Anti opioid rally 2014
Public Schools and the Drug Fantasies of the State House
First let me start off by saying that the opioid crisis is
real and something is needed to be done. Overall it is a good thing that the State
House recently passed an opioid bill.
The bill mandates drug screenings for public school
children.
However’ there does not seem to be any evidence that the
crisis is particularly acute in public schools.
In fact the statistical evidence is that drug use of any kind among high
schools is declining.
The National Institute on Drug Abuse in a recent report said
the following.
“2014’s Monitoring the Future survey of drug use
and attitudes among American 8th, 10th, and 12th graders continued to show
encouraging news about youth drug use, including decreasing use of alcohol,
cigarettes, and prescription pain relievers; no increase in use of marijuana;
decreasing use of inhalants and synthetic drugs, including K2/Spice and bath
salts; and a general decline over the last two decades in the use of illicit drugs.
Misuse and abuse (or
“non-medical use”) of prescription and over-the-counter drugs continues to
decline among the nation’s youth. Past-year use of the opioid pain reliever
Vicodin has dropped significantly over the past 5 years; 4.8 percent of 12th
graders used Vicodin for non-medical reasons in 2014, compared to 9.7 percent
in 2009. Past-year use of narcotics other than heroin (which includes all
opioid pain relievers) among high school seniors dropped from 7.1 percent in
2013 to 6.1 percent in 2014; 9.5 percent of seniors had reported past-year use
of these drugs in 2004”.
The private schools are not required to carry out drug
screenings. Given that this is a medical
issue it seems prejudicial that the State Legislature was silent on drug screening
for private schools. There are State laws on vaccinations that apply private
schools.
This seems to be another matter where the public school
children are treated in a disparate and maybe an unlawful manner. The issue of mandatory drug screening certainly
raises Fourth Amendment issues of searches by government agencies without
problem cause. In this matter it is a search without reasonable cause.
The drug screenings are to be conducted by school nurses or
other medical personnel. I do not think
each high school and middle school in Worcester has a school nurse; many of
them were eliminated in budget cuts while ago. It is likely that there will be
more layoffs next fiscal year due to school underfunding.
In theory the parents of a child is able to opt out her
child from the drug screening. This raises process and procedure questions as
how the parents will be informed about the substance and implication of the
drug screening and how to opt her child out.
There are also questions about medical records. From
experience in discrimination law every “oral“warning was actually written down
and place in the employee’s file. I am pretty sure that the same will happen
with these drug screenings.
I cannot imagine the process would be if the nurse or other
interrogator came to the conclusion that a child was abusing drugs. Such a conclusion is likely an automatic
suspension from school. Although the
conversations with medical personnel are “confidential”, it is not the same as
the lawyer client privilege. The medical personnel can be summoned to give an
affidavit or to court.
The Mass Human Rights and PLP plan to raise these issues
with the Worcester School Administration and the School Committee. It seems
like an issue other groups should be interested like CPPAX and School Not Jail.
With the transition to a new Superintendent Worcester might
not get to these issues for a while. How
other school district handle this new drug screening mandate could prove
helpful.
Perhaps the Worcester
Legislative Senators and Representatives and the Governor’s office can sponsor
an information session on how to carry out this mandate without violating the
children’s civil rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment