|
Author: Ed Granger
Date: 2007-08-29 23:04
"We have been discussing this for some time now with many participants. Most seem to strongly decry drug testing programs. Yet, no one has offered a real alternative to identifying users."
I disagree, as I believe one has at least been strongly hinted at, if it wasn't stated explicitely. There are programs designed to teach parents, teachers, coaches, band directors, and adults who work with kids to spot not just those who are already using, but those who are at risk for using drugs. Interventions can then be delivered that are targeted at those kids. Testing programs can in fact be used in support of these programs with some benefit. However, too often, random testing programs are a lazy alternative to these programs. The problem with your statement quoted above is that it implies that drug testing programs work. The emerging evidence says that they don't, and that they may be counterproductive. So I'm not sure how it is even incumbent upon somone to suggest an alternative for something that is ineffective. The implication is that doing something is better than doing nothing, even when that "something" is mere (costly) window-dressing designed to make folks feel like they're doing something.
In an earlier post, you compared drug testing to locking your door - why would you make it easy for criminals. But your analogy falls short. Locking your door is simple, easy, and cheap. So even if it doesn't work, the peace of mind it provides may be worth the effort. But drug testing that doesn't work isn't worth the high price tag or the other negative consequences that locking your door doesn't bring.
Ed
Post Edited (2007-08-29 23:10)
|
|
|
GBK |
2007-07-31 12:06 |
|
Dano |
2007-07-31 13:26 |
|
clarinetwife |
2007-07-31 14:51 |
|
SVClarinet09 |
2007-07-31 15:37 |
|
marzi |
2007-07-31 15:42 |
|
Ed Granger |
2007-07-31 15:58 |
|
clarinetwife |
2007-07-31 16:17 |
|
larryb |
2007-07-31 17:15 |
|
gwie |
2007-07-31 17:20 |
|
bmcgar |
2007-07-31 17:40 |
|
GBK |
2007-07-31 17:44 |
|
clarinetwife |
2007-07-31 17:54 |
|
sfalexi |
2007-07-31 18:03 |
|
kev182 |
2007-07-31 18:13 |
|
Jack Kissinger |
2007-07-31 18:33 |
|
Ed Granger |
2007-07-31 18:55 |
|
EEBaum |
2007-07-31 18:44 |
|
Dano |
2007-07-31 19:17 |
|
Ed Granger |
2007-07-31 19:27 |
|
Tim P |
2007-07-31 20:09 |
|
Tony Beck |
2007-07-31 20:32 |
|
DavidBlumberg |
2007-07-31 20:28 |
|
bmcgar |
2007-07-31 20:42 |
|
Ski |
2007-07-31 20:53 |
|
EEBaum |
2007-08-01 07:44 |
|
gwie |
2007-08-01 08:26 |
|
joeyscl |
2007-08-02 21:43 |
|
Fred |
2007-08-04 03:08 |
|
Ski |
2007-08-04 03:57 |
|
MichaelR |
2007-08-04 14:21 |
|
bmcgar |
2007-08-04 03:20 |
|
Dano |
2007-08-04 04:14 |
|
Ed Granger |
2007-08-04 12:33 |
|
Fred |
2007-08-04 15:39 |
|
Ski |
2007-08-04 17:03 |
|
Fred |
2007-08-04 19:32 |
|
Ed Granger |
2007-08-04 22:00 |
|
Mark Charette |
2007-08-04 22:34 |
|
DavidBlumberg |
2007-08-04 22:42 |
|
Michael E. Shultz |
2007-08-04 23:00 |
|
Ski |
2007-08-04 23:28 |
|
Ed Granger |
2007-08-04 23:13 |
|
GBK |
2007-08-05 07:03 |
|
Dano |
2007-08-05 15:50 |
|
Michael E. Shultz |
2007-08-05 21:17 |
|
DavidBlumberg |
2007-08-06 00:51 |
|
bstutsman |
2007-08-07 20:57 |
|
bmcgar |
2007-08-21 03:57 |
|
bstutsman |
2007-08-21 04:59 |
|
Mark Charette |
2007-08-21 11:10 |
|
Dee |
2007-08-26 16:08 |
|
davyd |
2007-08-21 02:25 |
|
C2thew |
2007-08-21 05:08 |
|
Mark Charette |
2007-08-21 11:12 |
|
Ski |
2007-08-21 07:16 |
|
bstutsman |
2007-08-29 05:22 |
|
Ski |
2007-08-29 23:19 |
|
Lelia Loban |
2007-08-26 21:17 |
|
Dano |
2007-08-26 21:37 |
|
tictactux |
2007-08-26 21:49 |
|
Pam H. |
2007-08-28 02:37 |
|
GBK |
2007-08-28 02:52 |
|
Ski |
2007-08-28 02:56 |
|
Pam H. |
2007-08-28 22:37 |
|
jane84 |
2007-08-29 19:36 |
|
Wayne |
2007-08-29 20:25 |
|
bstutsman |
2007-08-29 21:06 |
|
Dano |
2007-08-29 21:00 |
   |
Re: Want to play in HS band? Pass a drug test |
|
Ed Granger |
2007-08-29 23:04 |
|
dfh |
2007-08-30 02:49 |
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
