FOR MANY kids, the drama of attending school reads like an after-school special full of chintzy melodrama. It's
unlikely, though, that any of those stereotypical students had to submit to a drug test. A lot of children in gym
classes think it's bad enough that they have to change with their peers in the locker room every day. Now those who
participate in extracurricalur activities other than sports might have to add urinating into a Dixie cup at the
request of a teacher. The Supreme Court now must decide whether to expand random drug tests to the wider student
population. While the testing undoubtedly will cause some initial embarrassment, the Supreme Court should approve
the extension of drug tests to other extracurricular activities beyond the attention solely placed on student
athletes.
The case currently under debate stems from a Tecumseh, Oklahoma school district that in 1998 decided to extend its
student drug tests to other competitive extracurricular groups such as chorus and band. After having to provide a
urine sample to teachers, a former choir member sued on the grounds that officials had no reasonable evidence to
suspect her of using drugs. The Supreme Court, which in 1995 voted 6-3 to allow the random testing of student
athletes, after hearing arguments the other week now has the case of Earls v. Board of Education of Tecumseh Public
School District in its hands. A decision is expected sometime this summer.
The 1995 ruling as it stands, unjustly singles out athletes. According to the Court, the rights of athletes are not
abridged by the tests because of the safety risks involved in sports and the already apparent lack of privacy in
locker rooms. These are slim grounds to stand on. There's an equal chance of bodily harm present in participating in
band considering some of the heavy instruments involved. Few people would want to be around a doped up musician
lugging around a tuba, let alone jump in front of a couple of large linebackers who use performance enhancing drugs.
In addition, one can't argue that it's OK for athletes to be tested because it's already convenient since they share
open locker rooms'
Opponents of drug testing, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, argue that such procedures violate students'
Fourth Amendment protection from illegal search and seizure. If that's the case, then athletes are getting the short
end of the deal. They have an equal claim on constitutional privileges. As crude as it sounds, if one group's rights
are going to be breached, then everybody else's should too.
Only testing athletes also perpetuates their unreasonable stereotypes. Contrary to some popular belief, athletes
aren't street thugs who only care about their sport as a free ride to college and cannot believe themselves immune
to the consequences of drug use. In fact, in today's schools where students involve themselves in such a wide range
of activities, the prized captain of the football team may also be the class valedictorian or esteemed cellist. So
to imply by the selectivity of the testing to athletes that they are more likely to use drugs than students in other
activities is unwarranted.
Those who oppose random student drug testing also do so arguing that providing a urine sample causes embarrassment
to a student. It's no more shameful, though, than any other childhood rite of passage. Certainly no one supports
preventing students from talking in front of the class for fear that someone might be embarrassed. Of course, drug
testing is a little more personal, but if privacy is an issue, then the way in which the tests are performed can be
modified to ensure the utmost discretion.
Above all, students who do not use drugs should not worry about the tests. If they have nothing to hide, they can
have no qualms in confirming their innocence. Knowing that everyone is under the same supervision should erase the
stigma that they might feel in thinking they are unfairly being chosen.
Drug testing has become a fact of everyday life in America. It's a preventative measure to keep kids off drugs, not
a witch hunt, and student athletes should not become the sole test subjects use to gage drug use in American
schools. The Supreme Court must see that drug testing is an all or nothing deal.
(Becky Krystal is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at bkrystal@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 hours agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 2 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
