I know I'm a day late and all but after reading all these posts I have one question.....who pays for the kids rehab, the parents or the taxpayers? Frankly I could care less about every child...I only care about my own...so paying for rehab for some kid smoking pot.....I think not.

Better yet, how about a clean drug test to vote? Maybe then politicians will stop pandering to groups that use their votes to secure social programs for themselves. I would piss in a cup every day if it would guarantee that no person on drugs could cancel out my vote.
Of course this would mean the end of the jackass party.

While we are at it, lets require clean drug tests to obtain welfare, with repeat tests being randomly done. I had to take a drug test to get a job to be able to earn wages which are then taxed and some of that tax money is used as welfare funding. Yet people on welfare, many of whom who are quite capable of working, don't have to do anything other than fill out some paperwork, sit around, drink beer, play cards and do drugs using my money.

Ragman, who is on the EXTREME right? Since when is the idea of individual freedoms and liberties extreme, either way? Or the idea of not wanting to waste public funds on a program that doesn't accomplish its intended purpose?

i can't wait to see all the kids that are no longer going to be allowed to participate in sports due to drug use...the so called " model athletes" are the main users...i just wonder what kind of approach the parents will use to try to get their kids out of this mess...

First, I need to acknowledge a few things as I just got through reading through all the posts:

1.Latindaddy, your GAY and YOU support ABSTINENCE?? BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...oh, he's serious. Latindaddy, do the terms condom, birth control or proper instruction mean anything to you? I find it astounding that you can come up with so many theories, videos, and urls that support the idea that homosexuality is disorder, which is a far left idea I might add, then come back and support abstinence; which is the mark of a christian conservative.

2.Bundy and Mike: Children, children, play nice and share. Remember, this playground is for everyone. BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! It's ironic that the advocate didnt remove your posts. Ahh, how I live to watch the epic struggle between the liberal and the conservative. Me? I sway niether way, I believe in a balance between the two.

3. Rachel: Yes I acknowledge that the course of action taken in the case of your daughter was indeed not the best one. Have you sought recourse from the District? If you have and they did nothing, then yes as far as I know, thats grounds for a law suit. My best wishes go to you and your daughter as I hope you get this issue resolved in a timely fashion.

4.stxgurl(I hope I got tht right): You bring up an interesting point on parenting. It is now that I wonder what kind of parenting style I will adopt. Hmmm, only time can tell I guess.

5.John: HIE HITLER!!!!!!!!-Raises arm in salute to Hitler- Seriously though, you brought up some interesting ideas with CPS and blanket drug testing for all. You are also right in stating that the drug problem in victoria is a huge cockroach that needs to be stomp on and then flushed down the toilet.

Mike has a radical liberal agenda? He is a radical liberal ? That's rich.  Most people in Victoria wouldn't know what a radical liberal was if they came up and bit them on the arse.  Mike is pretty middle of the road compared to a radical liberal. But I guess compared to the EXTREME right.........

It is far more than an appearance. It is a fact. Schools are now the place to get your haircut, do your laundry, get your car fixed, have a meal, shop for clothes, play cards, and anything else you might want or need to do.
I think the Advocate needs to release this guy's identity, so we can make sure he isn't employed by VISD.

I won't name any names, but it appears we have a totalitarian on the loose!

Full of myself? That really means alot, coming from an ass (it's your picture).
Run along and put on your Gore Cheerleading outfit.
Home spun...how original.

Got to go.
Go ahead and log in to Fox News for additional instructions.

You are so full of yourself ,like Matt....Next you will be using uncles,nephews and personal (lies)to back up your home spun theories.

A gun in every pickup....LOL

Nearly every pickup
Like I said earlier, learn to read.

Anyone who doesn't agree with your radical liberal agenda is either
a. using talking points
b. using homespun theories
How long did it take you to come up with "homespun theories"?
You are such a joke.

Like I really care about your hopes.
Besides, you read way too much into what I post.
That the reason for your exaggerations and homes spun theories.
A gun in every pickup. 30 years ago....LOL

I gave up hope long ago that any of your posts would contain reason.

I am a taxpayer ,probably for a longer period than most.
Compassion and reason can amount to the same thing.
BTW My post was presented as a question.

BTW Mike, grants are taxpayer-funded too. We must het past this mentality that funds from a higher form of government don't cost us anything.

Did I just witness Mike having compassion for the taxpayer? Heaven sure looks alot like earth...

John
You do realize it is random testing ,so the system is fallible. It is not Solving a city/county problem. It is a $178,290 grant for 5900 students @ $3022 a pop.....Now, if it is determined that drug usage did not go down considerably, do we continue to ask the taxpayers to pay for the expensive random drug tests,when the grant money runs out?
400 tests will be for anabolic steroids.
I read your blog and IMO you went overboard with government/school control...I admire your concern ,but a free society like ours has consequences...Good and bad.

John, if it is now a matter of survival, please answer one question. How many VISD students died last year from drugs?

Does anyone know if home schooled kids who participate in EC's are subjected to testing?

But we were talking about politics..... I understand what you mean,but it's going to take time to bring in public financing and rid ourself of the lobbyist influence. Lobbyist and their right to petition the government, so it won't be easy....Maybe it be like Barack Obama likes to say "They have a right to a seat at the table, just not all of them."

I think that upon utilizing this tool that is going to lower the amount of our children to become frequent drug users, we should also drug test their parents as well. We all know there are far worse problems out there than drug use, but if we are going to pin point a certain group of people to perhaps extremely lower or to completely stop the use of illegal drugs, shouldn't that group be EVERYONE?

