Although there is conflicting data on whether drug testing deters drug use in students, it has be proven to keep workplaces drug free. If you fail a drug test, you should not be allowed to work with children. Other childcare workers such as bus drivers are drug tested. Here is MA, we have seen drug-addicted teachers showing students how to inject heroin. Keeping our schools safe should be our priority. Why not drug test all school employees?

DRUG FREE SCHOOL ZONE Administrators, teachers, staff and volunteers on school property who are unwilling to submit to random drug testing are practicing YOUTHISM. Youthism is is a form of age discrimination, discrimination against a person on the grounds of that person's youth.

FAA technicians, Air Traffic Controllers,law unforcement and public safety personnel, amoung many others all require drug testing. It seems to me anyone paid by public money and embued with the public trust should should subject to drug testing. Teachers are entrusted with the safety, education, and future of our children. They certainly fit within those guidelines. As a profession many, not all, teachers feel that they are beyond the pale of the rest of the general population. However, the post positive testing protocols should be fair, equitable, and positive in outcomes.

Unfortunately we have had several experiences in which teachers have been under the influence in the classroom as well as on the roads. Students are aware of it and even in my youth (1955)at age 7 can remember the teacher who smelled like alcohol and acted irrationally from day to day. I do see the need for some type of testing. As a counselor, I recognize addiction as cutting across all professions and levels of intelligence. Addiction is no respector of position, credentials or degrees.

Medical tests (urine) are not best used to make employment decisons. Medicine is about healing. The best use of urine toxicology is as part of a recovery program. In such a context you have practitioners who understand the complexity of inferring drug and alcohol use from urine results and also how to help people take this information and use it to change their lives for the better. In employment situations, you have people who want black and white answers and who have less interest in helping or fostering recovery. A good example is the current interest in ethyl glucuronide, a urine metabolite of alcohol, in inferring recent use of alcohol. This technology is so new that SAMSHA advises against using it in any but a clinical setting because we don't understand how gender, ethnicity, physical pathology and other factors affect this test. But some employers use it anyway to make decisions about jobs. We must guard against being so eager to deal with the scourge of substance use in schools and workplaces that we use technology in ways that are not supported by science and that are of questionable benefit when we consider the big picture of bringing recovery.

We are trusting teachers with our children. If we do not set a standard that drug use is not acceptable for our teachers I am afraid we are failing as a nation. I believe a random drug testing policy along with the option to seek help if a teacher fails is appropriate and desperately needed. As parents, we need to make sure our children are with trusted professional adults in a nurturing safe environment.

I would think that most districts already have both "for cause" and initial employment drug screening in place. Random testing is appropriate for DOT positions (airline personnel, train engineers, river pilots, etc.), but I'm not sure what a district would want to accomplish by instituting random testing of teachers. I think you need to look at historical data and see how many terminations or "suggested" resignations were drug/alcohol based and move from there. If there have been a large number, then your screening process isn't working very well. I'd rather see the money going into the classroom programs or teacher's salaries than literally being flushed down the toilet. On the other hand, please let me know when thr RFPs come out; sounds like some lucrative contracts.

Anyone who works with children should be subject to the closest scrutiny, including drug-testing. How can we expect that our children are getting the "drug-free" message when their teachers are not living that message? Last year there were two instances in my community of teachers being arrested for maintaining a household where illegal drugs were present. This type of publicity diminishes the public trust. Would it not be better to deal with these issues internally (within the school system) before it becomes public knowledge? If these employees were actually using illegal drugs, drug-testing would have alerted school officials that there was a problem and given them the opportunity to deal with it. The bottom line is: if you have to be drug-tested to work at Wal Mart, you should also have to be drug-tested to work in public schools.

The thought that the NEA wouldn't want its member to be tested for drug use in the classrooms where our children are taught the dangers of drug use is absurd. Not surprising, but absurd. What are they protecting their members from??? You can't teach if you're not a member of the NEA, and this is what they bring to our classrooms. gary in florida

Since drug-testing is so widespread, with virtually every employer using this tool, I am surprised (to say the least) to learn that pubic school employees, who are entrusted with developing our country's most valuable resource (our children), are exempt from drug-testing. Last year there were two instances of teachers being arrested for maintaining a dwelling where illegal drugs were present. Now I understand how this might have been prevented.

Why not randomly drug test all parents, since they are the main influence on the little terrors. The reality is that some medication is probably needed to "teach" children doomed by a society of nitwits.

