At my workplace I had the opportunity, the other day, to talk with a deaf person. This lady told me that she was deaf and that I would have to face her and talk slowly. The would be able to read my lips, and understand what I was saying. We'll, I found out that it wasn't so easy. I kept wanting to turn to the side, apparently, and much of what I tried to say she couldn't understand. As she wrote up an order, I tried to give her information, but since she wasn't looking at me, she didn't hear me. It was quite an education in communication, let me tell you. You see.... just because something is said, and the other person may look like they are listening, it isn't necessarily so. Well, drug and alcohol use at Whitefish High School is kind of similar. You see, a lot of parents don't want their kids to be into the drug culture, or drinking alcohol. You see. They might end up a junkie, or dead from a car crash (maybe killing someone else). However, for most parents, it wasn't a big deal for them to drink when they were teens, and in some cases they feel that maybe it's not that big of a deal for kids now. If they're doing it safely, and not driving, who's it going to harm? Currently, I have a problem with our contract system. Every kid signs a contract saying they wont drink or do drugs, and then a large part of them then proceed to do just that. There doesn't seem to be any problem with most teens, not to live up to the agreement. Right now, it seems that it's just a piece of paper that needs to be signed to participate, not a contract. I thought about it today on our way to polson as a semi passed our bus going faster than the speed zone, on a double line. It's not whether you obey the agreed upon rules, because if you dont get caught, then it must not have happened. Kind of like speeding when late for school. It's okay, because you don't want to be late, and..... you didn't get caught. Well, it's still breaking a law, no matter how trivial. From my understanding, the drug testing policy is an attempt by school administration to give another reason for kids to say no when confronted with a peer situation. With the ability to say a random test may find you positive, maybe others would be able to let the pressure go. Anything to help keep kids from getting into trouble I'm for. Currently, I'm not impressed with the current system. I'm not saying the drug testing is necesarily the best solution, but it's got to be better than the one in existance.

this is an interesting topic. by personal experience, i have been drug tested at five in the morning three times here at WP already. apparently this is a "random" drug testing program designed to catch cadets off-guard if they were doing drugs. i have read of "undercover" cocaine user groups here in the past. i have not heard or seen anything that signifies there is drug use here at this place. the tests are so often and random and the consequences so severe (removal from the academy, jail time, expulsion from the army etc) that there is great fear to use unless one is one 30 + days of "leave," and this is rare to have such a long break, even during summer. i hate getting woken up to pee in a cup, but i think this works. only the really stupid ones with no common sense would do drugs b/c its too likely to get caught. If there was drug testing at WF high, well, im sorry to say but there would no longer be a WF high, except for maybe a few dozen students. most people say they only "tried it once," so perhaps only half the school would test possitve at any given time. i think random tests should be incorporated, and then maybe there would be a better realization of how abused the system was, and how many kids need some help.

i just wanted to say that i agree mucho with jacob. anne had some good points as well. one thing though is that anne is attending west point and we're talking about a single A high school in montana. i think we could expect drug testing at west point and those that attned west point have worked super super hard to get in and that is where they want to be, however at Whitefish High School most kids havn't had the chance to make a choice of direction they would like to take in life, some kids have goals already in high school and drug testing would really affect them, they're clean, others that just want to play sports may stop their drugs due to testing during season but i can't imagine they will refrain once the season is done, and others may just not play if there is drug testing. We know there are drugs and alcohol at WHS and maybe even more than at most schools but is to the point where is really is a problem? last fall i believe mr. paulson said 85% of students were enrolled in a fall activity. This sounds like a pretty healthy fact. Throw drug testing in there and that percentage is very likely to fall. Do we want 85% of the school out for activites knowing that some may use drugs or drink or do we want 50% out that all test clean at least for the season? Fall'06 boys soccer won state i believe, girls won also, boys golf was third i think, girls i'm not sure, volleyball state champs, boys girls xc 3rd place. Successful season at WHS?