Number one, if you use drugs for any reason you have problems that you can't handle on your own and need help.

Everyone with some common sense will tell you a bottle of whiskey or gin after a breakup is not a good idea. Marijuana after a long day of work is not such a good idea either. Cocaine to loose some extra pounds isn't really healthy either. People, this is ridiculous. This "new tactic" should be used for EVERYONE! at all times! Haha!

What they really should teach in School is more about ABSTINENCE, obviously since Parent's are too embarrassed or uncomfortable to teach their children about sex. Put your own embarrassment and pride out of the way so your kid doesn't end up with an incurable STD or turn out pregnant by the time their 16th birthday comes around. We are having so many teenage girls and boys becoming more sexually active than ever before, and the proof is right in the pudding, little 15 year old girls having 1 year old's walking around in the mall shopping for clothes among other things and it's so sad. LORD!

Well good luck BigJ ,but you will have to convience  a majority of your 534 colleagues,stay in good standing with the speaker of the House, and enough sponsors and votes to override a presidential veto.... We already have a lone stranger in office....LOL
Putting yourself in a holier than thou category,will not get you many votes... A politician of principles ,is someone in a safe seat.

Not saying yea,or nay just pointing out the fact that random school drug testing made its way to the third branch of our government....They ruled ,and the Bush Administration has set aside millions of dollars to help with school testing.

The courts are sometimes wrong, and bad decisions are sometimes overturned.

Sorry BigJ
Vernonia School District v. Acton (1995), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of random drug testing for students who participate in school athletics. They expanded it in 2002 to include other events.

John, let me try to explain it another way.
I understand your wishes, and mine coincide with yours. But you have a serious flaw in your problem-solving approach.
Instead of chasing an ever-amorphous culprit, narrow your focus on the true cause of the problem - behavior.
Behavior can be changed through force, but it is cost prohibitive, and labor-intensive. Look at how much money and manpower is used to secure inmates.
Behavior can also be changed through realization of the subject who is indulging in the behavior. This is often compelled by a set if circumstances that the subject deems unbearable.
This is where real change can be effected.
You know the old saying "you cna lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink"?

Your argument lacks the human element. People will always engage in self-destructive behavior. People will always make bad choices. The point is that those who don't exhibit antisocial behabior or make bad choices should not be "enslaved" (to use your term) by the system.
If your only argument is that you can do whatever you want in the name of protecting someone, then I guess every one of us should be locked in a padded cell for the rest of our lives. This way of thinking has produced this out of control, oppressive society that we now share.

I read when the local plants were tested,they were told to expect that it would detect 2% of the workforce..That was normal... In the first years. At first the percentage was a little bit higher than that,because of the false positives and the plant had a bigger problem than they thought.... Some of the plants expanded the test to include alcohol.Yes,they treated the addiction as a disease.

Should the drug policy be disbanded after 10 years? That should be left up to the school board ,whom I presume will keep up with these matters..... Home invasion, home testing is in a general time horizon.

For all of you who support drug testing, what would you suggest if we do this for 10 years and nothing changes?
Would you then support suspending the program, or should we start installing cameras in homes?

Well, I agree with GoliadChica.. they should do the 2nd drug test if they found the drug the first time and they should send them to rehab.. I worked at Union Carbide and that is what they would do with their employees and hardly ever suspended them.. because they considered it an illness.. inwhich it is..
yet I also feel the teachers should also be tested inwhich till this day they are not I may be wrong..
I know for a fact I was working at a high school where a High school Teacher would come in drunk to teach her students and I knew she was because the children would tell me ... and I would have to take over her classes...she reek in booze.. and carried a silver Flask in her purse... and one day we were gonna have a field day at school and we had picked teams for vollyball teachers against the student and she was on the teachers team.. she was so drunk she tripped over the side and didnt hurt herself too bad but they called the ambulance and she was drunk... but they let it go till the end of the year.. and those children even though got taught... but what if they hadn't and missed out a whole school year .. then what..

You also informed us that school boards hire administrators and teachers, as well as set policy. Not true.
Who said anything about you being from Rockport?

Born & raised in Victoria,Texas 62 years ago..Not a transplant from Rockport?
Never gave an opinion on drug testing,merely the course for changing the policy.
 I think that those of you who support this drug testing scheme are projecting your own guilt from your childhood onto this generation
Another example of exaggerated homespun theories to substitute for established fact.....Others call it shotgun theory(just throw something out there and hope something sticks)......Every pickup had a gun in it....LOL

Mike, it is you who have homespun theories not grounded in fact. "WE" are not voting in anybody, when all we get is 5% at the polls. And school boards don't hire the administrators. School boards hire one person - the superintendent.
Nice try.
As for how things were 30 years ago, talk to some people who grew up around here, not liberal transplants such as yourself. I never said everyone drove pickups, either. Get your eyes checked.
I think that those of you who support this drug testing scheme are projecting your own guilt from your childhood onto this generation.

LOL... What are you suggesting a time machine?...Guns in all the pickups? Everyone drove pickups? Where did this study come from "The Bundy Institute of BS theory."....This reminds me of another poster called Matt, who used exaggerated homespun theories to substitute for established facts..... We the taxpayers,vote in the school board members,who in turn hire/fire the administrators and teachers and set the agenda....Don't like that ,private school and home schooling are the other options.
Trying to tie the fourth amendment with a school policy is ludicrous...Try to do that in the workplace,your next destination will be TWC.

