High school students involved in extracurricular activities may now have to pay the price for using drugs.

A United States Supreme Court decision last spring, which legalizes drug testing for those students involved in extracurricular activities, has sparked a debate throughout many communities within the United States over whether or not the testing should even take place and if it does the means of testing that should be implemented.

This decision allowed not only athletes but anyone involved in any extracurricular activity to be tested for drugs.

Professor Richard Ellison, a constitutional law professor in the Syracuse University School of Law, said that the decision in the spring gave schools the right to test for drugs in any students involved in extracurricular activities but does not require drug testing.

“There are better ways for schools to spend money,” Ellison said. “They should make sure that every kid has a book and access to art and poetry.”

The Supreme Court ruling has not put an end to the controversy over drug testing among high school administrators.

Tim Chupaila, principal of of Fayetteville-Manlius High School, said his school is not currently testing students for drugs and has no plans in the works to begin testing,

“You have to look at your own school and community,” Chupaila said. “It is not something we want to do at this time.”

Thomas Tatham, athletic director at Cicero-North Syracuse High School, said athletes at his school are tested on a volunteer basis.

“Mandatory testing doesn’t work,” Tatham said. “It has been proven over and over again it is a sham because the kids know how to get around the test.”

Tatham said athletes who volunteer for the testing, as part of the school’s “Be Free. Be Proud.” program, are given discounts at several participating local businesses as a reward.

The courts and administrators are not the only people with differing opinions of the appropriate level of testing, as many SU students expressed varying opinions.

Edwin Escobar, a senior public relations and political science major, agrees with the Supreme Court that drug testing has a value but feels that it also has its limits.

“Random drug testing should be done on a case by case basis because people in a leadership position should be held to a higher standard than those in non-leadership positions,” Escobar said. “Leaders have responsibilities of importance that affect many people.”

The belief that drug testing is appropriate for certain people and not others is not held by everyone and the Supreme Court‘s ruling seemed to suggest that it would support the testing of all students citing a school’s responsibilities to its students.

Drew Bucktooth, a sophomore child and family studies major, agreed with the Supreme Court and said students involved in extracurricular activities should not be singled out for drug testing.

The disparity in student opinion shows what a difficult issue drug testing in high school is, some feel the actions will not affect the number of high school drug users but others are more optimistic.

Stephen De Jony, a sophomore history major, went to a catholic high school which tested all athletes for drugs and said that the drug testing in his school did not affect the amount of drug use within the school.

Mark Schweikert, a senior drama major, said as he gets older he gains perspective on the benefits of drug testing in high school.

“I would not have liked the idea,” Schweikert said. “As I get older, I would not want my own kids to do (drugs).”

Published on September 30, 2002 at 12:00 pm