Student Athletes Should Not Be Drug Tested Essay

In many high schools around the country, student athletes are using drugs. “The percent of students that have drunk alcohol is 72.5% while the number of students who have used marijuana is 36.8%” (Report: Nearly Half of High School Students Using Drugs, Alcohol). The students believe that since they are athletes that they do not need to abide by the rules because they feel more superior and that the narcotic will not hurt or affect them. Implementing random drug tests for athletes will create a positive image and not hurt others or themselves. Schools need to have drug tests for student athletes because drugs effect relationships, using drugs have consequences, and lastly they have a major effect on the body.

Drug testing athletes or even just college students is against the students and Linn State’s fourth amendment rights. College students have the right to be secure in themselves, house, and papers. “On the con side of the argument, the American Civil Liberties Union along with with students attending Linn State say that drug testing of all college students is against the law and violation of their fourth amendment right” (Clabaugh 3). According to Jason Clabaugh, students have a right to not be drug tested because of their fourth amendment of having the right to be secure of themselves. Also sometimes test can lead to false positives. “On the con side of testing the college student athlete population, drug tests can often lead to false positives” (Clabaugh 4). Although, it’s likely to be a false positive it might not

The use of illegal substances is rapidly increasing in the college sports due to the expansion of supplements used by athletes that are being banned. In a study done, athletes were asked if illicit drugs would negatively impact their performance. Majority of them responded “yes”, their main reasoning being; the effects of illicit drugs were both mental and physically damaging. Illicit drugs come in many forms, but the testing procedures are all the same for any substance. There is almost always a consequence with the use of prohibited substances. Drug testing is appropriate to help ensure the safety of student athletes while they participate in intercollegiate contests. (Krotee, M 555).

By now, four years had passed since the issue had first started. In the end, the court had ruled six to three in favor of the district. The court answered the question of whether or not the student athletes’ Fourth Amendment rights were violated with a strong no. The court claimed that student athletes already subject themselves to more exposure than most other students, and that these drug tests had just as much of a reasonable cause behind them as a vaccine requirement or scoliosis check done in-school. Moreover, the court also stated that the results would only be shared with limited personal, which made the tests arguably more private than what athletes were exposing in their open locker rooms. In their opinion, stated by Antonin Scalia, “We find that the privacy...by the process of obtaining the urine samples (is) negligible, since samples are collected under conditions nearly identical to those routinely encountered in public restrooms. Furthermore, the test looks only for standard drugs not private medical conditions and the results of the test are released only to a limited group of school officials who have a need to know the information. The nature and the immediacy of the government's interest and the efficacy of this means for meeting it, also contribute to our conclusion that the policy is reasonable. The importance of deterring drug use by public school children

Athletes should take drug tests because they might be cheating in their games and competitions. They should take their tests at least once every month and one before they compete in a game to make sure it's fair for everyone. Throughout the years, there have been cases in which the athlete uses drugs right before entering a competition like the Olympics. An African-American woman who was competing in the Olympics used drugs to get an advantage from all the other athletes, and she won the gold medal all the time. Once she was about to retire, she confessed that she was using drugs the whole time and was stripped of all of her gold medals that she won while using her drugs. If she actually tried to win the medal fairly, she could've done it

Drugs in sports is becoming a problem everywhere. “Another 26-year old athlete died of liver cancer after taking a number of different types of steroids over a four year period ” (Drugs and…). This is significant because this shows how dangerous drugs can be. If we have drug testing in schools this student could still be alive and would have stopped drugs before it got bad. The evidence points to the fact that drugs are a major health risk that is very concerning. In some cases taking drugs can even lead to death. In addition, another situation took place that affected a college student named Bob. Bob tried everything to gain weight so he could play football, so he chose to try steroids like everyone else. Steroids got him to play professional football, but horrible things were happening to him. He was having serious health problems. Bob quit drugs and is lucky to be alive (Drugs and…). This connects to the fact that doing drugs is a major

Some people may say that mandatory drug testing is a violation of the athletes’ Fourth Amendment right. According to some people, these tests are unnecessary and therefore violate these rights. The author of “Mandatory Drug Testing Violates Rights” believes that drug testing is a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution; “Courts have ruled that drug tests are a search. A search is a privacy issue, and there has to be a reason for the search.” This is true. Drug tests are a search, and in some cases they may violate the rights of some citizens. Professional athletes, on the other hand, do not get their rights violated by this. This does not violate the Fourth Amendment because the athletes have already agreed to the rules of participating in the sport. Deborah Lee and Ann Griswold, authors of “Point: Athletes Should be Tested for Drugs” explains that “in none of these cases have athletes’ Constitutional rights been abrogated because the participation in athletic events is always voluntary and never mandatory. The ‘mandate’ only comes into play after the athlete has agreed to participate, thereby voluntarily agreeing to obey the rules of the sport.” This explains how the athletes have agreed to the rules of the activity, which in most cases prohibit the use of many performance enhancing substances, so since they have agreed to these conditions, the mandatory drug testing of athletes is not a violation of their rights. An athlete’s rights are not being violated by

Rains, B. (2009). Testing Student Athletes for Drugs is Appropriate. In C. Watkins, Sports and Athletes (pp. 192-196). Detroit: Greenhaven Press.

