I'm a SJ alum. I share Ace's view on this one.
I also agree they are a private school and can basically do what they want. Doesn't mean I have to like it. Actually, SJ hasn't seen a dime from me since they fired a whole round of older employees a couple years back for no apparent reason. The "SJ Tradition" was broken for me; in fact, its part of the reason I will not be going to reunion weekend.
1.) If you think your kid is on drugs, you get the test and make your child take it. You, the parent or the caregiver. Why is this not discussed? Actually, SJ has a better platform than most schools to pull the parents aside/on the phone and say "Scotty is really fucked up. We think its drugs, but you need to find out. You need to do something or he's outta here." They don't have to worry about "you have to take him" shit like in public schools. They can have the problem dealt with or kick him out.
2.) St John's has long been known for having drug problems; kudos to the school for taking action where the parents choose to be naive.
What a cheap shot at all the kids and their parents. Shove it.
SJ has no more drug problems than those public schools you laud and defend in other threads. SJ is a great school, far and above ANY area public school. Take a look at the courses offered, core and electives. I cruised through my first 2 1/2-3 years of college due to the education I received there...I was that far ahead. Yet, that doesn't make it immune from drugs or alcohol problems. Smart kids/dumb kids/rich kids/poor kids/all-ethnicity kids wherever they go to school can have substance problems. And those that don't will be confronted by more at any university, from DeVry to Harvard.
As Kumar said when he couldn't buy weed at Princeton, "What kind of Ivy League school is this?"
3.) "When you are talking about some of these privacy issues, I think the safety issues and the making-good-choices issues are more important," [Fr. Martinez] said."
And there you have in one tidy package the textbook reason why our airports have become 4th Amendment-free zones, why your private information can be stored on a government server, and many freedoms we once enjoyed are eroding before us....the absolute pathological obsession with making everything in life 100% safe. Everybody is guilty, unless they can prove otherwise. So your privacy is gone...it's for "safety" reasons.
I guess it's OK until you have to submit to any of your master's whims. When you are mandated to do things the employer has no right to know, but they assert that they do. I'm sorry--you employ me--you do not own me. Unfortunately, there are a number of people in this country who fail to see the distinction and think it's perfectly OK to know everything about everyone all the time. Maybe it's a "Facebook effect"...I dunno.
And to address "safety", these kids aren't operating heavy machinery at school, climbing stepladders, performing roofing work, or anything remotely "risky" beyond a reasonable amount (i.e. contact sports, gym, normal high school stuff). Safety? What?
4.) ...the students don't have a leg to stand on.
Most likely true. Students are children and as such have fewer rights, especially since their parents will sign the consent forms to get little Scotty into one of the best schools in NW Ohio.
5.) It's rather telling that they will not test for alcohol, which was by far more abused than drugs. That would be far more telling IMO.
I'm not trying to sugarcoat any problems at St. John's. There are drugs for sure. There are alcohol abusers for sure. But trying to weed that out by force feeding drug tests down the throats of all students is wrong. Reasonable suspicion testing--sure, I'll go along with that. Kid is noticeably fucked up--teacher should take note and alert supervisors and they can proceed consulting parents, laying out options, etc.
But a blanket test for the amorphous reason of "safety". To use words I used to use when walking the hallowed halls of SJ: Fuck that.