Welfare Drug Testing

Welfare Drug Testing
The article, "States Adding Drug Test as Hurdle for Welfare" stated that in three dozen sates
proposed drug testing for the people that are on welfare. However, people say that the tax dollars
given to them are not being misused and that it's promoting stereotypes about the poor. the article
says that in Florida, people that receive welfare have to pay for their own drug tests. Also, it says
that people argued that it was unreasonable to drug test those on welfare and that it was an act of
search and seizure. It's noted that drug tests are getting more and more required for getting jobs.
Ellen Brandom, a state representative in Missouri said, "Working people today work very hard to
make ends meet, and it just doesn't seem fair to them that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The fate of a proposition to drug tests in Indiana welfare beneficiaries in in doubt after the
provision's creator formally pulled back his support and the state organization would control the
system and it would cost $2.3 million during the next two years. However, that is after taking of
consideration $213,000 in foreseen funds expecting that 5 percent of those tested fail and are
temporarily removed from the program. Also, it was mentioned that this program would help stem a
HIV outbreak which would be brought into play by sharing needles among drug abusers. According
to state officials, just around 9,400 adults get installments or accept them in the interest of children,
statewide and around 17,000 children get the advantage. If TANF beneficiaries fail a drug test, they
would have a chance to get counseling. In any case, if they keep on failing drug screenings after
counseling, they would be ineligible for welfare advantages for no less than three months.
Beneficiaries would be in charge of the expense of counseling and positive drug tests. The drug
testings proposition could accelerate an already steep decrease in the quantity of Indiana TANF
beneficiaries. Normal installments are less than $90 a month for each beneficiary. Supporters of
such drug testing measures say they help keep open help from being spent of unlawful
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Drug Testing in the Workplace
Drug Testing in the Workplace:
A Costly Mistake
Abstract
The issue of drug testing in the workplace has sparked an ongoing debate among management.
There are many who feel that it is essential to prevent risks to the greater public caused by substance
abuse while on the job. However, others believe that the costs far outweigh the benefits and that it is
an invasion of privacy. Putting all ethical issues aside, evidence presented in this paper supports the
latter. The costs of drug testing are excessive and only a small percentage of employees are actually
found to be substance users. Drug testing in the work place has a negative effect on productivity;
contrary to what was originally intended. It actually decreases productivity ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Yet another example of how these drug tests are flawed.
The strongest reason for opposing drug testing however, is the invasion of privacy. This occurs
primarily in urinalysis, the most common drug screening process. Not only does this violate a
person's private life, it can open up, and reveal a number of other ailments that the employee may be
suffering and which that individual wishes to hide and keep it to himself. A urinalysis for example
can make public such diseases as an employee's heart condition, depression, epilepsy, diabetes, and
for women the same test can also confirm whether she is pregnant or not. Each of these conditions is
a private and personal manner, and the employer has no right to involve itself in these matters.
Another argument that proponents of drug testing use is the supposed decrease in productivity.
Shepard and Clifton (1998) conducted a study of high tech industries and concluded that managers
did not feel that drug testing improved productivity. In fact, it found that companies that have drug
testing programs actually exhibited lower productivity levels than similar companies that did not
drug test. The reason for this could be a possible perceived concept that management does not trust
its employees and the relationship between the employer and the employees suffers greatly. This
creates an awkward and hostile environment for everyone in the workplace.

Drug Testing in the Workplace
Drug Testing in the Workplace Thesis statement: Administering a drug and alcohol policy can be
challenging, but it can also be beneficial to the manufacturing company. I. Administering a drug and
alcohol policy can be challenging. A. The company must comply with State and Federal laws when
administering the drug and alcohol policy. B. The company must make sure the implementation of
the test is done in a uniform manner. C. Some employees may bring law suits against the employer
for a variety of violations. D. Employers have to pay a collection site to administer the test and have
the specimen sent to a laboratory for certification II. The company may incur many costs that have
been associated with the use of drugs ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Kathryn Keep says, "A drug–using employee is 3.6 times more likely to be involved in an accident,
and five times more likely to make a worker's compensation claim. Impaired judgment can result in
slow reaction times and misguided decisions, which may lead to accidents." Each drug user can cost
a company thousands of dollars, translating into billions spent each year due to work–related
accidents or injuries. The company will have to pay the healthcare

Drug Testing In Schools
Drugs are everywhere around the world. They are in the streets, labs, transportation, and and selling
them. Above all, drugs have been a huge problem to the world and in recent years it is now in
schools where education is important and helpful. It is why i think drug testing should be required in
all the schools. Mainly because of drugs affecting students with their education and focus. Drugs are
never good for your body and can be life threatening. Although some people believe that only
certain amount to none should be drug tested in school, it is best to subject students to drug testing
to prevent them from becoming addicts, commit crimes and not to ruin their life. Drug is a serious
thing and can be dangerous if not handled seriously. The ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
Drug problem in schools are being heard over the U.S and the government are trying, not doing, to
solve this. Big issue with drugs is that it is everywhere and everywhere you go, you will encounter
drugs. Drug leaders export their merchandise to the U.S so it can be sold and so many has entered
the U.S that it is know everywhere. America represents four percent of the world's population, yet it
consumes two thirds of the world's illegal drugs "Drug Testing Information". Even if the U.S start to
fix the drug issue, the U.S is in trouble with the amount of drugs in the U.S. The U.S is struggling to
operate because too many youth, our citizens, are abusing drugs "Drug Testing Information". The
state government or the president of the U.S should fix the damage that is being done to children
forced to attend drug infested schools because it is not their fault that they go to that school "Drug
Testing Information". If the President payed more focus to the student in the U.S with their
education, there would be no problem with drugs, there wouldn't be a problem of drugs being found
in

Drug Testing In America
One may be astonished to discover that in 2012 "..about 17 percent of American high school
students were drinking, smoking or using drugs during the school day" and this number has
remained relatively stagnant throughout the years (Kuczynski–Brown). The amount of students who
take part in the illegal acts of drinking, smoking, and drug use has been difficult to combat. Students
do not understand that these substances can result in harmful consequences down the road. This is
why it is imperative that, as a society, we begin looking for solutions to defeat these harmful habits,
and sometimes, addictions. The earlier we begin to inculcate the effects of these substances on the
young, the better. That is why the prime–time to spread this message ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
However, drug testing is constitutional and has proven to be useful nationwide in America. A simple
search on the World Wide Web will unveil the truth about the constitutionality of drug testing in
America. Two major cases from Supreme Court, Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton and Board of
Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County, et al, Petitioners v.
Lindsay Earls et al, involved the challenging of officials' ability to drug test students in order to
participate in extracurricular activities. In both cases, the ruling resulted in a majority declaring
these test requirements to be constitutional ("Prevention"). Along with the fact that testing has held
its constitutionality in Supreme Court, evaluations have proven that the testing process effectively
minimizes drug use among high school students in extracurricular activities. "Some 16 percent of
students subject to drug testing reported using substances...in the past 30 days, compared with 22
percent of comparable students in schools without the program ('The Effectiveness')." This fact
means that six percent less students in the high schools studied were not using drugs in the schools
which had been implementing the drug tests. If this same number would be a proportionate
reflection of all high schools in America, six percent more of high school students – about 3.3
million teenagers – would not be utilizing drugs and contracting the painful consequences later in
life ("Fast Facts"). That is a humongous number which means a humongous number of kids would
be drug–free, living healthier lives with even brighter futures. The constitutional drug testing in high
school athletics could save over 3 million kids from having to endure possible years of life with
painful illnesses like cancer during

