Parents question new drug testing policy

Friday, September 11, 2009

Steve Moyer - Nevada Daily Mail

Three parents spoke at the Nevada R-5 Board of Education meeting Wednesday evening concerning the recently enacted drug-testing policy at the high school. One patron, Mike Freeze who had spoken beforehand to R-5 Superintendent David Stephens, Ph.D., presented a study he said showed that drug-testing students actually hurt the educational process. Stephens said he thought the study was not accurate and he didn't believe it. Freeze then stormed out of the meeting.

Another unidentified father, who was much more civil, questioned whether he could be with his son if he was chosen to be tested.

"I don't have a problem with him being tested," the father said. "As a matter of fact you can test him all day long. I'd just like to know if you choose him to be tested if I could be there."

Stephens replied that because of the time involved there would be no time for the father to get to the school before the testing would be done.

"The way it works is the collection company would call us up and say they were on their way and to have the students on their list ready to test when they got there," Stephens said. "There just wouldn't be any advance notice."

The board selelcted Employee Screening from the firms submitting bids, to collect the samples and do the testing for the districts random drug testing policy. Employee Screening, which has offices in Joplin, will select the names of students to be tested, collect the samples, and do the testing.

The board also voted to increase the out-of-district tuition rate, which has remained steady for several years. Stephens said the per pupil cost to the district was more than $7,800 per year and the district currently charges between $2,200 and $2,800 per year depending on grade level. The new rate is $5,500 per year.

There are currently 12 students who pay the out-of-district rate and Stephens said those students should not have to pay the entire amount of the increase all at once so the motion to increase the tuition included a clause that current students would have their tuition increased gradually to the new rate.

Stephens updated the board on enrollment and said the high school numbers were down slightly from last year as were the numbers for Benton. Truman and Bryan elementary schools saw their number increase slightly. The attendance rate for the district is 94 percent, which Stephens said was typical for Missouri.

Stephens told the board that the vote to extend the levy on Nov. 8 is an important issue, since revenues were down and the future income from the foundation formula was in doubt.

"We should see the full formula next year but it looks pretty bleak after that," Stephens said. "We need to let the patrons know that we're not asking for one penny more, we're just asking to continue at the same level they authorized 10 years ago."

Denise Nelson, Health Services coordinator, updated the board on the district's health services and a contingency plan in case the H1N1 flu virus is confirmed in the district. Nelson said the fever point at which students are sent home is 100.0 degrees, the same as it has been for several years.

"We need to make sure they go home and stay home until they've been fever-free for 24 hours without medication," Nelson said. "We have a checklist of five items we sent to parents. If two of the five are checked the child should stay home and be kept home for three to five days."

The district will use its Web site and the phone contact system to keep parents informed of the flu situation.

Comments

View 12 comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

How long before they round up the kids and send them off away from the influence of parents?

Can forced work camps for the undesirables be far behind? I find life in Nevada to be more and more Draconian as the years go by.

As a friend so succinctly put it "Welcome to Nevada the home of our daily disappointment!

Isn't this how things got started in Germany. First you lose a little freedom and then a little more and before too long your in Aushwitz....

-- Posted by cats_attic on Fri, Sep 11, 2009, at 6:59 PM
I think it is very sad that the School System has to resort to drug testing to keep the children in a community from doing illeagle drugs. Evedentally signing a document stateting that they will refrain from such acts means nothing to them.

If this will keep one child from using METH or driving while intoxicated.

AMEN.

Maybe if the parents that have problems would be parents to their kids instead of a best friend than the schools would not neet to go to the expense of drug testing.

-- Posted by Mom 101 on Mon, Sep 14, 2009, at 7:36 AM
Well said. My children are through school but if they were still there test them. Test my grandchildren!!! Parents are many times the last to know because they are to close to the problem or choose to turn a blind eye when the signs are there. Good for the School!!!

-- Posted by ccmom on Mon, Sep 14, 2009, at 7:49 AM
Well done, test them everyday, because obviously there are parents who don't have a clue what their children are doing or don't care as long as they are out of their hair!! Parents need to start sitting down with their kids at dinner time (does anyone know what that is anymore)and talk about their day and what's going on in school you'll be amazed what your child will tell you, that is I guess if your lucky to have a son or daughter that will open up and tell you what's going on, but it all starts at a early age, so parents who have kids in grade school start talking and do more listening. Luckily our oldest child has only one more year before she graduates from this school and get out of this town and go to college somewhere and find out their is life outside of this area. Our youngest goes to a christian school and there is noway I will let her go to public school, she loves her school and has a better education!!! My last calculations there is 9 pregnant girls in high school, they must consider their life being over at the ripe old age of what 25!

-- Posted by mu fan on Mon, Sep 14, 2009, at 11:50 AM
I think that this issue should not be in schools. This goes against anything that is morally right. It is not fair for someone to do something as random as this. Would you like it if some one told you all of sudden that you had to be tested without probable cause I think not. This goes to all the parents that don't take the time to talk to their children. I think that the more parents talk to their kids the less likely the are to get into destructive choices. The schools are made to teach future Americans and not act like the parents. It is up to the parents to protect their children. I go to the Nevada High School and every day it seems that the school system and the prison system are the same only the schools don't have a fence. For those of you guessing on how they get the money to do this testing well it come's straight out of the taxpayers money. Any child that you have that goes to the school's is paying for that same test. I hope to see one day that schools are less strict then they are now, and that the student's have a superintendent that is under no influence of outside his ore her job.

-- Posted by blockice4 on Tue, Sep 15, 2009, at 4:29 PM
I agree 100% with the drug testing policies! The school are there to teach and protect our children! And there are several people that I believe need to open their eyes to the drug problem that is in Vernon County!! I remember in high school signing a piece of paper saying that I was not going to be around or participate in drugs/tabacco/alcohol and I remember several team members signing that piece of paper and then partying almost every weekend! Kids now days are not any different! If the fact of my child having the possiblility of being pulled in for a random test helps keep them honest and true to not only themselves but their team and family then I will support these tests!! Peer pressure can be a very big factor in kids and if they can tell their so called 'friends' "No, I could be in the next random tests" and their 'friend' accept that answer and leave them be... then why not? I will accept any help that the school system will place to keep my children on track and helping them with making the right choices!

The only thing I would like to see happen with this policy is that the teachers/administration/coaches also get put into the system to be called on as well for a random test. I firmly believe that all of these people should be able to show our children that they are not any different and if they are going to teach/coach them they too should be held to the same policy as all of their students.

-- Posted by ftballmom on Fri, Sep 18, 2009, at 8:10 AM
IF EVERY EMPLOYEE OF NEVADA WERE MADE TO TAKE A "RANDOM" DRUG TEST ONCE A YEAR, YOU WOULD BE SURPRISED BY THOSE WHO WOULD BE THE FIRST TO COMPLAIN, AND MORE SURPRISED BY THOSE WHO FAILED THE TEST.

-- Posted by resident65 on Sun, Sep 20, 2009, at 9:43 AM
I know...next the School Board can test our young women in our Middle and High Schools to see if they are sexually active. Obviously they are minors and not able to give consent. Therefore, we have a violation of law and a bunch of statutory rapists disguised as young male students. Perhaps this will deter all of these young people from having sex and curb the alarming rate of teen pregnancy in Vernon Co.

Come on folks, do you really think this is going to stop drugs?? If a student is a drug user then they just don't go out for sports or "co-curricular" activities. Just another opportunity missed to educate these young people and give them something else to do other than drugs (like Nevada has so much for a young person to do). I'm guessing the School Board has SO much money that they just couldn't find anything else to spend it on....

And another thing...I agree with an earlier post in that we need to test our Board, Faculty and Administrators as well. These are the folks who should know better....

-- Posted by Eriedoc on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, at 5:00 PM
Far too often, students believe it is their right instead of a privilege to obtain an education through our public school system. I would much rather my tax dollars be spent on saving or straightening young lives.

Now with that said, I wish this policy would have been established when I was a student. Maybe it would have saved me from years of abusing the bottle. With no policies then, it made partying behind the White Grill easy. And when I say easy, I mean easy to obtain any type of drug a young person wanted. What we did then was wrong, and it is still wrong today.

Now, many years of sobriety later and accepting responsibility for my own actions, I can say first-handed that drugs are a problem in every school. And until a school takes a stand in putting a stop to the use among students, the problem will only escalate.

Teachers are there to teach a precious gift, not to baby-sit students under the influence who wish to do nothing more than disrupt their peers who are in class to gain an education.

Congratulations to the R5 District for taking a step into saving our leaders of tomorrow. My wish is to see other schools also adopt this policy.

-- Posted by Jessie on Wed, Sep 23, 2009, at 1:52 PM
In my opinion, if you receive or benefit from tax money, you should be tested. Parents of children who don't like drug testing policies are the same ones who believe children actually have "rights." The only "rights" children have are to be safe from abuse and provided food and shelter. The constitution applies to LEGAL ADULTS. Free speech, privacy and search and seizure do not apply to minor children. That's why criminal laws are different for children, they're NOT ADULTS. Children are just that. If my tax money is going toward someone else's kid's education, then I say test them, and test them often.

-- Posted by chris on Fri, Sep 25, 2009, at 8:29 AM
Jesse...congratulations on your sobriety and I wish you the best of luck. However, I still disagree with you. I grow weary anytime the state believes that it has the responsibility to do what we as parents should be doing. I understand that all parents do not raise their children in such a way as to give them the tools to "just say no" or to remove themselves from such activity. This policy is in place in several towns a crossed our state since the Missouri Supreme Court gave them the ability to do so. And the result has shown that drugs are just as prevalent in those towns as anywhere. This policy does nothing more than to keep students who use drugs from participating in school activities. Maybe that's your argument, if you use drugs you shouldn't be able to participate. That argument makes more sense than this phantom war on drugs the School Board is selling. They are not protecting anyone nor are they stopping the use of drugs. The Board is not testing everyone...only a select few but just because they have the authority...doesn't mean that they should.

Chris..."if you receive or benefit from tax money, you should be tested"...well, we all benefit from tax money. By way of our roads and bridges...to the library you should be sitting in...all are funded with state and federal tax dollars. So according to your logic...we should all be tested. Get real and wake up...perhaps we should fund drug testing the citizens of the United States as opposed to funding our schools or roads? And yes, children do have rights and they are protected by the Constitution. It even protects those who are not citizens. Perhaps you should visit the local library or ask an attorney friend of yours. The criminal law for children is different because of their age and inexperience...not because the Constitution doesn't protect them. Free speech, privacy and search and seizure do apply to them. However the case usually involves that of property which children seldom if ever own. For example if your child was to claim that you couldn't search their room without probable cause or that you were violating their privacy, the property is owned by you and you have every right to access and enjoy your own property. Get your facts straight.

-- Posted by Eriedoc on Fri, Sep 25, 2009, at 1:27 PM
sorry...it was the U.S. Supreme Court...not Missouri

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF INDEPENDENT v. EARLS, 536 U.S. 822(2002)

-- Posted by Eriedoc on Fri, Sep 25, 2009, at 2:09 PM

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration:

If you already have an account, follow this link to login
Otherwise, follow this link to register