How about random drug testing, just like at work, with mandatory 2nd drug testing if found positive for illegal substances and no prescription can be verified. And, as in some workplaces, mandatory counseling, rehab, whatever to give the kid a chance to get themselves straight without going to Mitchell.

Give 'em a chance. They think they're grown and we parents often treat them like they are, but they are children and have a child's mind.

Let's take an objective look at what has transpired over the last 30 years.
30 years ago:
Nearly every pickup in the school parking lot had a gun in it (no school shootings)
Parents were not harassed by authorities for disciplining their children (kids behaved)
Authorities did not go out of their way to label children as criminals when they ran afoul of the law (kids grew up without a lasting stigma)
Parents ruled the school, because they owned it, and the teachers and administrators knew it (all involved respected each other)
Kids had far more freedom at school than they do today (kids had more respect for authority)
Today:
No guns allowed at school (school shootings)
Parents are harassed by authorities for disciplining their children (kids misbehave)
Authorities go out of their way to label children as criminals when they ran afoul of the law (kids grow up to become the criminals they are labeled as)
Teachers and administrators rule the school, because they are taught that they own it, (all involved have very little respect for each other)
Kids have far less freedom at school than they ever have (kids have nothing but contempt for authority)
Are things better today than they were 30 years ago?

"There is more corruption, deception, lying, and outright incompetency coming from Profit Drive than anywhere else in the district."

From now on I'm gonna call you "Bullseye Bundy," cuz sure hit that target straight on.

Just curious:

When I apply for a job, their drug policy is made known to me prior to applying. Does this apply to schools in Victoria? Do they have such a disclaimer? That students are subject to random drug testing? If so, how do they determine who will be tested? Does this apply ONLY to students participating in extracurricular activities, or does it apply to anyone who attends VISD?

Sorry, I'm out of the loop over here. Someone please enlighten me. Thanks.

Sandwich, no one said that. But I do believe that MY (my own, no one else's) children should know their rights to prevent them from being took advantage of.

"i'll go along with testing of students when parents, teachers and politicians are willing to undergo testing as well."
 
So, if it okay for the parents, teachers and politicians to get pregnant it is okay for the students? No, no. Too much progressive psycho babble here. Students should not tell the teachers and parents what to do. As bad as the kids telling the parents how the family operates, and pets dictating how the owners should operate. Space cadet stuff. Some of the reason for todays problems.
I will give you that teachers and politicians should be drug tested, but that is because most of us in the real world work place have to be subjected to the urine test. If it is good enough for us it should be good enough for all, especially those that work for US, taxpayers, etc..

The option is to be involved in shaping your childrens' future. I believe that most times the best example to a child is an example of what not to become. Give them the proper guidance, and they will recognize improper behavior, and realize that they have no wish to emulate it. Trust your children as you do your own convictions.

RG, no one is "scared." Trust me, you have SO got the wrong person.
Yes, yes, I know. "Freedom isn't free," there is no such thing as a fair trail (esp. in Victoria county, lol), you ARE NOT presumed innocent until proven guilty, and blah, blah, blah.
If I were scared of anything/anyone, I would just roll over and let people do whatever they wanted to me. That said, I will exercise my right to question certain authorities when I feel that my rights are being violated for no reason other than to be controlled, because that's all it amounts to in the long run. If you want to roll over, by all means, go right ahead--I'm sure someone will appreciate it. But I, and others, choose not to in every possible scenario of my/our life/lives that you can imagine, and it's MY RIGHT to do so. :P
As for parents being responsible for their child's actions when they get in trouble at school. To make a long story short: Tell that to the woman whose child was caught with the prescription pill by no fault of her own. I really don't think she would agree, and YOU KNOW I DON'T! But that's a whole nother story. Stay tuned. Last time I tried to address this issue, my computer froze and it didn't post.

Teachers are not drug tested? That is insane. Shaping young minds eh? I have 3 other children 6,4,3. I need some options here sheesh!

It's the administrators that need to be tested. There is more corruption, deception, lying, and outright incompetency coming from Profit Drive than anywhere else in the district.

i'll go along with testing of students when parents, teachers and politicians are willing to undergo testing as well.

Many legal and social scholars agree that the presumption of innocence is the single most important factor that distinguishes a free society from a totalitarian one.
I guess Ben Franklin's fears were well founded. He worried whether we could keep the Republic that he and the others at the Consitutional Convention had created for us.

I cringe each time I see someone post: "If you have nothing to hide, why are you afraid of testing (or searching)?" Well, I have nothing to hide, but I object to being tested and/or searched as if I am a criminal. As a citizen, I'm NOT supponed to have prove myself to be innocent. I'm NOT willing to sacrifice my liberty to the mentality that drugs are so bad that fighting their use has become more important that individual liberty. Quite frankly, I don't care what people inject, injest, or inhale. There's not a person on the planet who doesn't know that stuff will kill you. You want to kill yourself, be my guest. Your family and friends will mourn and get over your loss and continue without you. You'll be missed at holidays, but over the years you'll be missed less and less.

Trying to get people to understand why this is a bad policy is painful. Let's set aside the rights and freddom issues. All you have to do is think for a split second to begin to see the light.
OK, the majority of funding for public schools must be directed from the state. Are you with me? The state determines the funding by attendance. Still there?
Where is the incentive to actually find kids guilty of drug usage, when plan success dictates punishment that will diminish attendance, thereby decreasing funds from the state?
There is also another incentive to plan ineffectiveness; that being the false low numbers of usage that the district can report to the community.
My kid has been tested 11 times over the last 2 years.
Enough said.
This situation is ridiculously similar to the steroid testing in baseball. Keep testing the utility players and middle relievers, while Sosa, Clemens and Bonds go unmolested.