Drug Testing In Sports
Drug Testing
"People take steroids because they BELIEVE they have no other way. Steroids are about comparing
yourself to other people but if you just become the best YOU, you will find out that you will never
need them"– Howard Berman. Drug testing is necessary for the survival of sports. Professional
athletes earn great amounts of money and with it comes major responsibilities. All of them represent
their country, their state, their city, their school, their family, their team, their friends and their fans.
BY doing drugs to improve their athletic performance, they let down all that people that believed in
them and the athlete himself. Those athletes ruin the fair play, their reputation, their health and all
the hope people had on them. They throw away the effort, time, and work, their competitors and
teammates put in the game. And the worst thing, the steal that moment of glory. The use of drugs to
improve an athletic performance is cheating and it could lead into death; therefore, sport
organizations should make drug tests harder and more often so there are not cheaters.
HISTORY ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
And they will remind during the hole twenty–first century. Synthetic hormones were developed in
the 1930s and soon became popular in athletes or soldiers. Nazi doctors administered hormones to
soldiers to increase their strength. In the 1967 Tour the France the English cyclist Tom Simpson, due
to amphetamines, died. this created a new sense of urgency about the need for athletic drug testing.
In 1968, the International Olympic committee introduced drug testing for olympic athletes. in the
1970s, test were able to detect the presence of anabolic steroids. In the early 1990s professional
athletic associations began to ban steroids and test for them, most creating random drug–testing

Drug Testing In Schools. The Topic Of Random Drug Testing
Drug Testing in Schools The topic of random drug testing has been a very controversial one,
especially in the last few years. RSDT (random student drug testing) made a rise in popularity after
being legalized by the United States Supreme Court in 2006. This ruling made testing students who
participate in extracurriculars or drive to school able to be tested for illegal drug abuse. This court
decision is like many others in the aspect that some strongly agree and others heavily disagree. One
side of opinions agrees with the court 's ruling and believes that RSDT programs help prevent drug
abuse among the student population. Other people think that the programs infringe on the rights of
students and offer no usefulness in the fight against ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is important to note that if a student is caught with drugs in their system, rehabilitation and
restriction of extracurriculars are the repercussions. These people also argue that the tests are not too
expensive. Thirty dollars or less was the pre–program cost; this data held true for 91 percent of
surveyors.
In contrast to the people who believe that drug testing is helpful and necessary in schools, others
have a sharp difference in opinions. These people think that "random drug testing is not associated
with a change in the numbers of students who use drugs in any category" ("Random Drug Testing
Cannot Prevent Student Drug Abuse"). Disbelievers in the programs believe that they violate student
rights and feed more money into the drug testing industry. It is also said that since the testing can
only target students who participate in extracurriculars, students can easily get around the tests by
simply not participating in those activities. Evidence of these accusations come from a study out of
The University of Michigan called Monitoring the Future. This study showed little to no difference
in drug abuse among students when comparing schools that participate in the RSDT and have
similar demographic backgrounds. Non supporters also think the programs are ineffective. These
ideas are backed up by The Office of Management and Budget, where they deemed the programs
ineffective in reducing youth drug use, violence, and crime. They also believe that

Drug Testing Essay
There is a big question floating in the air around a lot of people today,
"Is drug testing the welfare constitutional or not?"
When dealing with this we come to many road blocks. We should know and understand the
difference in a drug use problem and a psychiatric disorder. Also understanding the difference in
substance abuse and substance dependence. Confusing the two could be an issue. When you decide
to drug test the welfare there is much more that needs to go into it than just the test to determine if
you should receive benefits from the state or not. Think about the rights we have as Americans have.
Drug testing the welfare can bring legal problems, such as due process. There have been states who
have tried this in the past but of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The housing assistance that the welfare provides doesn't have the same restrictions but can deny a
person because of a drug related or criminal activity.
TANF which is a program that provides cash assistance to needy families. The state is permitted to
drug–test these recipients. Although the states must have a "reasonable suspicion" of illicit drug use
in order to perform the test. TANF and SNAP are two very closely related programs. Administrators
have tried to limit assistance to only "worthy" families. The definition of a worthy family has
changed over the years. In the past it was based on a families morals. As where today it is base on
crime and drugs.
"The goal should be to develop effective, predictable, and fair systems that identify, monitor and
help recipients who experience the full rage of obstacles to self efficiency"
Celia Goetzl, author or "Special Need or Unconstitutional Condition?" discusses that consent, the
Fourth Amendment is the key. She says "The court has dealt with the problem of consent as a waiver
of constitutional rights with an "unconstitutional conditions" analysis." This just means that a person
would be denied the right of receiving welfare benefits for exercising their Fourth Amendment right.
Their goal is to focus on "welfare to work." Trying to make people use welfare assistance as a
platform and eventually be able to not be dependent on it. The fact is that

Drug Testing Persuasive Essay
In this Era of competitive high school sports, the lack of drug testing has high school athletes. Doing
anything to rise to the top and achieve money, fame, and championships. And what they do is
questionable to every parent and student fanbase; may be they train hard or eat a healthy diet, some
of that may be true. But performance enhancing drugs plays a big factor in a high school athlete's
development. There are a lot of performance enhancing drugs being used, but there isn't a
performance enhancing drug that affect the body physically and mentally, such as anabolic steroid.
At first used by professional athletes to performance at the peak potential, to being caught in the
process and facing serious consequences, is now being used by high school athletes it has become a
serious problem. But drug testing should be given to high school because it poses a health risk, give
an unfair advantage to the performance enhancing drug user, it could prevent high school athletes
from being faced ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They are getting the results they've always wanted in just a couple of months and performing at high
levels. Because anabolic steroids are fabricated version of human testosterone, in other words it's
produced in a laboratory instead of the human body. To go in depth, when athlete are training with
high intensity their testosterone levels drop dramatically. Together with, releasing another
testosterone glucocorticoid; that minimizes inflammation and breakdown muscle tissue. And when
the athlete takes the anabolic steroids after their training, it affect the hormonal balance of the body;
by recharging the testosterone levels, blocking the glucocorticoid from breaking down muscle tissue
and resulting into bigger leaner muscle mass. Even though, taking steroids cause good results they
are also causing side effects that will be noticeable on the outside of the

