You should read the story more closely, my friend:
When Wilson ordered the search, the only evidence that Savana had violated school policy was the uncorroborated accusation from Marissa, who was in trouble herself and eager to shift the blame. Even Marissa (who had pills in her pockets, not her underwear) did not claim that Savana currently possessed any pills, let alone that she had hidden them under her clothes.Savana, who was closely supervised after Wilson approached her, did not have an opportunity to stash contraband.
So your objection to this whole incident is that she shouldn't have been searched at all because, at best, all they would have found would have been more Advil. But the Advil was against school policy. Which means you're saying they should have the policy (to please the parents) but not enforce it (to please the students).
No, my objection to this whole incident is one of scope: this girl was subjected to a strip-search because she was merely accused by another girl of possessing Advil. Honestly, you can't appreciate how ridiculous this whole thing has become? On nothing but an uncorroborated accusation from a girl already in trouble for doing something she shouldn't have done, this school administrator thought it perfectly reasonable to force another girl to disrobe, and present her private parts to another administrator, to prove the allegations false. "Innocent until proven guilty" has turned into "guilty until you can prove yourself innocent."I'm sure you've never been the subject of a strip-search, of course, because you lead such a squeaky-clean life and you're such a good friend to the law enforcement community, but I can tell you from personal knowledge that a strip-search is 100% not fun. But then again, for all intents and purposes, this little girl was just like you---perfectly innocent, just going about her life; she just happened to be accused by someone of doing something she wasn't doing. I can't imagine that if you found yourself in similar circumstances, you'd find such an unwarranted and invasive search perfectly sane and reasonable.
So your objection to this whole incident is that she shouldn't have been searched at all because the incident only involved Advil? (Even though Advil is against school policy.) I guess that the student who was caught with Advil shouldn't be punished either because it was only Advil -- hard to punish one and not the other.
But if this incident involved, say, Ecstasy, then it would be OK to strip search the girl. No? Maybe Ecstasy would allow a backpack search only. Marijuana would be a backpack plus pockets in clothing. Cocaine would be backpack plus pockets plus an outside pat down. Opiates, on the other hand ....
Put that in writing and we'll get the new Hemingway's Ghost drug policy out to every school as soon as possible.