Drug and Substance Abuse Testing - Essay Example

Should Welfare Recipients be Drug Tested? In 1996, the government introduced a welfare reform that would change welfare pattern in the society. The adoption of for the implementation of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), was deemed feasible as it would ensure tax payers money is allocated to those in need. Moreover, supporters of this policy argued that the policy will ensure that welfare recipients are accountable for the help they receive (Schaberg 568). However, this policy is largely irrelevant as it unfairly assumes that welfare recipients are abusing drugs at a higher rate than the rest of the population. Welfare recipients should not be required to take a drug test as it is a violation of their privacy, irrelevant and a waste of taxpayers’ money. Welfare was designed to help the underprivileged in the society. Through welfare, the poor and the disabled population in the society are able to re-enter the workforce and to subsequently care for themselves. The fact is that ever since its incorporation, welfare has been able to assist numerous families and needy individuals in the society. However, the Welfare Reform consequentially contributed to a significant reduction of welfare dependants. Consequentially, regardless of the significant financial savings accrued to the welfare reform, this policy has facilitated the increase in unemployment levels. Moreover, drug testing by itself does nothing to promote employment, economic stability or responsible parenting ("Drug testing for welfare recipients to be considered by state Senate" 6). Recipients point to data showing that those on welfare are far less likely to do drugs than those who are not on welfare. Moreover, the monthly assistance checks barely cover necessities (Dawkins 2011:1). Therefore, the implementation of such a policy is an indication of stereotyping by the legislature, based on the assumption that welfare recipients are more likely to abuse drugs. The adoption of state drug testing requirements is unconstitutional and a violation of privacy. This issue came out as a result of the Michigan statute that was influenced by the Marchwinski case. In the case, Marchwinski v. Howard, the plaintiff challenged the Michigan state statute, arguing that the case suspicion-less drug testing was an unconstitutional search under the 4th amendment (Scheberg 583). The court held that suspicion-less drug testing is a blanket condition that is relevant in order to receive state assistance. Florida adopted the same procedure and received its fair share of opposition. In response to the lawsuits and the scrutiny facing the suspicion-less drug testing, the state of Florida adopted the special needs exception that provides reasonable suspicion to allow suspicion-less drug testing (Scheberg 587). The fact that welfare recipients are being subjected to suspicion-less drug testing is inhumane and undermines their constitutional right. Drug testing is a waste of tax-payers money. A research carried out in Arizona observed that approximately $3.4 million would be used in drug testing (6). A similar research observed that drug testing welfare would be a costly blunder as evident from the thirty-year war on drugs (Newell 250). According to Newell, identifying a single drug user would cost approximately, $20,000 to $70,000 (Newell 251). Currently, America has a prevalent debt of $14Trillion. Therefore, the country cannot afford to incur costs through actions such as drug testing of welfare recipients ("Drug testing for welfare recipients to be considered by state Senate" 6). Therefore, in light of earlier research observed no significant evidence that would incriminate welfare recipients, drug testing in irrelevant and costly to the government. Drug testing requirement is ideologically misguided. Social pathology rhetoric is present in both war on drugs and welfare reform congressional debates (Amundson, Zajicek & Hunt 25). Some researchers observe that there is a form of stereotyping that governs the formulation and adoption of certain policies. According to Amundson, Zajicek and Hunt, the reform debates support an ostensible convergence of the stereotyping (25). The attachment of the stereotype of a drug addict to the poor may dissuade some individuals from seeking assistance. Moreover, policies such as drug testing on welfare recipients incite public hostility toward the population (Amundson, Zajicek & Hunt 25). Consequentially, such policies have the tendency to cultivate withdrawal and passivity from the society. Some researchers support drug testing on welfare recipients. According to McLaughlin, the unemployment rate in the U.S is significantly high. Consequentially, drug and substance abuse creates a high employment barrier in the society thus limiting the Governments objective of increasing the workforce and eliminating substance abuse (McLaughlin 580). Moreover, regardless of the fact that welfare is a noble cause that aids the underprivileged in the society, welfare is a stepping stone to enhancing individual welfare and performance in the work environment. Therefore, it should not depend upon and particularly utilized for the purpose of obtaining harmful drugs or alcohol. McLaughlin observes that evidence suggesting drug addiction among welfare recipients is reason enough to justify suspicion-free search. This is because of the high employment barrier resulting from drug use. Furthermore, research indicates that welfare recipients abusing drugs are less likely to become and remain self-sufficient (McLaughlin 582). Supporters of drug testing claim that this action will ensure welfare benefits goes to those who need it. According to McLaughlin, the government has a duty of ensuring taxpayers dollars are not fraudulently spent. The author observes a research carried out by the Foundation for Government Accountability in Florida, observed that the implementation of drug testing programs can save taxpayers money (594). The report indicated that Florida’s taxpayers saved an annual sum of $922,922. The report also estimated that “if the observed July trends continue[d] throughout the first year then the drug testing prerequisite would save Florida’s taxpayers $9,135,504 from July 2011 through June 2012 (McLaughlin 595). McLaughlin concludes by stating that if States were allowed Sufficient Time to Conduct Testing, the results would show that drug testing policies save taxpayer dollars (595). In conclusion, drug and substance abuse is a prevalent issue affecting the whole society and has detrimental effects on the society. However, welfare recipients should not be required to take a drug test. This is because of the irrelevance of the welfare policy that does not facilitate behavioral change amongst substance abuse welfare recipients. Also, the policy enhances stereotyping of welfare recipients based on the assumption that they are more likely to abuse drugs. Amundson, Zajicek and Hunt draw similarity between the welfare reform and the stringent war on drugs policy (25). Consequentially, the war on drugs resulted in a plethora of societal challenges but did not deal with the elimination of the issue. The welfare reform ensures fewer people acquire welfare benefits, but it does not facilitate the eradication of substance abuse in the society. Works Cited "Drug testing for welfare recipients to be considered by state Senate" Indiana Daily Student: Indiana University (Bloomington, IN) 17 Apr. 2015: News Bank. Web. 28 Apr. 2015. Amundson, Kalynnzajicek, Anna M.Hunt, Valerie H. "Pathologies of the Poor: What Do the War on Drugs and Welfare Reform Have in Common?" Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare 41.1 (2014): 5-28. Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection Web. 28 Apr. 2015 Dawkins, B 2011, 'Crying Foul Over Welfare Law', Jet, 120, 5, p. 14, Middle Search Plus, EBSCOhost, viewed 29 April 2015 Mclaughlin, Brianna W. "Drug Testing, Welfare, and the Special Needs Doctrine: An Argument in Support of Drug Testing Tanf Recipients." Cleveland State Law Review 61.2 (2013): 567-595. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Apr. 2015. Schaberg, Abby E. "State Drug Testing Requirements for Welfare Recipients: Are Missouri And Florida's New Laws Constitutional?" Missouri Law Review 77.2 (2012): 567-589. Academic Search Complete Web. 28 Apr. 2015. Read More