Investigative New Drug Testing : Testing And Development...
Testing and development of new drugs can be a long, strenuous and costly project for a
manufacturing company. In 2003 drug companies spent $2.4 million on bringing new drugs to the
market. By 2005 that figured ballooned to $802 million. If you think that is crazy, now experimental
drugs cost pharmaceutical companies $312 million just for the post approval process of the drug and
a whopping $2.9 billion to place the new drug on the market. The whole process can take 8–12 years
until completion. First a drug must be approved to be transferred across state lines. If a sponsor
(usually a manufacturer or potential marketer) want to ship the product to a clinical trial facility(s)
an IND (Investigative New Drug Application) must be filed. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
They also must provide information regarding clinical protocols and investigator information. This
information is used to ensure that the physicians overseeing the administration of the drugs are
qualified to fulfill their clinical obligations.
Once the IND is submitted the sponsor must wait 30 calendar days before initiating any clinical
trials. During the preclinical phases the drug was subjected to in vivo testing. In vivo testing is when
a drug is tested in animals and is monitored for chromosomal damage and how toxicity levels are
effected. During to clinical phases the drug goes through 3 phases of testing. Phase 1 is when a
small group 20–100 of healthy volunteers are administered the drug dosage in small doses and
gradually increased. This phase's purpose to establish dosage and compound safety. Phase 2 is quite
the same as phase 1 but with a larger group 100–300 people that are drug candidates. This phase
determines effective dosage, methods of delivery and dosing intervals. Phase 3 and final phase is
same as its predecessor phase but with a much larger group of 1000–3000 individuals that are drug
candidates. This phase provides patients with the drug in the exact form as it will be given will on
the market and is compared to similar drugs on the market. Oftentimes double–blind studies are
done in this phase with the drug and a placebo.
After the

Arguments Against Drug Testing
Human experimentation has been something that's been going on for centuries. Researching humans
for new drug testing has accommodated a lot of controversy with people all over the world. Most
people don't agree and think it's not okay for this type of situation to happen to people but there are
different studies such as Diagnostic, Treatment, and Preventive that explains and gives a better point
of view and understanding the positive outcomes of the entire process. Diagnostic studies refers to
the practice of looking for better ways to identify a particular disorder or condition. For example,
researchers test an experimental drug or treatment in a small group of people for the first time with
their informed consent of the procedure. The researchers

Drug Testing Professions
In many professions, drug testing is the norm. When a company hires an employee, they may be
required to be drug tested (Deschenaux, 2015). Throughout the duration of the employment term,
drug testing may be required, rather this is a surprise test or not. It would be my opinion that drug
testing, for the most part, be used.
In many professions, such as hospital, school, or military settings drug testing is mandatory. After all
would an individual like to know that their doctor, nurse, child's teacher is under the influence of a
drug? I personally would not be happy. While some professions may not need drug testing, it would
be improbable to ban drug testing while still enforcing it for these above fields. For example, the
military performs ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Would this be the hospital's fault? Or would it be the individual doctor's fault? Many would say
both, however if the doctor was never required to take a drug test, then both parties should be held
accountable. Drug testing should be used a means to ensure that all those impacted, including those
required to take the test, understand that their primary concern is those individuals they serve. Even
construction workers serve people, they must ensure the work they do is safe for those who may use
whatever is being built. While drug tests may not save lives directly, they have the ability to have an
indirect impact if

Drug Testing Essay
Even though drug testing is very expensive, ALL high school's athletes should be tested because
drugs are bad for your health and very addictive. A simple drug test could save many lives. Many
schools around deny the request to drug test their athletes for the simple conclusion that the cost of
the testing would just be to expensive. I disagree whole heartedly on that because although it may be
expensive, we could save so many lives by requiring drug tests to play sports. Many students have
love for the game who would have no problem giving up drugs for the chance to play sports with
drug tests and a little guidance.
I've grown up in a generation where drugs are idolized. The feeling of being high, not having any
responsibility, and just ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I come from one of if not the poorest counties in North Carolina and seeing athletes just pushed on
because of their talent is absolutely sickening to me, I feel like we have and still do fail many
athletes by letting their drug abuse go unnoticed.
In the article "Drug–Testing Reduces Students' Drug Use, Study Says." It is statistically proven that
drug testing reduces students drug use. "Students involved in school random drug testing reported
less substance use than their peers in high school, that didn't have drug testing programs."
(Samuels). If students want to be involved in extracurricular activities, they will stop the drug abuse
if a drug test was mandatory just to be able to do so. Extracurricular activities is a privilege not a
right and will continue to be. Drug testing could change so many lives and people really fail to
comprehend that just because of the amount of the test behind it. On an average 47,000 people lose
their lives to drugs a year. It could be possible that half of those were teenagers.
The pros and cons on this issue vary from how expensive it can be to early interventions. In my
opinion the pros will always outweigh the cons for the simple fact that your saving someone no
matter the amount of money it cost. Some of the pros are that you can do early intervention, students
can learn to resist peer pressure, school promoting a safe and drug free environment, and increases
chances of students to have a successful future.

Drug Testing In The Workplace
My main opinions about compulsory drug testing in the workplace is that it should be mandatory
before an individual is hired for employment. The first positive aspect of drug testing in the
workplace is to identify those employers who come to work under the influence putting their co–
workers as well as themselves at risk by being involved in a preventable accident. In my opinion this
is probably the most important as well because it could potentially save many lives to include the
abuser. Secondly, drug testing in the work place can identify those employers who may be addicted
and in need of professional help of course the employee may not voluntarily ask for help however,
through random testing they are identified and offered the professional

