this essay talks about the contraversial topic of tandom drug testing in public highschools. It uses San Luis Obispo High School as an example. This paper has a negative bias towards drug testing, and comes from the perspective of a parent.
Public High Schools: Your Childs New Parent?
Imagine your son or daughter sitting in choir class and hearing their name called out along with several others over the intercom asking them to report to the high school auditorium where they will be drug tested in association with their involvement in one of the school's extracurricular activities. From the auditorium they are taken by a teacher into the bathroom and asked to urinate in a cup while the teacher stands outside of the stall listening for "normal" sounds. The teacher then proceeds to check the urine for warmth and clarity before putting the sample into a package to be tested.
This is exactly what happened to Lindsay Earls, a sixteen year old sophomore in Tecumseh, Oklahoma. On June 27, 2002 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 5-4 to allow public schools the authority to perform random drug tests on students who are involved in any type of extracurricular activities at the school, ruling that the need to stem drug use in schools outweighs students' right to privacy. As a parent, I believe that San Luis Obispo High School should not implement a random drug-testing program of its students involved in extra curricular activities.
Despite what the Supreme Court ruled, random drug testing in public high schools is an invasion of the student's privacy. The fourth amendment to our constitution which states "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no...