Students Find Dialogue More Effective Than Drug Testing

As someone who just reached the legal drinking age nine months ago, I can tell you firsthand that a high level of surveillance doesn't make young people safer. And on the topic of student drug testing, the experts agree: Random testing does not effectively reduce drug use among young people.

The first large-scale national study on student drug testing, published last April by University of Michigan researchers, found that there was no correlation between a school's use of drug testing and the level of reported drug use among its students. That's why I'm surprised that President Bush wants to offer $23 million to schools for drug testing.

At my high school — the Texas Academy of Mathematics and Science in Denton, one of the country's few public boarding schools — we were constantly under the purview of administrators and surveillance cameras. All 400 students followed strictly enforced curfews. We couldn't open our windows without approval, and the screens had stickers designed to reveal any escapes from our high-security dorm. Our rooms were searched randomly with bureaucratic regularity; students suspected of drinking were given Breathalyzer tests. One positive test result or an empty beer can was grounds for immediate expulsion.

Strict doesn't mean safe

You might think that we were the safest students in north Texas. But you'd be wrong. I knew classmates who drove drunk or high because they had no one to call who could pick them up in time to meet our strict curfew. Instead of opening up an honest dialogue, administrators enforced a strict no-tolerance policy, giving us the impression that we couldn't talk to them about alcohol or other drugs.

Thousands of students are subjected to drug-sniffing dogs, surveillance cameras in hallways and testing of their urine, hair or sweat. Some have to deal with even more traumatic measures. In November, for example, 14 police officers stormed a South Carolina high school in a commando-style drug raid. After detaining and searching 107 students at gunpoint, the police found no drugs. This search was based on the same "guilty-until-proved-innocent" logic by which we gradually surrender our constitutional rights for policies that don't actually make us safer.

Now Bush wants to expand drug testing. In his recent State of the Union speech, Bush cited an 11% drop in drug use among high school students in the past two years, crediting student drug testing with a significant role in this decline. But the University of Michigan study, partially funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, found no difference in rates of drug use between schools that have drug-testing programs and those that do not. In fact, its authors found that 95% of schools do not test students randomly for drugs, making it unlikely that drug testing played a substantial role in the decrease Bush cited.

Testing popularized

Drug testing without cause for suspicion has become more popular since a 2002 Supreme Court ruling upheld an Oklahoma school district's right to randomly test those students who wished to participate in competitive extracurricular activities.

For the past year and a half, John Walters, director of the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy, along with the rapidly expanding drug-testing industry, has been busy promoting drug testing as the "silver bullet" to prevent drug use and keep kids safe. But such testing only would humiliate students and undermine their relationships with their teachers and coaches.

What really would make young people safer — and what kids sincerely want — are adults who will listen to them. A 1997 study by University of Minnesota researchers revealed that students are less likely to use drugs when they have close relationships with their parents and teachers.

Although I couldn't talk openly with my high school administrators, my father and I had a very trusting relationship. He was always there for me, whether I had questions about drugs or just needed a ride home from a party where there were no designated drivers. That bond made me much safer than any drug test would.

Leah B. Rorvig is the publications associate at the Drug Policy Alliance and a recent graduate of Columbia University, where she co-founded the Columbia chapter of Students for Sensible Drug Policy.