Drug Testing Policy
Crowe and Sydney (2000) believe that if "youth are able to enter recovery and maintain self–
discipline through treatment they are less likely to cycle through the system multiple times.
Identifying youth who needs treatment and obtaining it for they may save money in distorted
correctional programs. Similarly, Lashey (1994) anticipated that drug testing, particularly for use in
appraisal, is valuable because adolescent are more likely to overcome denial and to discuss their
substance use problems. As Hutton (1992) argued that too often schools employ a drug–testing
policy for symbolic basis. For example, schools may implement a drug–testing policy because drug
use is a serious national concern or to set an example of a zero–tolerance policy, ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Parker et al (2002) suggests that such factors as the changes in the financial system and an increase
in young people attending university, result in the conservatory of the period in which young people
adopt their own independence and lack of responsibility over their own activities. Therefore is
suggested that the increasing rates of leisure drug use among student population reflect the notion of
"timeout" from the pressures of growing up, in which it is increasingly becoming normal. Even if
students have not taken any drugs their awareness and accessibility to access such drugs still shows
a clear picture of the extent to which drug use is normalized and accepted within society (meashan
et al, 2001). Shiner and Newburn (1997) criticize the normalization thesis as they believe that the
results discovered in the research does not involve the minorities reporting regular soft drug use are
large enough to legalize the "normalization" term. They believed that the normalization thesis
exaggerates the degree of drug used by young people as the majority of young people actually desist
from using drugs, preferring socially expressive and pre–occupying alternatives instead. Therefore,
they believed that it fails to pay enough attention to the normative contexts in which youthful drug
use

Drug Testing Essay
Drug testing is a laboratory procedure that looks for evidence of drug consumption by analyzing
urine, blood, and hair samples. If tested, you must provide a sample in front of an observer to make
sure that it is not tampered with. Samples are then sent to a laboratory for analysis, after which the
employer is notified of the results (Wodell 1). Exactly who should be subject to the new trend of
mandatory drug tests, is the big question being raised among businesses, schools, athletes and
federal government employees. Businesses feel that random drug testing of their employees will
create higher productivity, save on health care costs, improve employee turnover, prevent less
accidents, and improve job satisfaction. Schools are beginning to ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
On the contrary, many employees are not very happy about having to take drug tests and they are
voicing their opinions. A recent study conducted by the LeMoyne College Institute of Industrial
Relations suggests that, mandatory drug testing actually hurts workplace work place productivity
and may promote the abuse of cocaine, booze and other drugs. The study also implied that these
programs reduce employee productivity by as much as 33%, because it makes workers feel that they
are not trusted by their employers. Lastly, the study points out that because drug tests tend to zoom
in on marijuana (which only stays in the system for six weeks) some are turning to cocaine, and
psychedelic mushrooms which leave little residue in the body (Workplace 1). Companies putting
these testing policies in place must also consider the legal repercussions involved if they are not
careful. Many firms have found themselves in violation of our Fourth Amendment protection against
unlawful search and seizure, better known as a violation of privacy. Opponents claim that the tests
are too costly, ineffective, and prone to abuse. Random testing is a risk in many states, but if the
employee is in a position in which drug use could result in the death of an employee or the death of
others, random testing is usually OK. Another way employers are evaluating the need for a test is by

Violation Of Drug Testing
Some people may say that mandatory drug testing is a violation of the athletes' Fourth Amendment
right. According to some people, these tests are unnecessary and therefore violate these rights. The
author of "Mandatory Drug Testing Violates Rights" believes that drug testing is a violation of the
Fourth Amendment of the Constitution; "Courts have ruled that drug tests are a search. A search is a
privacy issue, and there has to be a reason for the search." This is true. Drug tests are a search, and
in some cases they may violate the rights of some citizens. Professional athletes, on the other hand,
do not get their rights violated by this. This does not violate the Fourth Amendment because the
athletes have already agreed to the rules of participating in the sport. Deborah Lee and Ann
Griswold, authors of "Point: Athletes Should be Tested for Drugs" explains that "in none of these
cases have athletes' Constitutional rights been abrogated because the participation in athletic events
is always voluntary and never mandatory. The 'mandate' only comes into play after the athlete has
agreed to participate, thereby voluntarily agreeing to obey the rules of the sport." This explains how
the athletes have agreed to the rules of the activity, which in most cases prohibit the use of many
performance enhancing substances, so since they have agreed to these conditions, the mandatory
drug testing of athletes is not a violation of their rights. An athlete's rights are not being violated by

Benefits Of Drug Testing
Government Benefits: Drug Testing Recipients
Across the United States, as of July 2016, approximately 43,369,684 people received Government
funded food stamps to feed their families. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program known
as SNAP, is funded by the Food Research Action Center known as FRAC, a private, nonprofit
organization. FRAC receives its funding from the Federal Government. In December 2015, the
year–end report had reported that the U.S. Government spent 80 billion dollars on the SNAP
program alone. 1.1 percent of each tax payer's tax dollars is put towards welfare costs. The Food
Stamp Act of 1977 was an act intended to provide better nutrition for low–income families.
However, fraudulent use of these benefits has become ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
With a questionnaire/ testing policy, Utah reportedly spent $30,000 on the screening process to net
twelve positive tests. In total, 250 people were denied benefits, in most cases because they would
not complete the process. As for the numerous recipients who did not submit to the drug tests, their
benefits where discontinued. As a result, the state of Utah saved $350,000 in benefits not paid in just
the first year. Almost every state is considering drug testing as a policy for receiving benefits. Tarren
Bragdon, of the Foundation for Government Accountability, stated that for each state, "The goal was
always the same. How do we protect kids and families, and at the same time ensure that people who
are receiving public assistance are ready to go into the workforce and become productive members
of

Drug Testing Welfare
Since the early War on Drugs and the welfare reform of the 1990s, those who receive public benefits
have been under the microscope of drug warriors and policy makers. Those who are proponents of
drug testing say that substance abuse and addiction can interfere with the ability to obtain or
maintain jobs. Drug testing can help welfare recipients prepare for the job market by getting them
clean and ready for the job application process (Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation (ASPE), 2011). Drug use and abuse can also contribute to child abuse and neglect
(Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), 2013). Testing welfare recipients can also be cost
effective, as it would prevent the misuse of public funds for the purchase ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The special need of the state must be sufficiently important to both suppress the normal Fourth
Amendment requirement of individualized suspicion and offset the individual's privacy interest.
However, if the court finds no special state need, ...the search is unreasonable (p.570).
Both Michigan and Florida were determined to have no special needs fit to blanket test all welfare
applicants and thus the drug test programs in both states were halted. In Marchwinski v. Howard, the
case regarding Michigan's drug test policy, it was shown that several widely known groups were
opposed to drug testing welfare recipients, especially random testing or blanket testing as in
Michigan and Florida. These groups were the the following: the American Public Health
Association, the National Association of Social Workers, National Assocation of Alcoholism and
Drug Abuse Counselors, National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Association of
Maternal and Child Health Programs, National Health Law Project, National Association on
Alcohol, Drugs, and Disability, Legal Action Center, National Welfare Rights Union, and the
American Civil Liberties Union, among others (ACLU,