Everyone should be randomly drug tested, from the president to the congressmen, to the parents of the students, to the school administrators etc. When a society singles out groups for this type of personal, potentially medical issues,it is an invasion of privacy. If a 'community culture' develops within the school system, then this would not be necessary, but since this country has developed into an individualism is 'king,' rather than a societal community, this is what we have ~ drug testing. While we are at it why not randomly drug test law enforcement or firefighters? The cost to the taxpayers, like in the Transportation sector, has proven to be a farce and a waste.

From reading the other comments, I think that there is a misunderstanding about RANDOM DRUG TESTING. It is not employment drug testing, that is prevalent in most areas~ no this is, it is 4 pm on a Friday and a person it told to go to the collection site, wherever it is, to leave their specimen. RANDOM is anytime, not just pre~employment. There are no excuses, if you have physician appointment, you have waited months to get and you get the RANDOM notice~ too bad, you must take the drug test first. It is a very dehumanizing, archaic and waste of money proposition.

I agree with Alnola that if there is just cause to test a teacher then test that teacher. I am more concerned with child predators infiltrating schools as teachers than I am the alcoholic or the drug using teacher. If a teacher is intoxicated at work be it drugs or alcohol then FIRE that teacher ASAP. I do not believe a person should be persecuted for activities done miles from school property and far from school hours unless it be of a child predatory nature. ALL school officials should be of the prevention mindset and NOT be teaching drug use period.

We just had a math teacher here in the Chicago area arrested for smoking marijuana in the teacher faculty bathroom. Too many times when this happens there is no arrest, the teacher is allowed to resign and ends up using drugs in the next school district. Random drug testing should be just one part of a comprehensive substance abuse polcy that includes employee prevention education, E.A.P. assistance programs, and for-cause on-scene impairment testing.

What color is the sky in Mr. Simpson's world?! To review his comment "would be in our view a waste of money, because there is no problem that a drug-testing program can address". Please tell us you are not implying that you are under the misconception that there are no teachers abusing drugs. Puh-leese! So, to follow one line of logic, if we identify those individuals, they can be helped by, say, gee, an EAP, or other program. (or take a page out of other unions notebooks and let the union shop handle it) Then if an individual continues to abuse prescription or illicit drugs, it can be dealt with. Break down the walls of the last good ol' boy organization, (public education) ask for accountability, and let in the light. (and a reality check) Your comment reminds me of the ROSITA study- a certain country had issues with roadside testing because in their minds, nobody in that country EVER drove under the influence. Yeah, right.

Just another way to blame teachers for societies ill. I agree with the comment that if they decide to do this, why not submit the parents to random testing too?! Where and when does it ever stop?!

If there is nothing to hide, why worry? Addiction is not predjudice. I think someone is finally on to something! They shouldnt be exempt. And, Parents do get tested!! Parents are workers too. If a teacher is "using" then they should be held accountable. Everyone else is. WE need to work together to fight addiction. That means everyone.

Good idea. This one sure has hit a few sore spots! Donna Parsons speaks of the dehumanizing random drug tests that do nothing? Oh, but they do. They show if someone is using a substance. For those of us who work with the justice systems, this is a big thing. And it should ge a big thing for teachers, as well, for if they are using (and I don't give a hoot if it is away from the school campus) they are teaching that illicit drug use is OK. And if we don't want our high school kids dealing and using weed, cocaine, meth, --whatever-- then we shouldn't condone their role models using it, either. And if we as a society don't believe this, then why are illicit drugs illicit in the first place?

Really good comments here-20 yrs ago a random test saved my life. I lost the job, but I have a great life & a better job today because of the test...start testing now!!

So a recent article was describing how a 13 year old girl was strip searched because she was suspected of having prescription strength ibuprofen in her possession and the school defended the action. Yet the union does not think teachers should have random drug screens? This article talks about kids being drug tested by the schools that don't want the teachers tested. What hypocracy! Random tests prevent use because you don't know when or if you will be tested.

I have been drug tested for pre-employment screening because I would possibly be handling equipment orders for the government. God forbid an employee handling our children be held to the same scrutiny. This coming from a very liberal. personal rights proponent.

I AM SHOCKED! It seems you have all been blinded. You have bought into government propaganda that there is a problem that must be addressed by urine voodoo! I want you to ask yourselves, what your parents or grandparents would have said if you told them they had to pee in a pot in order to get or hold a job! This is sick. Shame on you all.

