Lawmakers And School Officials: Stay Out Of Our Bodily Wastes

Why is it that the same conservatives who so desperately want “big government” out of our lives are at the same time so darn eager to have officials involved in our urination? Despite major studies showing that suspicion-less drug testing is not an effective means of identifying or deterring drug use, state and federal officials continue to promote it.  That is true of both school-based drug testing and random workplace testing.

In 2011, Florida Governor Rick Scott (a Republican) attempted to require anyone seeking benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to submit a urine sample. No suspicion was required, nor was any previous arrest or conviction for a drug-related offense required. Being poor was the only suspicion needed.  Federal courts declared the program unconstitutional, although Scott spent nearly $400,000 fighting the court’s decision. And Florida spent $118,140 reimbursing the 3,938 TANF applicants who tested negative for drugs. Only 2.6 percent of people who were tested during the four months that the Florida program was in operation had results positive for drugs—a rate far lower than drug use among the general public. In fact, more than three times lower than the 8.13 percent of Floridians over the age of 12 who are estimated by the federal government to use illegal drugs. Tennessee’s program saw only one person out of the 800 who applied for assistance test positive.

In 2012, Georgia passed the Social Responsibility and Accountability Act, a virtual carbon copy of the recently-debunked Florida law, which requires all benefits recipients to pass a drug test. Note the name of the law, which highlights the disgusting assumption that persons receiving benefits cannot be trusted to be socially responsible or accountable unless they take a piss test. In all, at least 28 states introduced some type of drug testing for benefits recipients in 2012. The infatuation with drug testing poor people has not ended. In early August, Republican Governor Paul LePage of Maine announced his plan to drug test people applying for TANF, although at least this proposal is limited to those who have previous felony drug convictions.

It’s not just the poor who are targeted, however. Officials seem to believe that all teenagers are up to no good, hence a continued increase in school-based drug-testing. This fall, three Catholic schools in Ohio are drug testing their entire student bodies, requiring students to submit hair samples. Closer to my home, the Miami Dade Public Schools announced it will begin randomly testing students this fall as well. In 2011, Linn State Technical College in Linn, Missouri, enacted a controversial policy requiring drug testing for all incoming students and some returning students. It was declared unconstitutional in 2013. It seems the only people immune from being tested are lawmakers themselves, as John Stewart so keenly pointed out when he requested that Florida Governor Rick Scott submit to a urinalysis.

Of course, while testing programs are not cheap, with the cost passed on to taxpayers, the drug-testing business has fast become a multi-billion dollar industry, with huge amounts spent on lobbyists who demonize the poor and vulnerable in order to line their own pockets. They argue, as do the lawmakers who they buy, that people shouldn’t worry if they have nothing to hide. That’s bunk. Our excretory processes should be among the most private activities, hence why we have laws against public urination and, even in our own homes, most of us shut the door to the bathroom.

To be clear, I have no problem with drug testing based on actual suspicion. Clearly, if someone appears to be impaired by drugs in the workplace or at school, this suspicion could justify use of a urinalysis. But for increasing numbers of high school youth and people in need of public services, no suspicion is needed. Rather, it is simply presumed that they must prove their innocence by whizzing in a cup.

Laura Finley, Ph.D., teaches in the Barry University Department of Sociology & Criminology and is syndicated by PeaceVoice.

Students heading off to college for the first time or even to a new campus as a transfer are always full of questions. As an academic adviser at my university, I am happy to answer whatever a student or parent who accompanies their son or daughter might ask.  Most of the questions I have been asked, however, are related to the pathway to graduation and career opportunities thereafter.

While surely these are important areas for consideration, I believe that both students and their parents might benefit from asking a different set of questions that better gets at the real goal of higher education: to transform young people into people who can create a better world. To that end, I offer the following five potential questions that students and/or their parents should ask when they meet with academic advisers, university admissions staff, orientation leaders, or others with whom new students interact in their first few days. I briefly unpack each here, although surely many other extension questions can be appropriate as well.

1.    What is the classroom experience actually like? Will professors work hard to reach learners of all sorts?  This is essential, since we all know that people learn in many different ways. Since most of the education in the U.S (from K-12 through college) privileges verbal learners who can listen and take notes from which they study, this question is particularly important for those who require different teaching modes.

2.    Does advising focus only on coursework and timely graduation? Some might ask, but what else would it emphasize? The answer is: A lot! If faculty members are the advisers, these sessions can be an important one-on-one mentoring session in which career and life tips are shared. Good advisers can help students understand not only how to prepare for their careers but also how to use the skills and knowledge they are obtaining to better their communities.

3.    Are there opportunities for students to interact with faculty and staff outside of the classroom? Students can and should be offered opportunities to engage in campus and community service in which their professors are involved, as well as in research projects. These experiences not only add to students’ knowledge base but they also enhance their confidence and leadership skills.

4.    Is the campus safe?  Colleges and universities are responsible for creating safe educational spaces for students. This includes minimizing the risk that students will be harmed by some of the most common crimes occurring on campuses, like sexual assault and dating violence, but also that classrooms and other environments will be safe for students to express their beliefs and ideas without suffering emotional or physical danger. Is there any written campus civil discourse set of standards? Do professors protect that safe educational environment even when uncomfortable conversations are encouraged (for example, would a student be allowed to use a racial, gender, sexual, religious, or other identity slur)?

5.    Does the college or university celebrate the achievements of ALL students? As a former collegiate athlete, I surely benefitted from the privilege many colleges and universities afford to student-athletes in terms of accolades. But much research has shown that the best educational climates are those in which different skills and knowledges are not only acknowledged but applauded. That means that colleges and universities must be equally excited, and share that excitement, when the Ethics Bowl Team, the Model UN, or other clubs, organizations, or students achieve at high levels.

I believe that advisers should be able to respond to each of the above. If not, it says a lot about the institution.  In sum, students, and the parents or others who support them, deserve an education that will not only teach but transform. It is my hope that perhaps this line of inquiry can help people determine whether a specific college or university is the best place for that to occur.

Laura Finley, Ph.D., teaches in the Barry University Department of Sociology & Criminology and is syndicated by PeaceVoice.