Texas Huckleberry and rg. I can assure you my concern is that procedures are not followed correctly. If you re read my posts you will see that my 16 year old WAS denied her rights. She was also denied the right to voluntarily take a drug test. We are not crying about anything. I would have gladly come to the school so as to be present while she was questioned by 2 peace officers (it is illegal for them to question her otherwise she was a minor) We have nothing to hide. It was the way it was handled which gave me pause. My daughter was innocent yet still suffered consequences a guilty party would face. My point is unless VISD is going to conduct themselves properly they should not implement this program plain and simple.

You just don't get it, and I lack the time or will to explain it any further.
BTW, where do you live that you can't relieve yourself without someone smoking crack 2 stalls down?
I'm taking that place off of my vacation list.

I will start my post off with one statement: There is no such thing as "free" or "equal". We live in a society where murder, theft, hopelessness reign are factors of life. We live in a society, where while you are laying your children down to sleep, there is someone waiting outside their bedroom window to steal their innocence. Where, while you are trying to urinate or defecate, there is someone in the next two stalls over snorking crack through a pipe. Where, everytime you turn on the news, there are reports of kidnappings, muggings, and molestations. I repeat there is no such thing as free, or equal. Sure, the words exist, but if people were free to do as they wished, then our world would have no need for reporters of any kind because we'd be able to see it outside our window. If everyone was equal, then a person who build's his life through an honest living with blood, sweat, and tears would indeed be compared to that cringing piece of filth who is nothing but a burden to society.

We have these laws as a first line of defense. So that you and I can go to a grocery store without fear. So that your children can have an education in a safe, clean and yes, controlled environment. We should consider ourselves lucky, because inviduals residing in Mexico, Indonesia, and Africa aren't nearly as privilaged as we are. This, in turn must be why people risk it all to come here: Because they are given a chance.

I ask you, if your child(ren) have nothing to hide, then why should you or they fear? Yes, I acknowledge that in a way it can be interpreted as an infringement of privacy; but I believe that in order to maintain a stable school environment in our society, this infringement is vital.

There was a comment on here that said what a child does is not always the fault of the parents. I strongly beg to differ. When you are parent, everything you do revolves completely around your child, until they are of appropriate age to leave the house. If your child gets in trouble at school then you have no one to question but yourself.

Everyone has a good point but, I worked in the school system and you have to be very careful how you handle the privacy of a child...because they will scream ...my privacy has been violated.. now known as HIPPAA... even when you tend to separate them in Special Education...very touchy situation....as far as mother with child they too have to be very disceet because they become home schooled..you want to do it very careful and with no attention to the child whatsoever,...I am for the drug testing but, do it ...if you think there is a student you think has probable cause .. like when you go over to help him with a lesson and you stand directly behind him looking over his shoulder and he reeks in a distinct oder that you recognize immediately and you see he is not with you today.....then you tell your principal...by going to the office and closing the door and asking him what should you do first?You have to understnad that you can place yourself a predictment you may not want to be in...because ..since you were one that reported it ..guess what you are the one that has to give the sign statement and the police come to the school.. and takes down your statement...its a very due processes...something I have had to do several times..

Yes, you need a lawyer. But you will have to hire one from out of town.

Well then I need a lawyer. Because they not only asked her what medication she takes they called and asked her friend who had given her the purse SEVERAL months prior what medication she takes. This is absurd. Not only are we supposed to trust them we pay them.

HIPAA

Hippa-it's a law. Look it up.

Oh, one last thing. My son was mistakenly diagnosed as being ADHD when he was 4 years old. I did not want him on the required drugs (amphetamines), but was literally PUSHED to get him on them by the teachers at his school (in Victoria). Once, they even sent me a note telling me not to send him back to school without his medication! This, of course, was before the law was passed saying that no one can make kids take these drugs in the late 90s.

Funny, or perhaps ironic is a better word, now the schools are so pro-drug (yes I know, LEGAL as opposed to ILLEGAL, but both can be abused), but when they find one anti-depressant in a girl's purse they get all anti-drug and go ballistic.

This brings up another question. If kids are taking prescribed medications for depression (it happens alot here in Austin), ADHD, autism, football injuries, whatever, how will that affect the repercussions of getting a false- positive drug test? When the drugs are prescribed, wouldn't that be a violation of the kid's right to privacy? I think so. And I think VISD better seriously rethink this idea and cover their azzes before beginning this witch hunt, because even asking the kids what prescription drugs they take is a violation.

Hmmph. Just like VISD to not think something through because they are on a tangent. Zealots! Kind of reminds me of how they used to try to hide the pregnant kids, or "suspend" them to keep them away from the other kids back when I went to school.

As mentioned in another post, I have worked for the State of Texas and am now a Federal employee, and I have NEVER been drug-tested for either. I also drive a car, but when I go to get my license or registration renewed, I am not drug tested.

If a kid is caught with drugs on school property, if their is reasonable cause to believe they are high while attending school. Yes, please do drug test them. But don't treat the mass majority like criminals because of a few bad apples.

I don't like it when I am treated like a child by my employer--I am an adult, and if they want me to respect them, they should respect me. I really don't believe that it asking too much to treat a child like the citizen of the US that he/she is, one who has rights no matter how young--unless there is reasonable cause not to do so.

