Is the 3-Ton Elephant in the room already? Are we missing something that is happening right in front of our eyes? Are we doing our greatest impersonation of an ostrich and burying our heads in the sands of time, allowing for yet another generation to go blissfully ignorant or stubbornly apathetic (depending on your viewpoint) about the ill-fated lifestyle of habitual drug use and/or the use of performance-enhancing drugs? Have I asked enough questions already?
If this is too much to ponder on such a cold and clear April morning have no fear. This is a two-parter. Today and tomorrow I will try and sort through some of the literature, the cases that have shaped the arguments on both sides, and the amalgamation of sources that influence the people and the amount of usage of these substances. Finally, I’ll try and bring forth some of my own experiences and conclusions based on what I’ve seen work and not work. Hopefully we’ll be better for it. If not, I tried. All the time in the world may not solve nor completely address the foundation of this issue, but at least we can try to put it into some perspective shall we? There I go asking questions again already.
Quite a bit of energy was exhausted in a rather short amount of time to try and get a grasp on this. As you’ve seen, there are a million-and-one questions to be answered. Like any responsible gatherer of knowledge I must not stop until what I am seeking has been found. One of the biggest concepts I’ve wrestled throughout the entire process of research, draft, edit, and draft again is this idea of feeling like a dirty, dirty little hypocrite for chastising a young person for making the same dumba** mistakes that I, in fact MOST of us made while growing up. This completely curmudgeon outlook that they are all guilty and we need to catch them doing wrong. It’s madness. When this kind of madness ensues, the only thing I know to do is educate myself about it. Here’s what I’ve got.
The first thing that jumped out immediately to me was the number of questions regarding the constitutionality of this notion of testing teenagers (specifically athletes) for the use of either controlled substances or performance-enhancing drugs (PED’s). Even more striking was the number of people that were not vehemently against the need for testing per say, it was the principle behind the collection process and its potential for violation of the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. This protects all Citizens of the U.S. against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The fight begins in 1985 in New Jersey when a urinalysis was made part of the mandatory physical needed to play athletics. Up until this time period, it’s apparent that the Federal and State Supreme Courts carried the sentiment that mass testing was unequivocally a violation of the Fourth Amendment. (Many case briefs point to this, but for the relevancy of this article we’ll use this one). The case of Odenheim v Carlestadt-East Rutherford Regional School District is taken to the New Jersey Supreme Court. One one side of the room the Defendants argued that it was in the Board of Education and the general public’s best interest to keep their kids drug-free by virtually any means necessary. The Court obviously didn’t think so to that extent and we begin to see a series of convoluted back-and-forth’s redefining of the roles between the States and the Federal System regarding this issue. The deal-breaker seemingly came when only 28 students out of a total population of 520 tested positive for marijuana. That was not even remotely close to a justifiable number to continue with the “preventative” measures the urinalysis was supposed to provide.
Flip the calendar exactly ten years later and you have a rather poignant dichotomy with regards to the United States Supreme Court and their 6-3 decision to uphold an Oregon school district’s policy of random drug testing as a requirement for participation. In the case of the Vernonia School District v. Acton, this too was born out of contempt for policy and refusal to submit a urinalysis. Only this time, we were a decade later into a decades-old drug war that was consuming pre-teens with the temptation to get high or drunk, or even worse now starting to use the term “cycle.”
The important thing to understand with this particular case is that it’s argued upon the foundation that the disciplinary problems (amongst the athletes nonetheless) within that district had reached unfathomable proportions and something drastic need to be done. The Supreme Court agreed, but tagged a “special circumstances” instruction to the ruling. Those “circumstances” now apparently covered the compelling need of the State of Oregon to have its kids drug-free. That possessing a climate of safety, specifically amongst its athletes outweighed the extremely limited and private sacrifices necessary for the greater good of the community.
The debate as to the constitutionality of mass testing will undoubtedly carry-on well into the next two or even three decades. Something that we cannot debate is the safety and the growing need for a proactive, not reactive approach towards taking care of the future. We may never come to a full agreement about HOW to test or WHO to test and WHEN, but the NEED for a test is no longer becoming debatable. The days of playing Russian Roulette with the cognitive and emotional development of a young person should be over. At least if we can help it.
The growing number of children that are becoming addicted or starting to use “legal” substances such as alcohol or painkillers or anything over-the-counter is needless to say; alarming. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse 93% of all teens have experienced alcohol by their senior year. Six percent of those kids are drinking on a daily basis. An even more astonishing 1-in-16 seniors smokes marijuana daily and 20% of students overall say they have done so (smoke) for a least a month in their lifetime already. Moreover, (according to the same institute) a recent poll said that teenagers consider drug use to be the biggest issue they face in today’s world. More so than crime, violence, and social pressures.
What’s the relevancy? Well if you do the math the ratio of users MUST crossover into the realm of athletics. Here’s where it gets sticky though. All of us at one point or another “tied one on” a little beyond our natural boundaries back in school. All, well most, okay some even partook in the “herbal remedies” that you thought would make Mrs. Magilacuddy’s English Class become that much more “enhanced”.
Did you ever wonder why your boy was so pissed off and forgetful? Did you think it was because he wasn’t getting any sleep? Or was it because Suzy Q wouldn’t give him the time of day when he tried to spit game? Maybe it was all of the above and not for “voluntary” reasons. How many kids did YOU know walking around the halls as freshmen completely in tuned with their inner sense of self-worth and responsibility? That’s what I thought. More importantly, did you think it was productive to slam a beer after a tough day in 4th period and your DB’s Coach was just out of control at practice that day?
Here’s one last set of statistics that I will leave you with for now regarding the building case for the need and the overwhelming responsibility for an effective way to satisfy that need. According to Drug Free America in 2008, 75% of parents of HS athletes supported random drug testing within schools as done by the National Poll of Children’s Health released by the University of Michigan. One out of every 10 were aware of an athlete from their area who uses performance-enhancing drugs. Of those polled, 97% believe it’s the coaches that should take the lead in educating their athletes about the dangers of drug use.
Tomorrow: A look at what some of the other states (Texas, Indiana, Georgia) are doing to combat this issue. Also, a look at what the coaches, schools, parents, players, and society as a whole can do to somehow curtail some of the activity and the possible solutions.