While receiving help from the government there should be a such thing as having a drug test done . Drug testing should be a very important procedure that should be done if you are receiving any type of benefits from the government. In that way it will prove in some ways that the people are not using drug s. Making sure that the benefits people are receiving are used wisely and not on drugs. If people do not have anything to hide then it should not be a problem with them taking a drug test. No one should be receiving benefits if their drug test comes back positive. That is being fair and equal.
However, drug testing should be a must. Strongly suggested,in some cases some people even sell their benefits/ food stamps for cash then turn around
…show more content…
Refusing to take a drug test should result in a warrant for failing the drug test and by that way their might be less drug addicts receiving benefits. Drug testing is also an effective method for saving taxpayer money. Receiving benefits is like getting free money for nothing but once you fail a drug test while receiving benefits that person should be held for thei actions. “Tennessee residents who test positive can still receive their welfare benefits if they enroll in treatment programs. At $200 per positive test result, Tennessee 's program is one of the least costly of the states studied”. Some states agree and some states do not but a lot of people are against the fact that some people get dru tested and some people do …show more content…
“And for those who are receiving assistance or applying for assistance and they are using drugs there should be some kind of way to seek help for addiction”(census.gov). The decision a person make about the choice of using drugs is their choice but just be ready for the consequences that comes behind it. Studies suggest it is not fair for the people who are receiving benefits to fail a drug test and still be able to receive benefits. The ones that is doing drugs is making it harder for the ones that is not and trying to receive assistance. Drug treatment should be required for the drug users that continue to fail the drug test.
Some states in the United States have enacted or proposed legislation requiring drug testing of people applying for welfare. As of March 2014, laws requiring
The ethics of drug testing has become an increased concern for many companies in the recent years. More companies are beginning to use it and more people are starting more to have problems with it. The tests are now more than ever seen as a way to stop the problems of drug abuse in the workplace. This brings up a very large question. Is drug testing an ethical way to decide employee drug use? It is also very hard to decide if the test is an invasion of employee privacy. “The ethical status of workplace drug testing can be expressed as a question of competing interests, between the employer’s right to use testing to reduce drug related harms and maximize profits, over against the employee’s right to privacy, particularly with regard to drug use which occurs outside the workplace.” (Cranford 2) The rights of the employee have to be considered. The Supreme Court case, Griswold vs. Connecticut outlines the idea that every person is entitled to a privacy zone. However this definition covers privacy and protection from government. To work productively especially when the work may be physical it is nearly impossible to keep one’s privacy. The relationship between employer and employee is based on a contract. The employee provides work for the employer and in return he is paid. If the employee cannot provide services because of problems such as drug abuse, then he is violating the contract. Employers have the right to know many things about their employees.
Have you ever questioned the tax taken out of your hard-earned money? Questions similar to that are where the money is going and if it is being used properly. In the U.S. news recently those questions have been on a great deal of State’s minds; reaching back to 2003, this issue has been brought up time and time again. The main topic of tax money is the use of assistance money and are the recipients really using the money for the right reasons. There are many problems with the assistance program but the one that comes to mind the most is that many people abuse the money given to buy the essentials and provide, for their family for illegal drugs. The solution that many state representatives have come up with is drug testing as a requirement for assistance. This will eliminate the abuse of the assistance program; also it will cut down the cost of assistance which is very expensive as a whole.
, implying that because they are poor, they must be drug addicts. However, individuals that support the law, express that the plan being put in effect is to ensure that tax payer’s money isn’t being thrown away on people who only plan to abuse this assistance. Out of the fifty states, only nine have proceeded with the drug testing of candidates. The drug testing has proven to be quite expensive. Consequently, some of the states only test subjects with whom they find suspicion, or that have admitted to drug use in the past. Though the proposal of drug testing Welfare applicants appears to be a good idea to weed out spongers from getting assistance, it seems that more money may be wasted on the testing itself, which would be imprudent in proving this law worthwhile.
