Forced drug testing

June 30 2009 Forced Drug Testing A drug test is an examination of urine, hair, blood, sweat, or oral fluid samples to determine the presence or absence of drugs in an individual’s body. Each country has its own set of laws and ethics that focus on the testing of drugs. In 1995, President Clinton developed and implemented a policy that enforced drug testing on every federal arrestee before they were released for trial. The argument was that every criminal was caught in a vicious cycle where they passed through courts, correction facilities and probation hooked onto drugs and committing crime. Clinton felt the only way to stop the user’s interaction with drugs was by eliminating it in the first step: immediately after the arrest (Clinton 1995). Thu the philosophy of testing pretrial arrestees for drug tests was introduced.
However, the drawbacks to drug testing are far beyond its merits. The biggest problem is the difficulty with which they are implemented and the costs these tests produce (Visher). Tax-payers need to know that their hard-earned money is going into an investment that will reap suitable rewards. If the justice system enforces these tests, they have little or no proof that the ideology behind them is proving to be effective. These tests and their costs will only gain full approval when they show statistics lowering crime which should show the success of these drug tests.
There is also the belief that those who were tested for drugs the first time were actually better fits in society than repeated offenders who always tested negative for drugs (Belenko , Mara-Drita , and McElroy 1992). This idea provides proof that no individual can be fully judged on the basis of his drug use. The theory is vital also because most criminals who enter the pretrial drug tests are users and their behavior very rarely if never reflects their crimes
The defenders of the drug tests feel it to be a vital solution in improving the justice system. They claim its presence is necessary for a number of reasons. Not only does it reveal who is using drugs but it also allows the justice officials to reach decisions that will check the release decisions that are made for the habitual drug users. They also speak of the improvements they can bring in the lives of these drug using individuals by checking on their lifestyles and helping improve on them before these criminals are released back into society. Also, once the drug users have been found they can be advised and encouraged to seek treatment and put in rehabilitation homes.
Thus, it is impossible to decide between the merits and flaws of pretrial drug testing. Despite the various arguments given of the advantages drug testing will bring, not only to the individual but also society as a whole, it is still evident that the argument is not valid or strong enough. Pretrial drug testing is not a boon for any individual involved in the process. The claims for its success ring faulty when compared with statistics which prove that while these tests are being implemented at state and federal levels, they have achieved little in lowering the crime rates in any area.

Works Cited
Belenko, S., Mara-Drita, I., & McElroy, J. E. (1992). Drug tests and the prediction of pretrial misconduct: Findings and policy issues. Crime and Delinquency 38
Clinton B, 1995, White House Directive on Drug Testing Arrestees, Memorandum to the Attorney General
Visher C, Pretrial drug testing: Panacea or Pandora’s box, The Annals, June 30 2009