion of students' privacy.
"We're making schools like prisons," he said.
I think post #58 addresses that.
It's not my position. Ask them.
You missed a question: "what is your basis for claiming that their interpretation of the Constitution is insincere?"
I can't speak for Roscoe, but the fed holds that its WoD is constitutional because of FDR's commerce clause.
Interesting position for a "conservative", no?
Oh? You only oppose federal restrictions on the illicit drug trade?
Produce a single authority or court decision holding that drug laws violate the 10th Amendment.
Interesting position for a "conservative", no?
It's an appalling position for a conservative. But I'm not addressing the truth or falsity of the position; I'm asking Roscoe where is his evidence that those who say it's against the Constitution to prohibit anything are not "honest about their agenda."
That it's false and completely unsupported.
No, Kevin Curry did in post 22, which post 26 makes clear. If you must lie, Roscoe, at least be less stupidly obvious about it.
That has no bearing on its sincerity. Your slurs about their not being "honest about their agenda" are baseless.
As a result of smoking?
I recognize that the fed has no legitimate constitutional authority to conduct a WoD. States may have that power, but only if their own constitutions allow it.
My personal preference is that states do not conduct a WoD. But I recognize their potential legitimate power to do so under the federal Constitution.
Produce a single authority or court decision holding that drug laws violate the 10th Amendment.
I couldn't care less what authorities who act outside their lawful mandates think. All three branches ignore the 10th Amendment. Doing so undermines their authority, not that of the Constitution. I don't need anyone to uphold the 10th Amendment. It stands on its own without the help of the corrupt, socialist disciples of FDR you and yours have disgraced our offices with. Until the 10th is revoked per the amendment process, all you have is usurpation backed with the violence of brute force. Such is the way of tyrants and thugs, and will draw NO respect or recognition from me.
No, he mentioned "pro-dopers." You introduced the term "pro-dope" and I responded to your use of the term.
Pretending that FR doesn't have "pro-dope" posters is nonsense.
Backwards. They have that power unless their state constitutions prohibit it.
[Produce a single authority or court decision holding that drug laws violate the 10th Amendment.]
I couldn't care less what authorities who act outside their lawful mandates think.
Your position is baseless.
They said the same thing about pot smoke. The standard reply is that it is the student's responsibility to avoid exposure to such undesirable activity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.