Affirmative Case: Camp 1998
"There's nothing else we can do to help her. We should go tell her family," says the doctor next to you. You are a doctor working in the ER and you hate this part of your job the most. An hour ago, a teenage softball player was brought in with a drug overdose. She is alive, but there is no brain activity and she will die if ever taken off the machines. Now you will have to face a room full of teary eyed people with the terrible truth. It is incidents such as this that lead me to affirm the resolution that states Resolved: That The Random Testing Of Student Athletes For Illegal Drug Use Is Justified.
I will offer the following definitions from Webster's Dictionary to clarify the resolution:
*random- lacking a definite plan, purpose, or pattern.
*testing- a critical examination, observation, or evaluation.
*student athlete- one who attends a school and is trained in exercises, sports, or games. Requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina.
*illegal- not according to or authorized by law.
*drug- something that causes addiction or habituation.
My value is that of security, which is being secure, safe, and having protection.
The most appropriate criteria in this debate is that of the social contract which states that people must give up some rights to keep your rights. In this case we must give up a little privacy to keep our right to safety and protection.
I will support today's resolution with three contentions. First, that random drug testing would help everyone. Second, the loss of a little privacy is a small price to pay. And third, there are many benefits to random drug testing. I will now direct my attention to
CONTENTION 1: Random drug testing would help everyone.
It would help the athletes on drugs by offering rehabilitation that will help get them off the drugs. It will also help catch and prevent mental, reproductive, and other physical problems. In Skinner's words, "School years are the time when physical, physiological, and addictive drugs are most severe." This is why we need to help the athletes now before it is too late for them. It would also help other athletes because they wouldn't have to worry about being hurt by a druggie on the field. Students would also be helped because they wouldn't have to worry about being attracted by a drugged athlete. Random drug testing would help every one at a small price to pay which brings me to
CONTENTION 2: The loss of a little privacy is a small price to pay.
The testing conditions involved with collecting the urine samples are very similar to those of most normal restrooms. Also, all the medical information is kept very confidential. The only way people would find out is if you told them. This is a very little breach of privacy to pay to receive the benefits of random drug testing which brings me to
CONTENTION 3: There are many benefits to random drug testing.
One, it would curb drug use. According to Susan Tekel, when Vietnam vets came back from Vietnam, the army noticed a rise in the drug rate. When they instated random drug testing, the drug rate dropped from 27% to 9% in only five years. Two, it would make a better learning environment for the students and the faculty. In the opinion of Linda Greenhouse of the New York Times, "The effects of a drug infested school are visited not just upon the users, but upon the entire student and faculty as the educational process is disrupted." By lowering the drug problem, the educational environment would be better. Next, there would be less drug related injuries because there would be less drugs. And finally, random drug testing would lower the crime rate. According to the National Institute of Justice, the juvenile crime rate has been rising and most of the crimes committed are done by juveniles on drugs. If we could instate random drug testing and get rid of the drug problem, we would also get rid of the crime problem.
The bottom line is that random drug testing helps everyone at a very small price and receive many benefits from it.
I am now open for cross examination.
Return to My Old Cases