Drug testing student athletes have helped lower drug abuse in high school and middle school. According to The National Center of Addiction and Substance Abuse, 15 to 17 percent of student athletes have failed their drug test. People believe that the student athletes should be drug tested before big games and events such as a state tournament. Drug testing needs to go around schools before big events and games to check for play enhancers and drugs, such as steroids.

Testing for performance-enhancing drugs protects student-athletes who play by the rules by being clean (NCAA Drug Testing Program). When all of the players are restricted from steroid use it makes the game fair and allows it to be correctly played. In addition, steroid use has become a supplement for many who simply do not want to put in the work or effort to become a better athlete (Steroids and Football). Furthermore, replacing workouts with drugs isn’t a fair tradeoff for those who do become stronger and a more efficient athlete by strengthening themselves. Everyone should have to play by the rules of the game and respect them. In the 1960s, before drug-testing laws were implemented, football coach Sid Gillman actually gave each player a steroid to improve their performance before they stepped onto the field (Steroids and Football). Obviously now that has changed due to testing years later, but the impact it made on each player and the game continues to show why it is so imperative that drug testing for student-athletes should be

College athletes must make sure there body is performing as good as their mind wants to compete. All drugs should be banned in college due to it being a no brainer and they are banned for everyone. There is a controversial subject in which the extra list of “banned substances”, also known as performance enhancing drugs, are banned for college athletes, yet not for everyone of the student body. Every year more and more drugs get added to the list that college athletes can’t use or they will get tested and end up ruining their practice time, game time, and more importantly their career if they drink the wrong protein drink. Athletes should be able to drink whatever supplement they want and not have to be worried about a drug test. It isn’t fair to athletes in college when everyone else gets

The NCAA does legitimate interest in the well being and health of these student-athletes, and the student- athletes are well aware of the testing the NCAA does and their reasoning, since they all submit to physical examinations prior to participation. Leading up to this trial the court case was in favor of Hill. Hill’s position was that the extensiveness of these NCAA administered tests do violate the student athletes rights by requiring them to disclose medications they were using, doing a drug test in front of a monitor, and providing a urine sample to undergo more test to reveal chemicals and other substances in the body. The trial for this case explained how the NCAA was overboard because it banned the use of over the counter prescriptions and medicines that were designed to improve the health of an athlete. The issue that was arising in trial that lead to the court case was if the NCAA was violating the student athletes Fourth Amendment, after analysis and deliberation that answer would turn out to be

Slowly pushing students to become addicts, drug testing high school student athletes may or may not be to blame. In Facts & Statistics on Random Drug Testing of High School Students, Dr. M.H. Davis stated, “In the early 1990s, many school districts began to look into drug testing as a way to curb student drug use, which led to two U.S. Supreme Court cases involving student privacy. The court upheld the constitutionality of drug testing student athletes in 1995, and in 2002, the court expanded high school drug testing policies to include all students who participate in a competitive extracurricular activity. In those rulings, the court stated deterring student drug use was more important than privacy” (Davis). Drug testing high school athletes

In recent years the number of athletes caught using drugs has increased dramatically. The use of a illegal or unprescribed drugs can cause serious problems and unfairness in many ways. Certain drugs can cause harm to the user and the people around the user, most student athletes do not even know what they are putting into their bodies. With all the risks many persons propose student athletes to be drug tested at random.

Introducing the fear to students on drug testing that will directly affect them, will most likely decrease the use of drugs being abused. The president of the Institute for Behavior and Health explains that RSDT (Random Student Drug Test) could be used on any athlete, any day, and any time without notice (DuPont et al ¶6). Making the testing random will help eliminate any cheating or strategizing that the students who would test positive could be doing. Keith Ablow, MD and psychiatrist published an article in 2011 said that, both varsity and junior varsity teams should be tested with results kept private (¶6). To only test Varsity athletes would be unacceptable because JV athletes could cause just as much harm to athletes around them as to themselves. To make it fair and because kids follow by example, coaches would test also (Ablow ¶ 9). When a positive test appears, there should be punishment, but not to the extent of expulsion. Guidelines to RSDT programs say it is not supposed to end up in punishment for drug tests (DuPont et al ¶25). Not giving any punishment would defeat the purpose because then kids would not care to stop their drug use. Random drug tests to not only student-athletes, but students in general will promote a healthier lifestyle without drug use (DuPont et al ¶5). Students should be on edge not knowing if they are going to be tested or