Essay On Drug Testing
Have you ever thought what would happen if the people who receive government assistance had to
be drug tested prior to receiving help, like many who must be tested to keep their job? Many people
must go through drug testing to get a job, then after they have it, they may be selected to be
randomly tested again to keep their job. There are people down on their luck or going through a
rough patch where they need to receive government assistance, nothing but an application needs to
be filled out prior to receiving payment from the government. Drug testing for government
assistance and how it may benefit the state budget is at the forefront of many news stories. Types of
government programs available for different assistance, laws causing ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
[Washington, D.C]25 Jan 1999: A04. The reason for this drop–in numbers was due to "the "work
first" approach that helps recipients look for work and then pushes them to take any job they can
find." As the nation focuses on individual drug testing laws by state federally there are two
provisions related to TANF and substance abuse, there has been since the 1996 welfare reform law.
"First, there is a provision that says States may require drug tests for welfare recipients and may
penalize those who fail such tests (21 U.S.C. 862b). In addition, the law includes a lifetime ban on
TANF and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly Food Stamps) benefits for
persons convicted of a drug–related felony, though States have the option of modifying or opting out
of the ban (21 U.S.C. 862a), and many have done so." "Drug Testing Welfare Recipients: Recent
Proposals and Continuing Controversies," (2012). Journal of Drug Addiction, Education, and
Eradication, 8(2), 99–128. Retrieved from https://search–proquest–
com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1731527138?accountid=8289
Additionally, there are many people who must be drug tested to get their job, they also are subjected
to random drug testing after being hired. There are currently 15 states that have the drug testing law
in place for government assistance. Of those, "Florida's attempt to test all welfare applicants through
a 2011 law ran afoul of the federal courts, as a U.S. District Court ruling that the

Drug Testing For Welfare
Due to welfare recipients abusing their advantage, Tax payers want to drug test the users of welfare.
Drug Testing welfare recipients would insure to the tax payers that their money is not going to
waste. Staying off drugs would insure that the parents of welfare kids would not lose their benefits,
so drug testing would prevent any loss of benefits for the kids and their benefits. Drug testing would
prevent illicit drugs in the poverty class by showing if a recipient did show positive for their drug
test, they would lose all their benefits
Drug Testing recipients will save Tax Payers money, by not having to pay more taxes for more
recipients, it will, in the long term save taxpayers money. This will teach recipients not to do drugs
again. A ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As Lombardo says, "Many people need to be drug tested in order to have gainful employment and a
regular paycheck. If it is a normal part of life for the vast majority of a country's population, then the
system of testing is already in place to add welfare recipients into the regular testing cycle." Every
year local, state, and national government programs offer low–income households the opportunity to
make impoverished peoples needs to be met. These welfare systems have a 3% abuse rate where
recipients use their benefits for alcohol and illicit drugs. To maintain compliance with program
regulations, drug testing would have to be in the

Drug Testing Welfare
Drug Testing for Welfare Welfare is a public assistance program that is designed to help families
who do not have enough money to support themselves. Welfare was developed to improve the
quality of life and living standards for the poor and underprivileged. This program started because of
the hardships people faced during the Great Depression of the 1930s. In 1935, public assistance for
the poor became the government's responsibility. The money comes from the taxes that are deducted
from the working class. Testing welfare recipients for drug abuse stereotypes the poor, is
unconstitutional, and has become a big burden. By drug testing, those who receive welfare are being
stereotyped. For example, society is now looking at welfare recipients ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The process to receive government help is already hard as is. Why make it harder for the families
who are struggling enough already? There are many strict steps these families must meet in order to
qualify for the program as is. There are a total of nine steps states according to "How to Apply for
Food Stamps in the US." First of all, not just anyone can apply and receive benefits; they must be a
U.S citizen or legal residents. They will also ask for detailed information on all of the applicant's
resources, and the assets need to be less than Two–Thousand dollars. The income of all the
household members together will also be evaluated and there is also an amount that must be met. A
free screening tool is also a requirement that is mandatory, and it must be completed online which
means the applicant will need to have access to a computer with internet. Next, the applicant will
have to locate a local SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) office and begin the
application process. In the application process, they will have to fill out a very detailed application
and then submit it. Afterwards, an interview will be scheduled where the applicant will have to take
in documentations to verify their previous information. Finally, if accepted they will receive their
letter and an EBT (electronic benefit transfer) card. This final step takes up to thirty days. It is
definitely a long process and drug testing will only make the wait longer. Not only will it extend
their waiting period but many won't apply anymore because they will need to pay for their own drug
test. How will they pay for such an expensive test, when they don't even have enough money to
provide for themselves? Only those who test positive will get reimbursed, but there is no way it can
be afforded by welfare recipients without a huge

Unemployee Drug Testing
"Privacy – like eating and breathing – is one of life's basic requirements", and drug testing in the
workplace does not respect that. It is an infringement of an individual's right to privacy. Several
strong arguments vouch for that. Essentially it is not the employer's task to prevent people from
illegal actions in their free time.
First of all it is the government's task to sanction illegal actions, not the employer's. Many people
state that to treat all employees equally, one should have the same objective tests for both alcohol
and drugs. This argument doesn't make sense since it is not done anyway that an employer acts like
a public authority.
Secondly arguing that an employer is entitled to test employees, since he pays their salary, does not
make sense, for a drug test does not show the actual state of a person. If someone has been smoking
weed two weeks before a drug test, the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Innocent, good working people could get fired for no reason.
Furthermore it is said that employees using drugs have double the rate of absenteeism, higher job
turnover rates, and cost more as to medical benefits. That is possible, but correlation doesn't imply
causation. A lot of people using drugs often are in a difficult social situation. They will not simply
escape by exposing their privacy in drug tests.
At last: where does this end? Will employers become able to fire people for speeding? This
evolution will lead to an unfair system. Labour agreements will start to content so many prohibitions
employees will be fired for anything.
Finally, although the problem is complex, we should be aware that drug testing is an infringement of
the basic right to privacy. Courts should continue to protect it. Drug tests are not accurate enough
and companies are not public authorities. Our lives besides work are personal, and would not be
personal if we shared