LSL...You want everybody drug tested. You volunteered so you think everybody ought to undergo those tests. Don't you understand that this turns our justice system on its head? You are assumed to be guilty until you proove -- by passing the test -- that you are innocent. Lady, this AIN'T the way it's supposed to work! That job I had where I had to fill a cup on a random basis was one where I worked for a corporation. I knew the requirement when I went to work. I never had a problem passing the test, I just resented having to proove I was innocent. By the way, I don't work there now. The difference between that job and the schools is that kids must attend school. Most attend public, tax supported schools. The Fourth Amendment should apply in schools as it does elsewhere. I'm not the world's biggest fan of teenagers, but they are citizens and as such have rights. Idiot school administrators have kicked kids out over aspirin tablets and girls taking Midol. This is insanity. You want to get rid of the druggies in school? Do so within the bounds of the Constitution. You find a kid dealing hard drugs or loaded himself, kick him out and don't let him back for the remainder of the year. Put him on probation so that any -- ANY -- infraction boots him out permanently.

wonderful

Thank you, I can sleep peacefully tonight knowing we agree on that one thing. The other things I'm not going to comment on anymore tonight. God bless and I love ya, Al.

We do agree. I have that very lettor to the editor framed on my wall. I hope you are not trying to draw a comparison between the welfare recipient and the students.
1. Kids are forced to go to school
Collecting welfare is a choice
2. Taxpayers nearly to a man understand the benefits of a public school system
These same taxpayers are typically not as sympathetic to the plight of welfare recipients
3. All citizens have access to the benefits of public education
The same can not be said for welfare checks
4. Kids are unable to care for themselves
Welfare recipients are unwilling to care for themselves.
But I absolutely love the idea behind the message. I concur wholeheartedly.

Okay, since you brought up the welfare thing, your making me do it. This is a copy of an email I received a few months back, I didn't recognize the name of the person who forwarded it to me, nor do I know who wrote it, but here it goes "Like a lot of folks, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test with which I have no problem. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand. I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their tail, doing drugs, while I work. Can you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?" I'm really going to go now, Bundy. Can I leave knowing we agree on something?

With all due respect, what does it matter? You have clearly stated your willingness to have your rights diminished, in favor of the police state. So why did you object? Big Brother was right. Who are you to question?
Starting to see the lunacy of your position?

Rachel, I am so sorry for your daughter. When one of my daughters was in high school, she heard a couple of boys talking about taking Lortabs. She asked them,"What does Lortab do for you?" The principal heard her ask them that question and gave her 3 days in school suspension. I raised hell with the principal and was told she was 'just looking out for my daughter's best interests'.?????? Guess what, she still had 3 days ISS. The boys got nothing.

If you want to VOLUNTARILY submit to a drug test, you do so with my blessing. As for extracurriculars being a privilege, you and I will never be in agreement. I think that the children of taxpayers should have equal access to all EC's until they exhibit behavior that revokes that access. Not wanting to be subjected to drug screening without probable cause or due process is not sufficient grounds to prevent kids from accessing these EC's.
In the next few years, a Texas court will hand down a decision that corrects this wrong.
You know what I think is a privilege? I think welfare is a privilege. Why are welfare recipients not tested before receiving their benefits? Oh, that's right, because the state is too busy funding school districts to drug test juveniles...stupid me.

I was drug tested a couple of weeks ago because it was a condition of a study I am VOLUNTARILY participating in. I was informed of that need before I agreed to participate in it. Just as anyone who VOLUNTARILY agrees to participate in an extracurricular activity. Just as anyone who VOLUNTARILY takes a job with a company that has a Drug-free workplace policy. As for searching my car/house for stolen goods or such, that falls under the reasonable suspicion clause, Al.

They BELIEVED it was a pill for ADHD? They ruined the educational experience for a child on a BELIEF? The pill was never properly identified? Sweetie, I'm sure you just want this all to go away, but I don't think I could let them get away with this.
I truly feel for you. You and your daughter have undoubtedly become victims of the system and statistics. Please become involved in the future school board elections. Be vocal in your opposition to the superintendent. Don't let them win.

They said they believed it was a drug for ADHD. I was never allowed to see it. My daughter has a heart condition and had she taken any kind of upper as they say it is, it would have been clearly evident that she was ON something. Like I said the teacher and the officer believe it may have been dropped in her purse when they were alerted to the presence of the drug dogs arrival so she was not charged but suspended for 3 days pending a hearing with the admin. During that hearing she was to be made an example out of. If they want to make examples out of students it should be those who are actually involved in this kind of behavior. The only message they sent that day was that it sure is funny to get a pretty smart, sorry if I offend anyone, white girl whose never been in trouble in trouble huh?

What kind of pill was it?

We had to attend a hearing with the administration in which our conversations were recorded. I made sure to state the facts as I did below and was given a litany of excuses none worthy of course. Even though she was not charged nor did her campus think she should be further punished the administration still recommended expulsion and Mitchell. That is deplorable. She refused to be treated like a criminal and begged me not to send her where she would be treated as such. They want to send a good student with good grades to a school surrounded by barbed wire on a bus with an armed guard and they wonder why there are so many people choosing to home school or send their children elsewhere CLASSIC.