I've been asked to attend the next School Board meeting where this issue is due to be discussed again. So, I need to review the situation. I look for more feedback. First I have a few questions regarding Jacobs response. quote pid="359c3bbcbb754e7d9c7f115e5d7a7935">I understand that we have a problem with drugs and alcohol in WF... perhaps even more so than in other high schools. I'm not too sure why that is, but I am pretty sure that drug testing the student population will not help the problem, and in some senses, may hurt. Here's how I see it: I don't do drugs. If I sign a contract, and if I give my word on something, I try my best to follow through. But if someone took me aside and told me that I had to decide to submit to a drug test or stop running with the team, I would stop running with the team. No, I do not have anything to hide. They would test me, and I would be clean, and everything would be ok, but that's not the point. It's the idea behind the process. I would like to think that if I promise I will do something, that people will listen to me. If I tell someone I don't do drugs, then that should be good enough. You admit that there is a problem with the use of drugs, (and alcohol) at Whitefish High School. You feel that a student giving their word and signing a contract should be enough, mainly because it's enough for you. I would ask, If every student was like a Jacob Fern, would we even suggest a drug testing policy? I would assume not. Unfortunately, Jacob, you may have been in the minority while at WHS. Think of all those that you knew of that were drinking or using drugs, when they said they wouldn't. Who can be trusted? Those that honor their word, or those that don't? How do you seperate the two? Or can the two be seperated? That wouldn't be fair. But that's not the only reason that I think this plan is misguided. There are, of course, many people who routinely do drugs and still participate in sports. Would this plan keep them from doing drugs? In my opinion, no. If someone is into drugs, they will simply not participate in the team. Or, they will switch to something different... something that can't be tested for. Alcohol is a big problem, and it seems like every year there is someone from the high school who dies from drinking and driving. But alcohol can't be tested for. After a person is sober, there's no trace of it. I'm not the only one who knows this... everyone does. If they can't do one thing, they will do another. There's always somethign to take the place. I have heard a lot of arguments about the effectiveness of the program... and not many reports say that it has had any effect on the overall drug/alcohol use in the school. I agree that if a person is really hooked on drugs, they may not participate with the team. Is that a problem? If they were not constantly there influencing people to feel that it's cool to use drugs, maybe that would be better than letting them participate. Especially if this individual is a leader. Leaders should lead to what's best, not what's damaging. In regard to alcohol, I don't think this will have as much of an effect, other than offering an opportunity for a person to say, "I don't want to take a chance that it may still be in my system." Ignorant or not, it could be used as a reason to say they don't want to participate in the drinking. Finally, it breeds a culture of mistrust, and a us vs. them mentality. I'm going to be honest... I'm not the biggest fan of the current administration. They've done a lot of things that I just flat out disagree with. But despite that fact, while in HS, I was still respectful, and followed their rules. This policy, however, would simply be crossing the line. It brings school closer and closer to a prison, and less of a comfortable learning environment. Learning is, after all, the point of school. The safest school would be one where everyone was locked up and monitored 24/7. but that wouldn't do much for the whole learning aspect. So what's the tradeoff? How much of our freedom do we need to give up to ensure a safe, drug free school? What's next? The culture of mistrust has already been created by athletes, that sign the contract, and then laugh about how stupid it is. In some cases, blatently drinking while on trips with the team, showing how cool they are and how they can get away with it. The current administration exists to adminstrate. The choice as to how, is up to them. Even the best ideas seem to have as many that disagree, as those that agree. That seems to be normal. Youth seems to have a need to rebel, as part of the maturation process. As one gets older, independance becomes more important, and in many cases, disagreeing with "the man" is in vogue regardless of the message. Truth be told, high school students under the age of 18 don't really have freedoms, except perhaps those of basic humanity. I think the problem is that of being given trusts, and then feeling that once these trusts have been broken, it's hard for people to have faith. The question of what to do is the big question. If the current system is broken then a new one may need to be found. If testing is not the answer, then what is? I know that it's easier to point out flaws in any idea, than it is to propose a new set. School is a learning envirnment. That much is true. One suggestion made by a bigwig in the National Drug Education Association is that a better drug education program should be used. Imagine that. A person who works in the system suggests more education. Do you think that would work? Or would the high schooler that alread scoffs at the current education and educators as being pointless, really pay attention. "Just Say No". That worked well with elementary aged students, but with high school aged students that are constantly reminded of how cool it is to use drugs by movies, music, and parents. Role models of today's youth have been lobbying for the use of recreational drugs by their own use, while exiting and re-entering drug rehabs in attempt to stay on the right side of the law. I don't know what the answer is, but choosing to put ones head in the sand and say, "I think every student that signs a contract will resist the temptation of that cool senior who seems to get away with it whenever they want." Jacob, If when you were a freshman and you had to do a drug test, that everyone else was doing, would you really not go out for a sport or activity? If society has deemed that it is not legal, or therfore acceptable, for those under the age of 21 to drink. If society has said that by doing drugs in not acceptable and made laws to punish the use of them, why do so many high school students feel that all these people who have voted for these laws are so stupid. When in every case, it was these students own parents! Laws can be changed but these haven't been changed to make it easier for high school aged students to drink. In Montana, it's actually been changed by voters to raise the age from 18 to 19 in the late 1970's to keep alcohol away from high school aged students. Then it was ultimately raised to 21, as to match just about every other state in the country. Are that many people wrong? Or is it those that choose to drink and use drugs at a young age that may be causing the most damage? "Well, my parents said they got away with it when they were in high school and they turned out okay." Did they? They may have participated, but they don't seem to think it's okay for their kids to use it, especially when they drive.