Drug Testing And The Workplace
In many years, companies adopted many programs to monitor substance abuse in the workplace.
The implementation of drug testing by companies grew in recent years. American workers have seen
a dramatic increase in the use of drug testing in the previous years. Drug testing is implemented to
assure safe workplaces for American workers. Drug testing can reduce the company's health care
and insurance costs. Even though drug testing has become common in the workplace, there is little
research that exists regarding this matter. Overall, drug testing affects the decisions of workers by
adopting a "zero tolerance" policy. Experienced users try to beat these tests by using drug to cancel
the tracking of the drug itself. These workers attempt to avoid the detection of drug use for long
periods (Borack, 1995). Literature implies that employee drug use in the workplace may create high
costs to firms in the form of lower productivity, increased absences, and an increase in workplace
accidents. As a response to these costs, employers have implemented a variety of policies and
programs to decrease employee drug use. Educational programs and standards such as "Zero
Tolerance" policies, employers have turned to drug testing programs more in the past decades.
About 46 percent of American workers report that their employer conducts drug testing, although
other sources indicate that 90 percent of Fortune 200 companies use some type of drug testing
(Flynn 1999). The factor behind workplace drug

Drug Testing Satire
More muscles, more money? The bigger you are, the bigger the lies? Drug testing in sports is a
significant issue, even though people don't take it as serious as they should. This happens because
players in sports either don't have knowledge about steroids, or they feel the need to make
themselves look bigger. The problem is when they do take this drug, the players get away with it,
and become better than everyone else. That's why I think drug testing should alter their way of
testing to make the games even.
It all starts when players use the performance enhancing drugs and pass the drug test. When the
others get word about this, some of them might take that shot and take the performance enhancing
drug too. This is how it spreads between athletes

Drug Testing Memo
The purpose of this memorandum is, adopting a policy regarding illegal drug use in the workplace.
Employees who engage in the illegal use of drugs risk their safety, that of their colleagues and
customers. As part of the company's responsibilities, you should commit to maintaining a healthy
and happy workforce. The policy will provide a formal process to aid employees in dealing with
substances that can negatively impact or impede with work performance. Therefore, it should be
policy to pre–employment testing and for cause.
Drug use by employees is an epidemic that can cause many expensive problems such as, injury, lost
productivity and an increase with insurance claims. Additionally, some other risks include, higher
turnover, illegal activities, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
All things considered, require employees to sign acknowledgment of receiving policy, and train all
supervisors to identify legitimate interest for drug testing employees.
My research shows that drug testing in the workplace will be beneficial to employers and
employees. Testing can allow employers to maintain productivity and contain health care costs,
essentially saving the company money. Additionally, deterring drug use and increasing motivation.
For employees, increasing morale and ensuring a safe workplace. Also, all employees are
performing his or her job competently. It's stressful when an employee has to pick up the slack for a
colleague, through no fault of their own.
Moving forward, we share a collective responsibility to ensure a safe workplace. I ask for the
finances and time necessary to create and implement this policy. The resources I will need include,
establishing a clear written substance abuse policy, selecting a drug testing lab, educating the
employees, train supervisors determine when testing is warranted and pre–employment screening.
We can also obtain support from the resources SAMHSA and health benefit carriers. All things
considered, I'm hopeful we can all work together and take the next steps necessary for this to be
successful. Please feel free to contact me via electronic mail and I will answer any questions you
have. Additionally, I will keep you updated on the

Drug Testing in Schools Drug testing in schools is a very controversial issue with strong opponents
and proponents. The controversy comes down to legality, safety, and privacy, with both sides of the
argument having different perspectives on each. Drug testing for schools is a fairly recent
development in the educational system, supposedly aimed at fighting an evolving drug problem in
the United States. One side of the argument concludes that random drug testing is harmful, infringes
on students' rights, and is ineffective at solving the drug problem. "The first large–scale national
study on student drug testing found no difference in schools that have drug testing programs and
those that do not" (Appel). Side A claims that drug testing ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
This has been a topic that has only been recently discussed, with many concerns being raised about
the application of these programs, or not having them at all. Overall, the main goal of this proposal
is to come up with a plan that both satisfies the need for a drug testing program, and alleviates the
concerns of those who are wary of drug testing for the reasons of legality and effectiveness. In order
to solve the drug problem, there must be compromise in order to further our understanding of the
issue at hand, and this proposed solution allows for compromise that all can agree on. Works Cited
Appel, Judith, et al. "Random Drug Testing Is Harmful and Infringes on Students' Rights." Making
Sense of Student Drug Testing: Why Educators Are Saying No. 2004. Rpt. in Students' Rights. Ed.
Jamuna Carroll. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints
in Context. Web. 23 Feb. 2017 McKinney, Joseph R. "Random Drug Testing Can Prevent Student
Drug Abuse." Addiction. Ed. Christina Fisanick. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing
Viewpoints. Rpt. from "The Effectiveness and Legality of Random Student Drug Testing Programs
Revisited." RandomStudentDrugTesting.org 13 Dec. 2005. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web.
23 Feb.

Drug Testing
Mandatory Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients
Introduction
Mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients is a controversial issue. Should the government hold
people accepting government entitlement's accountable for illegal drug use or would this type of
action cross the boundary of civil liberties into an invasion of privacy? The government has a vested
interest in getting welfare recipients back into the working population. Holding welfare recipients
accountable for illicit drug use only ensures the government's monetary investment in human
resources is protected. Mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients would be beneficial to the state
despite its initial cost to initiate the program.
There are many benefits of Mandatory ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Many citizens thought Florida was the first state to require drug testing for welfare recipients but
they were not. "In 1996, Congress said states could test welfare recipients for illegal drug use. In
1999, Michigan instituted mandatory drug test for all welfare regardless of suspicion. But this kind
of testing was struck down in as unconstitutional, discouraging other states (Bowers, 2011)." In
2010, shortly after taking office, Florida's Governor, Rick Scott proposed a bill to mandate blanket
drug testing for all state cash assistance programs. In 2011, Florida became the first state to pass and
fully implement a bill mandating suspicion less drug screening for all applicants after Michigan's
legal loss. Many people feel the remaining employees are being held to a higher standard than those
on welfare. The American Civil Liberties Union has declared mandatory drug testing by the federal
government on welfare recipients intrudes on the rights of poor citizens. Yet, most working class
citizens have to take drug tests in order to maintain employment. Nearly every profession in the
private sector requires drug testing. New hires at

Drug Testing Ethics
Running head: THE ETHICS OF DRUG TESTING 1 THE ETHICS OF DRUG TESTING 4
The Ethics of Drug Testing
Hieu Le
Columbia Southern University
The Ethics of Drug Testing Drug testing is the most useful method that employers conduct on their
hiring process to examine the overall health results of their potential employees. Blood draws and
urine testing are the primary health examinations that employers use to conclude whether any
potential candidate has been abusing drugs. Hence, employers may deny their job offer to
candidates, who were found that engaged on positive drug testing. However, ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
The method supports employers comply with the federal law, and prevent further disputes. Although
there are protests against drug testing due to personal privacy, the testing method is appreciated by
several politicians and law agencies. While drug testing may reveal personal privacy, the benefit
behind this method is that employer ensure their employees are not engaging with illegal drugs, the
safety of employees, and legal issues in the future.
According to Kitterlin, Moll, and Moreno (2015) Coca–Cola conducts drug test on their potential
candidates to examine such drug abuse to fulfill with the federal law and protect their image
accordingly. Violation of this law code that may cause the firm face a massive fine by the
government (Kitterlin et. al, 2015). Furthermore, Coca–Cola want to assure the fairness to their
employees by requiring their employees perform the drug