NEA should check out Houston, over the past few months at least six teachers have been found to have drugs in their cars at school...if in their cars.....test em is what I think we should do.

Drug-testing shouldn't raise eyebrows but concerns regarding our esteemed institution of higher learning not higher being. Safeguards in schools should be revered as much as our homeland security. Safe is safe and society places the safety and well-being in the hands of a drug-free system. Interventions are a precursor to treatment and that is costly. Look at the war on drugs and how it has failed on both sides of the border. Abuse that leads to addiction that leads to dependency is alot more costly than flushing urine down a toilet.

To the commenters here who have raised objections about drug testing on medical privacy grounds, the DOT model addresses that very effectively. And Dave, no responsible employer uses ETG for alcohol unless that employee has already gottem him/herself into a zero-tolerance situation. Even then, it is very rarely used, and administered by the treatment program as part of a last-chance employment agreement.

Most school districts do not pre-employment test anyone but their bus drivers. I'm frankly surprised at the few disticts mentioned here that do ANY testing. There is case law regarding testing of public employees. Because while a drug test is not a medical test, it is a "search" according to some supreme court case from the 70s. So then a suspicionless (pre-employment, random, post-accident)test is a warrantless search. Private sector employers have the right to require those as a condition of employment, but government may not conduct warrantless searches. At least that's the way the 9th District Court of Appeals saw it in 2000 or maybe early 2001.

Police random testing runs into a very practical issue -- what do you do with the gun belt? They certainly can't take it off and toss it in the trunk of their patrol car, or hand it to the collection site staff. And you can't let them wear it into the restroom, or you have trashed the integrity of the process. The only solution is to test at the precinct before they leave, and then there are union and privacy issues. As for firefighters . . . deep sigh . . . they have a very strong union and are viewed as heroes to such an extent that lawmakers are cowed by them. While I appreciate the work of all public safety staff, I'd love to see firefighters' exemption to DOT regs ended.

Brinna, you have to have an open mind. YES..drugs and alcohol are a problem for EVERYONE. IF someone isnt using, they are still affected by someone close to them. Teachers are no different. Finally , someone is looking beyond what we normally see being a problem for these issues. Teachers may be the only ones that children have when a parent or both parents are in active addiction. So by helping our teachers, we are helping everyone. We are all in this together whether we like it or not! ACCEPTANCE!!!!

oh, great. So the drug testing argument is to be couched in "we're helping them". Pre-emptive druy testing is bad - look what happened with pre-emptive war. That's what it comes down to - another war. The war on drugs is a failure and unbelievaly expensive because we treat an addiction as a crime instead of a medical problem. When 42% of our population at least admits to using "illicit" drugs, isn't it time to decriminalize drug use? Do we want 50% and more of our citizens criminalized and out of work? If a teacher is performing well and getting results in the classroom, leave them alone. Their occasional recreational drug use is no threat to children, no more than a cocktail enjoyed in the privacy of their home and their life. Wake up people - do you want to live in a police state. Check you history. Did it work well in the Soviet Union? East Germany? Saudi Arabia? and many others. Is this the sort of security you want? Slippery slope people, slippery slope...

oh, great. So the drug testing argument is to be couched in "we're helping them". Pre-emptive drug testing is bad - look what happened with pre-emptive war. That's what it comes down to - another war. The war on drugs is a failure and unbelievably expensive because we treat an addiction as a crime instead of a medical problem. When 42% of our population at least admits to using "illicit" drugs, isn't it time to decriminalize drug use? Do we want 50% and more of our citizens criminalized and out of work? If a teacher is performing well and getting results in the classroom, leave them alone. Their occasional recreational drug use is no threat to children, no more than a cocktail enjoyed in the privacy of their home and their life. As a nation we have been conditioned to living in fear and seeing threats where there are none. Most successful policy under Bush. Wake up people - do you want to live in a police state. Check your history. Did it work well in the Soviet Union? East Germany? Saudi Arabia? and many others. Is this the sort of security you want? Slippery slope people, slippery slope...

If you Smoke Weed every other night and you work in a Drug Free Job; The Manager has sent all the other employees for the Drug Screening EXCEPT for This Lady who she claims she can't send her for a drug test right now because she needs her to fill a position of a person who is out sick with the flu. Everyone there KNOWS she gets High. I have a friend that she smokes it with.....that's how I got this information. What should BE DONE ABOUT THIS??? ShouldN'T she be drug tested as well?