Matt Baxendell is right about one thing: Sometimes you read something so stupid you can only shake your head and laugh. Is his statement that drug testing is a “fact of life” supposed to be a justification of it?
Slavery, domestic violence, segregation and unsafe workplace conditions all have one thing in common with mandatory drug tests: At some point or another, they were/are “facts of life.” Anything grotesque can be a “fact of life” until people of conscience organize to oppose it and convince our government that the situation should be changed.
If he was interested in justifying workplace or school-drug testing, that argument should be based on the supposed merits of the practice and, not justified by its prevalence. Although the drug he mentions, marijuana, is laughably labeled “performance enhancing” by some athletic organizations, it is clear that what is really being tested is the athlete’s compliance with the law. In that case, why not check for misdemeanors or traffic violations, of which every single citizen is guilty of at some point in their lives? Shouldn’t people be fired for these as well?
Other justifications I have heard-that drug use is associated with higher absenteeism or lower productivity in the workplace, for instance, in my mind should open up a brave-new world in which employers can “test” an applicant for morbid obesity, a dangerous driving record, or the existence of chronically ill family members that require their care. Scores of chosen habits and lifestyles are associated with higher absenteeism and lower productivity, and to single out marijuana or other non-performance enhancing drugs is simple minded.
The criteria for evaluating an employee’s fitness for working should be based on reviews of their absenteeism and productivity and, not on the mere existence of factors that supposedly correlate with those things. There are millions of users of marijuana, for instance, who are completely productive citizens. The real issue here, as always in America, is abuse. While drug testing policies and drug laws themselves are based on the idea that any use of illegal drugs is abusive to the user, the reality is that anything reinforcing, even Miller Lite or Krispy Kremes, can be abused. There are no drug-free Americans, whether one’s mood-altering substance is alcohol, marijuana, caffeine or Prozac. Instead of insulting the intelligence of those whose drugs are deemed illegal, perhaps he should bother to use his own brain to investigate whether or not it is actually reasonable to lose one’s job for smoking a joint.
Scott LoweGraduate Student, Dance Department
