It’s easy to sit back and say it’s not your problem. It’s a matter of convenience if the child in question doesn’t carry your genes and you feel it’s time to “send them on home” for some good old-fashioned parental discipline. What if this child doesn’t have a set of parents? What if the coach is the only “positive” influence? What about the kids who have parents? Does this effect them too? Ahh yes, a whole new set of issues as we begin this second part regarding drug-testing and its feasibility from a variety of angles. There are some more facts & figures, studies, and overall attitudes that suggest this may not be as big of an uphill battle as we might think. Problem is, (as my dear friend said recently) is that takes a progressive mindset and people don’t generally do well under that sort of approach.

Some remarkable studies conducted in different parts of the country by the states of Colorado and Indiana have certainly caught my attention. Both are well ahead of Florida in terms of educational performance and ideas regarding the “greater good” which is what prompted specifically Oregon (as discussed in Part I) and more recently Indiana to implement Student Random Drug-Testing (SRDT). It would be irresponsible of me however to assume that these studies represent a blanket fix to this, and that either of these states carry major demographic characteristics in comparison to Florida. In addition, it’s also assumed that each state referenced does not equate into possessing the same budget restrictions and/or concerns, needs, etc. that Florida contains which could lead to major philosophical differences in funding priorities to begin with.

Dr. Joseph R. McKinney, Chair & Professor of the Department of Educational Leadership at Ball State University in conjunction with the Student Drug-Testing Coalition published an article entitled “Effectiveness of Student Random Drug-Testing Programs” in August of 2005 and some of his findings may (or may not) surprise you.  Throughout the duration of my research there was an incessant worry about whether or not drug-testing would significantly deter participation in sports or any other extracurricular activities for that matter. The State of Indiana completely debunked this preconceived notion. Although there was nothing life-altering in the stats themselves, they did tell a story in stark contrast with what was first thought.

To start, nearly 50% of the 54 responders to the survey reported an increase in activities participation after SRDT’s were introduced into the system. Specifically that number within athletics was a 46% increase in participation while 54% of those responding said that participations figures remained the same. The biggest stat was the ZERO percent decrease in participation. Within other extracurricular activities, the numbers were similar showing a 45% increase and 55% holding steady. It’s the second set of numbers that are becoming the glue of the pro–testing sentiment. High Schools in Indiana with SRDT’s exceeded the state average for test scores as mandated for graduation. 58 % of those Principals reported that drug use decreased while 42% said it held steady. Again, there was a ZERO percent increase in the usage of drugs during the 2002-04 school calendars.

Not bad for costing less than $30 per student (National Average) to test when you compare that it costs $60 billion a year to combat drug abuse and $100 billion for alcohol abuse. Last check, Texas was spending roughly $3 million per year for Steroids testing. Something that the State House of Representatives have tried to pull in this year’s budget. The programs began in 2007.  Granted there’s a bunch of things we don’t know like, what were these schools like BEFORE the tests were conducted. Or were these schools handpicked by State Legislators knowing they had built-in success stories waiting to happen? I’m not naive enough either to think that when politics are involved that the numbers have a tendency to reflect whatever agenda there is to be served eventually. It’s another way of “pimping the system.”

What happens when there’s a perceived “positive influence” in the form of parents or older siblings, etc.? It may not be all peachy for those living the “lap of luxury” where some kids see their nannies more than their parents. It may be even more alarming when you think your packing the kids up to head down to your place of worship and try to instill some morals into your sons or daughters. The University of Colorado sampled 14,000 kids of Junior High and Senior High School age inserting the idea of Faith being the moral compass and influencing the kids into what is “right” and “wrong.” The study used the terms “churched” and “unchurched” versus a sampling of the four most frequently used substances by kids. They were Beer, Marijuana, Amphetamines/Barbiturates, and Cocaine.

In the ‘unchurched’ category of Beer, 88% of those preteens and teens said they had tried or used alcohol regularly. Compare that with a not-so-surprising 80% of those kids that were identified as ‘churched.’  Marijuana usage amongst the unchurched crowd came in at 47%, while an interesting figure of 38% of those 14,000 were saying yes to the drug. Twenty-Eight Percent of those polled in the unchurched category had used Amphetamines/Barbiturates compared to the similar number of 22% amongst those of the Faith. Cocaine usage was the lowest with 14% to 11%. Very interesting to see that there was relatively little difference amongst those that were not seeking a higher sense of moral direction and those that seemingly were.

So that leads me to yet another set of questions. WHO in the hell is going to step up then if parents don’t want to or don’t know HOW to parent. Or WHAT is going to save us if consulting a higher power isn’t going to work either? Does the obligation lie from the coaches? The players? the parents? The Legislature? How about all of the above. Some believe it falls with the ones that are already spending the most time with the kids. Bring in the coaches.

In Part I, there was a survey referenced from the National Poll of Children’s Health. Remember that one? It said that 75% of parents favored random-testing and 1-in-10 were aware of PED usage within their own neighborhoods. Well the Poll Director, Dr. Matthew Davis feels like it falls for the vast majority on those that are already spending the overwhelming portion of THEIR time with the kids. In an excerpt from his findings here is what he said:

“Coaches lend a voice; the same person who is telling them to be competitive may also be compelling in getting them to understand the dangers they face if they choose to use (performance-enhancing drugs.)”

In a perfect world full of lollipops and gummy bears this would be no truer a statement. But let’s be frank. There are coaches who use that very same power to do right; using it to do wrong. There really are those that don’t give a horses arse about what you do away from their domain as long as you’re bringing your hard hat to the fieldhouse and are ready to work for them. They too represent a legitimate argument that there are literally enough things to worry about during the day and the course of a season other than one of their players deciding to crack open a Swisher Sweet and roll it back up.