U.S drug testing policy continues to expand and several studies have shown that the implementation
of drug testing had a positive impact on occupational safety and overall work performance (Dwyer
275); however, many employees have expressed negative opinions of drug testing practices, to name
a few, as questionable, non–ethical and that violates individual's right to privacy (Comer 259). This
policy is becoming increasingly popular at the workplace, not only in the United States but also in
other regions around the globe such as Latin America, Europe, Canada, and Asia. It has become
more reinforced frequently throughout the workplace to perform a drug test. According to Colakis
and Bruce, drug abuse refers to the use of illicit drugs (e.g. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
According to Joe Pinsker, drug testing does not reduce the use of drugs; it only causes the drug
abuser to choose not to work for companies that test them (1). Although an employee may be
prescribed medication by a doctor for personal or work–related pain, this does not eliminate them
from being a candidate of a drug test. As a result, the employee may or may not be dismissed from
the current assignment based on the employers ruling. Substance abuse is known to impair
employees' judgments and overall accuracy to perform job duties, but for some it's a boost to assist
them in accomplishing the task at hand. This causes employers to seek different drug testing
strategies to reduce drug abusers within the

Welfare Drug Testing
In the U.S. News Digital Weekly article titled "Should Welfare Recipients be Drug Tested?" Senator
David Vitter addresses the ongoing debate about whether or not drug testing should be required in
order to receive welfare. Senator David Vitter states that all welfare recipients should be drug tested
in order to ensure that only the families that deserve the money get it and to make sure that drug
addicts get the help that they need. However, I believe that by drug testing this group of people, the
government is not only intruding into private lives but also is unfairly assuming that welfare
recipients are abusing drugs at a higher rate than the rest of the population. While Vitter's article
may contain some good ideas, his argument consists ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Vitter later suggests that by drug testing welfare recipients, the government can ensure that only the
families that truly need assistance will receive it, but does not address the expense associated with
drug testing. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a urine drug screen
costs between $25 and $44 dollars each (Overman). It is important to note that federal law prohibits
charging welfare applicants for these tests (Owens); therefore, the government is the one responsible
for paying for them. This would be less of an issue if the amount that they were saving was higher
than the amount that they were spending. However, this hasn't been the case so far. For example, in
Florida, they performed a "trial–run" of the drug testing requirement. During this trial–run, the state
of Florida required that everyone applying for TANF had to pay for his or her own drug test.
However, it was

Highschool Drug Testing
Drug testing
These are my three reasons why high school athletes should be tested for the enhancement in drugs.
My first statement is how many deaths there was and still are from drugs. My second point of view
is how it can affect you and teammates. This is why we should have drug testing when it comes to
athletes.
According to rasmussen.edu "there are roughly 3.2 percent of high school Athletes that have been
using steroids or taken shots with out doctors permission." There was a story in the New York times
article Differing Views on Value of High School Tests that had triggered people's attention. Taylor
Hooton a 17 year old lived in Plano, Tex., Had committed suicide in 2003. This was a very shocking
moment Taylor was a baseball player, and was very athletic. It was said that his father was the one
who started the the testing drugs in high school. Nothing was said about his mother as far as I know
from my knowledge is that she was very shocked.
Fox 13 salt lake city reporter Caroline Collonny, had a story on a hockey team that held silence for a
teammate that had past away a year ago by the use of drugs with three friends on a Friday. This was
not a usual case it all happened one night, but this is a prime example if it had not been all one night,
and it just so happened to happen all the time. The police had said that they ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Yes you may say what if you need it for sports? Like in some cases you would need it for allergies,
but it should not be used without a doctor's permission. Even one drug can kill you depending on
how strong it is. Even one drug no matter what it is you can still kill yourself. I understand if you are
at home sick, and you are running a fever, but if you use it all the time then no that is just wrong.
That will just leave you to depression, then to eventually killing yourself and that had happened to a
lot of people

Drug Testing Benefits
Over 27.1 million people in the U.S. were reported in drug use. An eighth of them people either got
injured or passed away. This is the reason we drug test at jobs. It helps keep the dangers away from
people and businesses. Our society as a whole will improve by being a lot safer. There will be less
shootings and catastrophes due to drugs. That's the purpose of drug testing at jobs.
At work workers always have to be doing their job the correct way. For the employer they have to
have reliable workers. "Many companies test job applicants for illegal drug use as part of the
employment hiring process." (Doyle) .Doing a yearly drug test to see who isn't doing their job
correct is an action many businesses are taking now. It makes it a safer environment ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Drug testing at jobs are also helping to lower that rate. There are more and more jobs everyday that
require drugs tests which means it will continue to lower. "There is a 500% increase on
incarceration's due to drugs." (Politicalfact). People will either keep doing drugs and go to jail, or
stop doing them and go on the right way in life. The purpose of the drug test is to get people to stop
doing them so everyone can be safer and more productive.
Snyder 1
There is at least a casualty a day caused by drugs. "More Americans died from drug overdose in
2016 then died in the entirety of the Vietnam War."(Lopez). Innocent people die from them that are
just bystanders. This has to stop and drug tests are helping. A safer environment is the main reason
businesses started doing this. People should not have to give a life because of someone else's
actions. People at work are protected by the test as well. The employer saves money as well because
no equipment is destroyed and no lives will be taken.
Drug testing is for the better than the worse. The people who think otherwise need to be tested. It
protects people, weather its the user people at work ,or the innocent bystander keeping people off
drugs will help build and protect this country. It's also helping build a new generation drug free, and
that is the goal for drug

Drug testing originally began in the U.S. as a prevention strategy during the Vietnam War. In 1982,
the U.S. Navy began randomly drug testing all active duty personnel following a tragic accident on
the carrier Nimitz which was due to impairment from illegal drug use. Shortly thereafter random
drug testing was extended to all active duty military personnel. Later on, because of concerns about
public safety, the Federal Government expanded drug testing to workers in safety–sensitive
industries in the late 1980s. At that time drug testing became standard for many private and
government employers. Due to these positive improvements in the workplace, public and private
schools, since 1995 have incorporated random drug testing into their comprehensive