Rachel, you are absolutely correct, and i apologize. My digression is inexcusable, but ignorance must be dealt a mortal blow when it presents itself. The martyrdom of my own integrity is often an undesired result of such chivalry.
Back to your point. You are completely justified in your indignity to what transpired with your child. Too bad every attorney in this town has either had a brainectomy or a testiculectomy. (Those words are made up, but I think you get the point.)
The reason why proper criminal procedures are not practiced in the schools today is because there is never a fear of evidence presentation. What I mean is that students are often judged summarily by the investigating parties, therefore evidence collection techniques need not pass Constitutional muster. It is admittedly a very serious transgression of individual rights, but rarely does anyone of much stature take an oppositional stance to these actions. I suspect that like all things, sooner or later they will "bark up the wrong tree".
Do you really want a solution? Network with other like-minded parents, and request a public meeting as a group with the next candidates that run for the school board trustee positions. Ask them what their stances are on these issues, then hols them accountable after they are elected. It takes time and effort, but it can work.
If the candidate acts differently after the election, brand them with a scarlet letter by shaming and shunning them publicly. And I don't just mean singularly, but the entire group.
It's kind of like with the current mayor and city council members, with the exception of David Hagan. Those guys should not be able to patronize a store, walk their dog, or sit down to a meal without being ridiculed by the citizens around them.

I think the drug testers need to take a field trip to your house.
People also harbor stolen goods in their homes, so would you consent to weekly random searches being conducted? People use their vehicles to transport illegal items, so would you like to constantly be subjected to searches of your vehicle?
These conditions are reminiscent of a Police State, which has proven throughout history to be detrimental to a free society. Earlier you told me I should move to a Communist country. It sounds to me like Communism is the political system of choice for you. I was hoping that you would take my queue when I asked if you knew what Communism was, and go look it up. I guess I shouldn't be so presumptive in my expectations.
Please educate yourself, then you will see whose views are most closely aligned with the principles of Communism.

Well you guys sure are getting heated. What I find funny is not many of you even commented on the portion of my post earlier that stated my child was denied a drug test and her rights to have a parent present at questioning. If VISD wants to implement this it must be done right. With parental consent and involvement. We are talking about kids here people. Why bother even discussing this if it is not going to be done properly.

Love ya'll! Hugs n kisses!

www-Do you know how much $ would be involved in investigating EVERY so-called reasonable suspicion? How much time would be involved in investigating EVERY so-called reasonable suspicion? And who would set the rules for reasonable suspicion? My reasonable and your reasonable suspicions may be two different ideas. You have choice if want to stay in your current position or if you want to explore a different career that isn't controlled by federal regulations, don't you? When I fly, I don't want my pilot to be strung out on crack. When I take a cruise, I don't want my captain high on marijuana. When I drive home, I don't want to get hit head-on by a semi-truck whose driver is tripping on LSD. Some rules/laws are in effect for the safety of the public. Ya'll can say whatever you want about the drug testing of students. Everyone has a right to their own opinion and my opinion is, I'm glad they're seeing the need and taking action on it.

Fancy words to hide behind? It's called a vocabulary, and I am not ashamed of it in the least. If you had one, you would understand.
The previous poster has this issue nailed. I could not articulate the message to a more poignant degree. Oops, there I go hiding again.
Uh, I couldn't have said it better. There, that should suffice for those of fleeting intelligence.

Lonestarlady...You were writing about the privlege of funding the tests with our tax dollars. I don't have kids but I'm honored to help fund this too. You want to keep passing laws and issue more rules and set up more regulations. I'd remind you that every law, rule and regulation infringes upon someone's rights. But you don't care. You just want to inflict more rules on everyone even if -- seemingly especially if -- they are innocent. If I had a kid and he had to undergo a drug test in order to participate in school activities, I'd be outraged. It was bad enough when I had to fill a cup because of federal regulations involving my job. The resentment I felt EVERY time was massive. Here's a thought...If you have REASON to believe that someone is using illegal drugs, take those reasonable suspicions to the authorities and they'll investigate and, if appropriate, they'll tell a judge what their reasonable suspicions are and sign an affidavit to that effect and the judge will issue a warrant to search the locker and belongings of the person under reasonable suspicion and EVERYBODY ELSE will be left alone.

And shouldn't you be searching the dictionary for more fancy words to hide behind? Do you have a solution to all the world's problems? I bet you do. Please, run for president.

Do you know what Communism is, or do you just know that it's bad?
Shouldn't you be in school, lonestarchild?

So now that you can't answer any of my questions, you just want to talk about the problem. You have no solutions, you just know that something needs to be done. So, by "doing something", you are perfectly OK with creating more problems? Just because you are OK with suspending your freedoms to solve a problem doesn't mean you have the right to suspend mine as well. I really hope you do not hold an authoritative position. Judging by lack of perspective though, I'd lament that my fears are realized.

Yes, it is your privilege to fund these programs. You voted, didn't you? Or maybe you should try moving to a communist country and try their way of life.

It will stop when children stop coming to school to make drug deals, it will stop when children stop coming to school stoned or tripping on crack, it will stop when adults stop selling/dealing to children. This is a war we're fighting and if we don't do anything to stop it......

Priveleges? Was my being required to fund these programs a privelege too? If so, I want my priveleges revoked?
I find it amusing how often the P word is thrown around by those who want to control others.
Driving is a privelege.
Freedom is a privelege.
Breathing is a privelege.
If everyone has access to something up to the point that their actions reduce or deny such access, it is not a privelege. If the access cannot be denied without sufficient grounds, and the access denial is uniform, it is not a privelege.
Me allowing my kids to drink chocolate milk is a privelege. Do you know why? Because I can remove the privelege anytime I see fit, and for no reason at all. In the public school arena, where the system is taxpayer funded and available to all, everyone needs to be careful what they deem to be a privelege.