I’ve always subscribed to the theory that the best teachers are often the biggest screw-ups that have managed to learn a few things from those mistakes and that coaching and teaching are one in the same. They are NOT mutually exclusive. So then, what do you do?  What has become a recurring theme in this research I’m afraid is that there is no one answer to this conundrum. It ultimately lies within that human being. It’s just like charity to me. You can’t call it charity if you’re forcing someone to do it. You can’t force anybody to be a human being in this day and age. It almost feels like the norm to see apathy permeate throughout all segments, ESPECIALLY when matters such as this start to flare.

So we’ve talked about the coaches briefly, but what about the actual guardians themselves? This one is just as tricky as the coaches. You can’t force someone to be a good parent. You can certainly allow them to be bad ones though. Easiest thing to do in this world is procreate and the system is set up to be REALLY good at it. Take the politics out of it.  It’s always the watermark of age when you start to think that one generation has become a set of misfits and have completely taken over the world. What happens when the same mentality is prevalent amongst the ones we are depending upon to actually show the way?

Parents that are working 12+ hours in a day realistically DON’T have the time to be as involved as much as it takes to ensure that their child is getting its necessary guidance. There’s just not enough hours in the day. Furthermore, in some of the RARE cases that I’ve seen firsthand the parents are actually feeding (literally and figuratively) the habits that we’re trying to break. When do you switch from being a human being to an apathetic a-hole that sees the writing on the wall? Again, at some point genetics and/or a predetermined circumstance is going to become the ultimate factor on how hard you’re going to fight for a kid’s life. There seems to be very little wiggle room that I’ve found on this.

The players themselves? Oh you mean the ones this entire project started on no more than 2 days ago? Yeah, those knuckleheads. It’s probably easy to perceive that I’m completely siding with the young ones and that they are merely victims of what the big bad adults have influenced them to do with our dictatorial and communistic demands. Not really. At the end of the day, the sizable difference between a kid becoming an addict versus becoming a “normal” socially functioning adolescent is likely between genetics and most importantly, the crowd they keep. Listen, unless you run into the University of Wisconsin Drumline anytime soon you’re NOT going to find a bunch of stoners, boozers, and criminals hanging out in the Symphonic Band or Spanish Club or any of the community service-oriented clubs unless that’s your thing. In that case, I suggest you simply drop out and start playing Guitar Hero now in hopes of landing that gig with Brett Michaels or whatever carnival is in town. KIDDING.

Addicts are often considered the best actors on the planet (which is why Hollywood is full of them) and you don’t need to be memorizing a script or working on your spray tan to be REALLY GOOD at it. That’s the thing about addiction. It knows no socioeconomic boundaries. It can turn the prettiest Prom Queen into Emily Rose overnight. It can turn the baddest baller into a worthless blob before you can even adjust. Many times by the instance you realize it’s gotten away from you is about the time it’s too late. It doesn’t take a member of Mensa to be aware of the impacts that peer-to-peer relationships can have. It goes without saying that simply observing the behaviors of the peers in the group will have a limited or unlimited role in what the kid is seeking.

One of the biggest problems is we’ve got an entire generation or generations of adults that have grown up in the drug and alcohol culture. It’s not unlikely to see Doctors, Lawyers, and just about anybody else know how to hit a gravity bong. (If you’re not one of those, then I apologize if I’ve offended you, but odds are you’ve at least seen this stuff go on amongst adults well into their 40’s and 50’s.

So after all of this, I bet you’re wondering what’s my OFFICIAL take on what I’ve just laid out. The issue at hand is do we test? I say not quite. Close, but not quite. Only if it is undeniably warranted (like the case in Oregon) and if we can use it as only a portion of the solution. Simply confirming that a kid does drugs accomplishes nothing. If anything, it could backfire. You could lose the kid forever. The parents may take it as a personal affront to their own parenting skills. You could even end up in litigation.  However the risks associated with sweeping this under the rug may demand that we find a way to make this work before we lose a lot more kids than we think. Testing is not meant to be some sort of Scarlett Letter. In fact, punish those that violate privacy laws as felons if necessary to protect the due process involved.

At $30 a student in an already financially desolate climate such as this one, I would most likely find a hard time convincing anybody that this would fly. But if the cost were to be less than $10 million over a 2-3 year period, then why not? I mentioned that charity isn’t charity if you’re forcing someone to give it up, but we can’t assume that there isn’t someone or some entity out there that wants to make a difference and needs something different to put their money behind. They didn’t become millionaires by being stupid. Or at least we hope right?

The issue of false positives and false negatives is something that science would have to answer for. I’m looking at the human aspect which I believe wholeheartedly is at the center of this. I’m looking at a society that seems to be moved by catastrophes in order to change something. The only time you see sweeping changes to a particular ideology is if innocence or freedom is lost. Why do we have to wait so long? Why do we have to wait for a plane to fall out of the sky before we change maintenance procedures? We’re talking about human lives, no matter how insignificant they may seem to you.

It was pointed out to me by the same dear friend that mentioned the idea of progressivism being a little too, well progressive that he dealt in logic and ethics. I said it’s both logical and ethical to save a child’s life if you have the necessary means to do so. I also said that logic and ethics have nothing to do with business which is where the money to pay for it comes into play. It certainly is a slippery slope. But again, it’s never really “your problem” until it’s your family member that’s affected whether directly or indirectly.  We can choose to fly our teams across the country missing school in order to play match-ups that somehow determine our worth on the field, but how in good faith do we let them represent us if we are knowingly sending them out there to fail?  Remember. This is more than sports. This is life.

 

If you would like to contact me, you can do so at pugh@bigcountypreps.com for any of the links or bibliographical information.