The Drug Of Drug Testing Welfare Recipients
Drug Testing Welfare Recipients To test or not to test has been has been the question at hand for
many states that are dealing with whether or not to pass the law that welfare recipients should or
should not be drug tested in order to receive assistance from the government. Florida was the first
state to mandate the law in 2011 and thereafter twenty four other states in the last year have also
passed this law in our own state of Oklahoma being one of them. Although alcohol is legal it is
abused far more than marijuana or hard core drugs, According to the 1996 study by the National
Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism the differences between the proportion of welfare and
non–welfare recipients using illegal drugs are statistically insignificant. Although some states have
decided to pass the law for welfare recipients in order receive government assistance, I believe it's
ineffective to drug test these welfare recipients in order to receive their benefits. Welfare in the
United States commonly refers to the federal government welfare programs that have been put in
place to assist the unemployed or underemployed. Help is extended to the poor through a variety of
government welfare programs that include the Women, Infants, and Children Program, which is
referred to as WIC, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families commonly known as
TANF and Aid to Families with Dependent Children. Drug testing welfare recipients is negative
because drug tests performed on welfare

The usage of drugs is increasing every year for students through middle and high school. A way to
counteract this is: drug testing. There are no federal laws concerning drug testing in schools.
However there are two Supreme Court cases that allow schools across the United States to do drug
testing: In 1995, it turned legal to test student athletes, and in 2002, the case ruled that drug testing
be expanded to students in any competitive extracurricular activity like marching band and chess
club. Although pupils can be severely punished, drug testing should continue to to be in school. This
is because it can help early intervention, shows that schools are keeping a safe and drug free
environment, and helps docents have a successful future. Having drug testing can help give students
an early intervention to stop doing drugs before they get too addicted. It can help students resist
peer–pressure because they have a reason to. The testing can also help with finding who already has
a drug problem, and can get treatment. The National Institute on Drug Abuse says that drug testing
is a way to prevent any future use of any drug. When students do the testing, they could cheat by
turning to drugs, alcohol, or synthetic marijuana that will not show on a drug test. If a student got
addicted to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It reflects well for the schools image and reassures parents that their children are safe in that
particular school. When a student is under the influence of drugs, it can disrupt the teaching
environment for the other people in the classroom. In a study conducted in 2013, when a positive
school climate was there it decreased the likelihood of drug usage like marijuana, and both cigarette
initiation and escalation. There is a chance of it not working by giving the wrong results because of
medical reasons. With drug testing, the schools can keep up with a positive, safe environment while
being drug

Belpre Drug Testing
In this article say that 30 to 50 percent of the student's ''belpre'' testing pool.
Carroll county school district in georgia, which has 4,000 students, tests 80 random students each
month. Of the 720 tested during the last full school year, only 18 tested positive, and law
enforcement was not notified.
Belpre isn't alone: About 27 percent of high school nationwide have a form of student drug testing,
According to the federal centers for disease control and prevention. Some schools also perform
''Reasonable suspicion'' testing on students who show evidence of illegal drug use, which can
include ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Compared with non–users, recent users were more likely to be full–time athletes and to also know
other athletes who use drugs. Both lifetime users and recent users were older than the non–users.
Some peoples can make criminals and more if they are athletes in this information say that the use
of ''doping'' undermines the integrity of sports and negates the exemplary effects of drug–free sport
for the general public within a culture of increasing commodification of competitive sports in which
athletes are objects for profit and not agents of sportsmanship. I think that the athletes consume
drugs so that they think that the grogues can help them to take more action in their sports but the
reality is that they musso harass

Drug Testing : A Drug Test
Drug testing in the workplace started happening in 1988 and till this day is still continuing. Not until
1991 did they start drug testing on employees who work on aviation, trucking, railroads, mass
transit, and pipelines. Today, mostly everywhere you apply for a job a drug test is mandatory. Which
is reasonable because if illegal drugs are involved, drug use can affect workplace concentration and
judgment which could put the employee at risk. But should a drug test be required only for those in
public transportation sector jobs? Although a drug test shows whether if a person has done drugs
recently or not, there are many ways that people can beat a drug test. So how does one truly know if
the person is still doing drugs after he/she passes the test? Drug tests should not be required whether
it is for any or public transportation sector job because it does not prove whether if an employee has
fully stopped using the drug therefore making no justification to the drug test at all. The most
common drug screens that employers request are the five panel. The five panel which tests for the
five most common street drugs, such as marijuana, cocaine, phencyclidine (PCP), amphetamines
and opiates. All the drugs listed affect a person in a negative way but some are worse than others.
Marijuana tends to slow the body down, a person will have less energy and feel as if they do not
want to do anything. They start having lack of focus and motivation which it can really interfere in
the

Drug Testing Workplace
In our changing world and changing society it is important that we understand the growing issue of
legal or illegal drug use in the workplace. 70% of the estimated 14.8 million Americans who use
illegal drugs are employed. Marijuana is the most commonly used and abused illegal drug by
employees, followed by cocaine, with prescription drug use steadily increasing ("Drugs" 1). There
are no requirements for private employers to have a drug–free workplace policy other than federal
contractors as well as safety industry positions. The most common reasons we drug test; required by
law, reasonable suspicion, random, prior history, and workplace accidents. Not all employers are
required to drug test but nearly 80 percent of large corporations in the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The five–panel test screens for signs of marijuana, cocaine, phencyclidine, amphetamines and
opiates. Amphetamines include illegal drugs such as methamphetamines, speed, crank and ecstasy.
There are five primary drug tests they include urine, blood, hair, saliva, and sweat. Urine is the most
common way to test for drug or alcohol abuse but there are new sampling methods on the rise. Urine
is the least expensive and least intrusive. The urine drug test usually screens for alcohol,
amphetamines, benzodiazepines, marijuana, cocaine, PCP, and opioids (narcotics). Hair sampling,
human hair samples are easy to collect, store, and transport, and they are difficult to adulterate
(Busick, p. 1). Metabolites of drug use are transferred from the bloodstream, form sweat or oily
secretions into or onto the hair, where they cannot be washed or bleached out (Busick, p. 1). Hair
samples can detect marijuana, cocaine, PCP, opiates, and amphetamines. Oral fluids samples test
saliva and can detect drug use from one hour to five days after use. Marijuana metabolites cannot be
detected through oral samples. To collect sweat samples a person must wear a skin patch for 7 to 10
days. Drugs can be detected that occurred shortly before the patch was applied or while the patch
was worn. Problems with this method include contamination by chemicals present on the skin when
the patch is applied; tampering

Welfare Drug Testing

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Ashley Thomas

More from Ashley Thomas (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Welfare Drug Testing