LSL, please recite to me the statute in the Penal Code that criminalizes the act of me giving tobacco to my child. It should be right next to the one that prohibits me from giving my child alcohol.
Here is the problem with the entire idea of these types of infringements - they are never forced to produce results. They have a way of becoming a means to effect a witch hunt, and to arbitrarily harass groups of people the establishment deems unsavory. If this testing program is ineffectual in decreasing the amount of drug and alcohol usage, will it be abolished? Of course not. There is too much money to be made, it is a useful little tool to disrupt, and it is a power play by people who feel insignificant and irrelevant.
The next topic down the pipe is school uniforms. What is next? Where will any of it stop?

And how are the rights of children being violated? Football, cheerleading, driving your own personal vehicle are all requirements? These are privileges folks. Although some spoiled kids might not agree. Mine included. If you don't want them drug tested, then don't play, dance, drive whatever.

PodunkTX you make me laugh: "Cause other parents don't know how to raise their children."

Have you drug-tested your child(ren) lately?

Excuse me, but it isn't always the parents fault. You'll have to trust me on that one.

Victoria schools leave much to be desired, unless, perhaps, you have the means to afford a private school. I didn't.

It really comes as no surprise to me that they (VISD) would violate a citizen's (yes, a minor, but with rights) Constitutional rights, no surprise at all. When my children attended VISD schools, I saw various levels of discrimination for one reason or another (some, but not all racist), and apathetic teachers and administrators who made the rules up as they went along.

After banging my head with those at VISD, and fighting to have my children educated, I finally decided to get the "H" out to give my kids more alternatives.

Not surprisingly, I see that I made the right choice. The only thing that appears to have changed is that it is getting worse!

Bundy, there are 5 different reasons to be drug tested. 1)Pre-employment, 2)RANDOM 3)Reasonable suspicion/Cause 4)Post-accident 5)Follow-up. They want to do #2 RANDOM. No body is suspecting your child of taking drugs. Look up the definition of random. As for a search warrant, the chain of custody that accompanies a drug test is your legal search warrant. Giving your child a chew of Red Man, are you serious? Contributing to a minor, I think that's a law. I agree with rg-it needs a little tweaking, but it's a good thing.

I knew I was going to have to comment on this topic sooner or later. To those parents who's kids have had to suffer injustice due to this policy, you have my sympathy. I think random drug searches is a good idea...that just needs to be tweaked a little bit more until it is perfected. Also, students who are showing odd behavior that is equal to a drug user, should also have to undergo the drug testing process. Conversations that have refernces to drugs and alcohol that are overheard by an employee of any kind should also be reported to the administration, who can take appropriate action. You can't imagine how many incurrences that pertain to both scenarios I have witnessed in my academic career. This problem has to be solved one way or another.

As for you, waywardwind, please keep up the libertyspeak. It is good to know that others cherish the ideals of freedom. I have a suspicion that as more and more of our population is subjected to unwarranted tyranny, our message will reverberate, and our constituency will multiply. Until then, we must be vigilant in our spreading of the freedom message.
Sadly, we have become a society that thinks laws can be enacted to prevent crimes and social injustices. This is a gross miscalculation on the part of those who do not cherish personal liberty.

LSL, you seem to be missing the point. If my child is not on drugs, has he done anything unethical, immoral, or illegal? The point you are not getting is that my child should have the right to not being summarily suspected or accused. I'm not telling you that you have an obligation to test your kid, so you should not be telling me that my kid must submit to testing.
I would also argue your assumption that all juvenile drug users become adult drug users. Have you ever heard of experimentation?
I read in the article that one of the substances tested for was tobacco. So what happens if I give my kid a chew of Red Man? There is no law against it, so how can my kid be suspended for it? VISD certainly has the right to dictate that their campuses be tobacco-free, but they don't have the right to dictate what my child does at home that is legal. This could get sticky for VISD.

Bundy...Thank you. I thought I was the only one who even remembered the Fourth Amendment and its protections from unreasonable searches without a warrant and the sixth's requirement for a public trial and the ability to confront accusers and to have testimony for your defense. I am sick of people who are willing to trash not only the Bill of Rights but the entire Constitution because -- "Oh Lard! We've gotta pertec th chilren!" We need to take back our rights and concentrate on separating the sheep from the goats regarding drug use in school and in society in general. Kick out the goats when found. Perhaps they can be given a second chance the following year, but put them in an alternative school with no extra-curricular activities, no parties, nothing but a steady dose of academics and no tolerance for truancy. If they miss a day, they must have a note from the doctor to be readmitted. If they decide they don't like the alternative school and they quit, they will then pay that price for the rest of their lives. If they want to be junkies, let'em, but keep them OUT of the school. Let them be examples to the good students of the consequences of being stupid and using drugs.

Bundy you see how we have never heard a peep of the issue with Maples and VISD.. Maybe Tyler threw out his case! Since he is in a federal prison!

Bundy, sounds like you've got issues with the school and not necessarily the drug testing of students. If my child was fat, would that be unethical, immoral or illegal? I think not. But a child who is doing drugs will become an adult who uses drugs and I don't think you want me to go into all the statistics of drug users in the workplace. And FYI, I DO drug test my children if there is a probable cause.

