kids, today we're going to learn how to pee into a cup

[rone]

A private high school in East Buttfuck, Illinois, will require all its students to undergo drug testing next fall. At least that can't happen in public schools; still, i don't see how these clowns are going to get away with testing kids without parental approval. Are they going to expel kids who won't test? That'll be a great way of getting parents to keep their kids enrolled in your school.

Comments

[lots42.livejournal.com]

And of course someone is going to test positive who really isn't, get kicked out on the basis of one test and lawsuits fly

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Yeah, a friend suggested that some smart-aleck kid set up a booth outside school giving away free poppy seed muffins. Everyone tests positive!

[eviltofu.livejournal.com]

I want the tests to cover the staff as well!

[ex-askesis860.livejournal.com]

At least that can't happen in public schools

Yet. See Tuesday's SC decision. (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Police-Searches.html) I'm considering holding a wake for the Fourth Amendment.

[boutell.livejournal.com]

Officer Badcop: All RIGHT! Now that bag of confiscated crack I bring on every bust will come in TWICE as handy!

[schwa242.livejournal.com]

But at least it beats cops bursting in on a drug bust and having all the students hit the floor at gunpoint ;)

-- Schwa ---

[opadit.livejournal.com]

The article reports that the testing will be done on hair samples. I guess most boys keep their hair short -- and there might even be a rule at this school requiring boys to wear their hair shorter than the Beatles' -- but surely hair-testing will yield more false positives than piss testing. I'm thinking about the time that could elapse between the user's last dose and the date the hair sample is taken. It would be too bad if a kid got a crew-cut in March of 8th grade, smoked some weed during Spring Break, never smoked again, and didn't cut his hair for several months, then tested positive in September of 9th grade. (The article mentions "young men" as if it's an all-boys school.)

I bet they made this announcement after parents had made their tuition payments (or at least their non-refundable deposits) for next year. I wonder how much the parents will protest this, whether they'll demand procedures for any positive results, what policy the school will develop for interpreting "real" positives, what the justification is for testing hair rather than piss. The one parent quoted spoke in favor of the policy but seemed to me to be speaking from the assumption that testing is always accurate and that proof of use equals proof of abuse and addiction.

Thanks for posting the article, Ron.