Thought that as a current WHS student, I'd add my two cents.. I agree somewhat with Jacob. Drug testing isn't completely bad, it's just not the best idea. Unfortunately, no one is throwing lists and lists of options out there. First, the pros: I recognize, as do most people, that there is a serious problem with drugs and alcohol at WHS; drug testing may help combat that. It may also give kids an excuse to refuse substances when under peer pressure, and/or teach students to keep their word when under contract. Personally, I think all of these are highly unlikely, so here are the cons: Jacob's right. Drug testing creates an "us vs. them" mentality from the students' perspective, and lowers the trust present between adults and teens. From my perspective as a student, I see the administration and many coaches and parents as being very naive (sorry Bill), although they vehemently disagree. But I see, everyday, the kids walking down the hallways and sitting in class who are either drunk/stoned or will be later in the day. The administration looks at many of these same kids, especially the star athletes, and sees what it wants to see, which is a nice boy/girl who is respectful and well-liked by their peers. That rosy glow that Mr. Peck and others have, especially concerning the popular, friendly athletic kids (namely seniors) would be thrown away with the use of drug testing. A lot, if not most, of the kids partying on the weekends (although not necessarily those who use hard drugs) are the athletes, as exemplified this fall. I'm betting that a lot of these kids would simply quit their sport rather than subject themselves to "stupid" drug tests. What would they then do with all that extra free time? Not sit at home, doing homework and drinking water... As a town, Whitefish is extremely proud of our athletics, almost above all else. Mr. Paulson loves spouting off his "85% involved" statistic. That stat would drop dramatically if kids started valuing personal freedoms above sports. Either that or, as Jacob said, they'd switch to drugs that can't be tested for. The Whitefish pride would be pretty wounded. These are just a few comments that have been coming up in classes and in hallways at good ol' WHS. (Although interestingly enough, the students most concerned with the issue, one way or another seem to be seniors and juniors, those who would be affected least.) Granted, as Bill said, it's easy to find flaws in a program, so here are a couple of comments on the favorable side of drug testing. One story from a school in Minnesota involved, not drug testing, but more stringent coaching procedures. A new football coach told his players at the beginning of the season that, if they drank, they were off his team. He stuck to his word, and for the first few years, the team was small and terrible. After a few years, though, players started coming up who understood the rules, and the team starting winning again, while staying clean. Another thought is to drug-test the coaches as well (maybe to make the players feel better?). Anyway, sorry this is so long. My mom reminds me that you guys all have jobs and school to attend, and I'm taking way too long. Just thought I'd better comment.

Since everyone else has given their 2 cents worth, I might as well throw mine in. I do not truly believe in the drug testing for athletics because I feel that the people who are truly on drugs will not be participating in athletics. I feel that the problem in athletics in WF is alcohol as pointed out 7 of 9 sports had alcohol related incidents and you cannot test for this. Unfortunately, one of those sports was xc. You all mention that trust should be given to athletes, that by signing a contract and being aware of the rules they will not be broken. Well, Bill and I did that and always have given our trust, assuming from experience, that for the most part runners are good kids. This past season our trust was violated, how do you think we feel as coaches? Not even just as coaches, but as people who put our trust, time and energy in these athletes and then were severerly disappointed? We even warned athletes numerous times of the alcohol rule and consequences, yet, the athletes still chose to have alcohol and drink. How do you think this makes us feel? You are coming from a students point of view, but, what about from our point of view as people who care about these athletes and about the team as a whole? You can not believe the level of disappointment we felt. We genuinely have cared for each athlete over the years and have enjoyed seeing individual success as well as the teams. There is also the fact that even though it was only a few that were caught, it makes us wonder how many more there were who did not get caught. These few were Seniors and "role models" what kind of message does this send? If we were not extremely diligient in keeping up on the rest of the team, these "role models" could have taken down the whole team, there may not have been a state championship. Most of the girls team were young freshman who could more easily be swayed by peer pressure than older kids that are more sure of themselves. It just goes to show that a few "bad apples" can spoil a whole team. My question is where do we go from here? Now that our trust has been abused, we cannot be as free to give it. Now we have to assume there will be alcohol. We have had many discussions on what we could do different, what we did wrong and how can we prevent it in the future. To be honest, I feel that drug and alcohol issues should be dealt with at home. As a parent I feel it is my job to know where my child is, what they are doing and for them to know that any kind of alcohol or drug use is not acceptable at all - not just in athletics and that wether they get caught or not, it is still wrong. The drinking age is 21, on average people live to be @70 or so, I feel @50 years is more than enough time to drink some alcohol if they want to. Kids need to be kids, not feel they need to do grown up things before they are adults. Our own children learned alot from this xc season about choices and consequences, which I hope will help them in the future.