Ahh...this topic is a veritable buffet for me.
First, I must address those that want their kids tested at school. TEST YOUR OWN KID! Where do you have a right, because of something you want, to have my child's rights diminished, and force me to pay for it? I may think your kid is fat, so I demand that you sign them up for a gym membership immediately, and force your kid to work out. How do you like that?
Now, to more intelligent dialogue between adults. Moore is a snake. All who follow him are vermin. Mickey Finley is a disgrace, along with Nancy McCord, Chapa, LeFavers, and Maples. Why do you think Maples was hired by Moore. Let's see...an embezzler from a previously shared post, where a bond was passed, to another town with a huge bond in place....Hmmmm....interesting indeed. I'm no Sherlock Holmes, and even I can smell the smoke and see the fire.
Just recently we had Finley convince the Board of Idiots that our 9 year old playing surface (which was a 25 year surface) was a danger to the safety of his football players. So what does he do? He gets $300,000 ponied up to replace something that didn't need to be replaced. I still have not seen verification of all of the ground-impact concussions that he claims were so prevalent.

Bundy i can tell you this. last year a friends daughter was tested and was dirty her suspension was off the cheer leading squad for 10 days and was let back on after that. I don't see that as appropriate she should have been suspended for the entire rest of the year. Do you think that has stopped her from smoking marijuana. Nope! it has not and guess what she is on the cheer leading squad for the up coming year! I believe that if you do drugs and are tested and you are found dirty they should be off for the rest of that year.

"Those students who do not fall in either category can put their child in the screening pool by signing the consent form in the student handbook." I just know that those little druggies that aren't involed in anything other than their own little drug world, are going to rush right home and have mamma sign the consent form! LOL!
Bundy...
Now, you, too can see that Bob Moore talks out of both sides of his mouth. Yes, his remark was ridiculous as are many of his decisions. His crew of outsiders are ruining our school district. Can't keep good teachers at the freshmam campus due to the dictatorship there. Lost a great principal at the senior campus when Mr.Schultke was shafted by McCord, Chapa and Moore. Remember Moore brought Maples and his enterage from OK City. When will the rest of them go?

Rachel, I am sorry for your daughter. They should NEVER be notified in advance of a random drug test or search. And certainly not be allowed to leave a classroom! Random drug tests should be computer generated so no body gets 'picked' on. I think drug testing students is a great idea. I am 98% certain that my 16-year old daughter is clean, but what about the other 2%? What if.......I think there's a lot of legal and ethical issues that need to be visited, but I'm all for it!

I am very alarmed at how the 4th & 6th Amendments have been tossed out in VISD. Nowhere in the Constitution does it state that a child is exempt from the protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.
I think the parents need to make this a central issue in the upcoming school board elections. We simply cannot continue to disallow the rights of all students because a few break the rules.
This idea of signing away all rights in the student handbook really gets under my skin. I hope that a case regarding these issues reaches the Texas Supreme Court very soon. The tyranny must be stopped.

Last school year my daughter who was a junior with NO prior disciplinary problems EVER was sitting in Criminal Justice class when they were told that the DOGS were coming to class 20 min in advance. At that time several students asked to be excused to the restroom or what not, my daughter was not one of those students. Upon the arrival of the dogs the students were then asked to stand outside. After a few minutes my daughter was called back into class and was asked by the officer if they could search her opened bag. (She always leaves it opened smart or not she does) She consented to the search without hesitation. They found one orange pill in the side opened pocket of her bag. They then without my knowledge or consent questioned her repeatedly(she was only 16)and held her for more than 2 hours before I was even notified. My daughter repeatedly asked to be given a drug test and to call her mother all of which she was refused. Luckily her teacher and the officer were confident that the drugs did not belong to her and aloud her to leave. She was still expelled and required to go to Mitchell if she wanted to graduate from Memorial. Needless to say my daughters senior year will be spent at home getting her diploma online. This program is obviously not working Victoria. Just ask my bright beautiful daughter who will not go to prom or graduate with her friends.

I find Bob Moore's comment absolutely ridiculous. So now he wants students to learn to make better decisions through punishment resulting from poor decisions? That's quite a switch from his previous stance. If he really believed in this principle, he would have allowed the MTV production of the drill team to proceed. Those few girls who made bad decisions would have been taught a valuable lesson if the show would have aired. Instead, they learned that you can make a fool of yourself, as long as your mommy and daddy raise enough cain and you attend a school that has a superintendent with no moral code.
Bob Moore, you have no integrity. The next time any media outlet looks to you for a comment, please decline.
It is far better to remain silent and have people think you are a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
I don't know who originally said that, but they were correct.

Random is nowhere near a part of the drug testing program at Memorial. I know of several students who were tested nearly 10 times last year, while known druggies went completely untested. I would also like to see the ethnic breakdown of those tested. This is just a further intrusion into the rights of those who follow the rules.
What actually happens to the kids who are found to be dirty?

Bad idea swbones. That is a job for the police, not a child.

Next step would be, if found to be “HOT” for drugs, require the student to participate in a “Sting” operation to bust the supplier. Takes care of two things. Gets the fist line supplier and “Burns” the buyer in the drug world.. makes it harder for them to purchase again.
I can already hear a few of you guys, “That would be endangering the child”. …tough Sh**is what I would tell them.. Don’t do drugs and you will not be on the “Spot”.

Well so far The school that has been doing this for awhile now is Industrial..they do a at random..and you could get lucky and get it done twice..in a year.. and the other school is Bloomington.. So, its a good thing..
but I also know parents that .. wait at the door with a test cup in their hands when their teenagers come home from a late night party or they do at randoms also.. parents are becoming more aware also.. The signs of the Times..
Good Article..

Very good. I wish all schools would do this.