Violation Of Drug Testing

I think it should be a federal law that all athletes should be tested before competing because performance enhancing drugs have a negative effect on long term health, they give an unfair advantage, and it could hurt other players because the drug could cause anger, drowsiness, and pain.

In the case of Vernonia v. Acton the fourth amendment is involved. The fourth amendment states that all people should be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Vernonia School District found that student athletes were participating in drug use after an official investigation, because of this they began requiring random drug testing for the students to participate in school sports. A student at the school, James Acton, and his parents did not consent to the random testing so he was not allowed to participate in football. Because he was not allowed, it was questioned if random drug testing of the student athletes violated the reasonable search and seizure clause of the fourth amendment.

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

Still in debate, the Supreme Court has yet to decided whether drug testing would interfere with the Fourth Amendment in such a way that it would restrict rights. Several individuals and states wish that the Court would rule in the drug testing favor, but from cases in the past, the chances are slim. The reason being that, unless they make it and requirement, random drug testing for the use of welfare is considered an unreasonable search.

Drug abuse has always been a very delicate question as it always it deals with the health, well-being and even lives of human beings belonging to any country. Many people have argued that mandatory drug testing is a violation of their civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment grants you the right against unreasonable searches and seizures, otherwise known as a person's right to privacy. However, employers have the right to know whether or not the people working under them are stable to do their jobs. Indeed, for safety of all the humans randomly drug testing is the best way to maintain the quality of the employees.

New Jersey statute N.J.A.C. 6A:16-4.4 raises a host of legal and financial issues for school district administrators. According to the law, when it comes to random testing of student alcohol and other drug use, districts that decide to do random drug tests must follow certain protocols to ensure students’ 4th Amendment rights are not violated.

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

The issue of drug testing in the workplace has sparked an ongoing debate among management. There are many who feel that it is essential to prevent risks to the greater public caused by substance abuse while on the job. However, others believe that the costs far outweigh the benefits and that it is an invasion of privacy. Putting all ethical issues aside, evidence presented in this paper supports the latter. The costs of drug testing are excessive and only a small percentage of employees are actually found to be substance users. Drug testing in the work place has a negative effect on productivity; contrary to what was originally intended. It actually decreases productivity

Mandatory Drug testing within schools reverses the legal principle of innocent until proven guilty and also violates the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution. Without suspicion of drug use, there is no probable cause to test student-athletes for drugs, thus violating the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unlawful searches. Drug testing student-athletes without acquiring sufficient evidence to base accusations on, is essentially asking them to provide the evidence of their own guilt which violates the Fifth Amendment right to protect

The Olympics now have various organizations and committees delegated to testing for and eliminating the use of performance enhancing drugs. The most recent Olympic committee for the Games in Vancouver was partnered with the World Anti-Doping Agency, the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, L’Institut national de la recherche scientifique — Institut Armand-Frappier, the United States Anti-Doping Agency, and LifeLabs to collect and test approximately 2450 blood and urine samples (“Anti-Doping Initiatives”). Their meticulousness and commitment was most definitely justified. Olympic athletes implicitly agree to a social contract of fair competition. Those athletes who take steroids have an unfair advantage over those who do not, and therefore these athletes are breaking this social contract.

The amount of homicides have increased by 7.4 percent in the past few year all of them were drug related. Drug testing High school athletes is a good idea because it has the kids pick a priority in life. It also teaches them responsibility and the consequences

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 many years, companies adopted many programs to monitor substance abuse in the workplace. The implementation of drug testing by companies grew in recent years. American workers have seen a dramatic increase in the use of drug testing in the previous years. Drug testing is implemented to assure safe workplaces for American workers. Drug testing can reduce the company’s health care and insurance costs. Even though drug testing has become common in the workplace, there is little research that exists regarding this matter. Overall, drug testing affects the decisions of workers by adopting a “zero tolerance” policy. Experienced users try to beat these tests by using drug to cancel the tracking of the drug itself. These workers attempt to avoid the detection of drug use for long periods (Borack, 1995).

In order to keep organization ethical as it relates to drug testing, the U.S. Supreme Court has approved four methods for drug testing. The organization can request a blood, breath, hair, or urine tests. These tests will not harm the job candidate or employee. The company will send the job candidate or employee to an off-site medical