There has been an ongoing controversy as to whether welfare recipients should have to have drug testing done. Drug testing will ensure that recipients will not abuse the money they’re given by the government. Having people on welfare take drug test is advantageous because it could save the system money, it would help social workers identify children who are around drug abuse, and it would deter people from purchasing and using illegal drugs; however, it does have a downside such as people who are on prescription medication will show false positives, it can be an invasion of privacy and drug testing can take hundreds and even thousands of dollars to administer.
There is an ongoing debate over whether or not welfare recipients should be drug tested to receive the benefits. Both sides of the argument have merit. Those who oppose the idea of drug testing say that it is unconstitutional and violates the Fourth Amendment. Furthermore, they claim that this law stereotypes and discriminates against those from low socioeconomic demographics, implying that because they are poor, they must be drug addicts. However, those who support the law note that its intended purpose is to ensure that taxpayer money is not being squandered on people who only plan to abuse this assistance. Only nine states so far have instituted drug testing of candidates for welfare assistance. This drug testing has proven to be prohibitively expensive in many cases. Consequently, some states only test subjects with whom they find suspicion, or who have admitted to past drug use. Though proposed drug testing of welfare applicants initially appears to be a good idea to eliminate potential abusers of the system from receiving assistance, it appears that even more money may be wasted on the testing process, which negates the savings that are the primary objective of the law.
The Government needs to draw the line somewhere. In Sweden the Government was giving out free heroin, in order to keep the drugs free from being impure. However, Margaret McKay (2001) declares that if we follow in same steps, soon we will be giving out not only free heroin, but also other illegal substances as well. It will then lead to problems with other drugs as well.
By implementing a policy change to require drug-testing to recipients in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) would be beneficial to clients in a clinical setting. For example, evidence has shown that drug testing has the potential to reduce unnecessary government spending and misuse of funds.
Although the government may have their suspicions on testing individuals who they provide assistance to, I feel that they shouldn’t drug test the individuals who are receiving assistance. Though, drug testing the individual seems as it would be a quaint idea, the cost of the tests stand as an issue. Rosenfeld discusses in his article that most drugs can leave a person’s system in about two to three days. Furthermore, it has become quite common today that majority of the drugs that people utilize drugs stay in a person’s systems for a few weeks to a few months (i.e. marijuana).While taking this thought into mind; it shows how the drugs tests won’t be accurate. Simply because, many people will try to beat the test by attempting to cleanse their system in order to receive their benefits.
In my opinion I feel that this time of authority drug test are not effective. ” It would seem that if this policy were to make way that there would not be such a large rate of recidivism” (U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1999). It takes more that sending a person to prison to break them of their habits. The means which are necessary to aid the cause of ending a drug habit are not available with this policy. Under the Bill of rights, the four rights that this policy violates are, The right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty, the right against unreasonable searches and seizures, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to be treated the same as others.
More drug testing should be used for welfare recipients because it would help ensure help is going to those who truly need it. If someone fails, it doesn’t mean they would stop receiving assistance, they would just have to prove that it’s prescribed by a physician (Haerens 1). They can enroll in a rehab center or correctional facility of some sort and continue to receive welfare while overcoming they drug abuse. Some people honestly do need it to support their families but others just use it to play the system and spend the money on drugs (Haerens 1).
When we don’t know how to control ourselves some changes have to be made. There are always has been and always will be consequences to our actions when we don’t know when to quit. Americans are greedy in so many ways, especially when it comes to getting assistance from the government. A good portion of the United States gets assistance. There are also people who don’t use that assistance, which is awesome. The government has set up assistance for the needy but they have to follow a set guideline in order to get it or continue receiving it. Some use it wisely and others abuse it. When the government started seeing people using that assistance for unnecessary things like drugs they stepped in. Now that people who want to apply for assistance or continue with it they are required to do a drug test/drug screening test. Some of those people think it is irrelevant to do so. So it comes down to this one question, should people who are getting assistance or want to be on assistance be drug tested?
Drug use now in days has grown more over these past years, with the abuse of drugs many people still have the privilege to apply freely to the welfare programs such as WIC, Food Stamps, and TANF. My interest to this topic is why it would be unconstitutional to be able to do a drug testing on welfare applicants.
As the common phrase goes, “where there’s a will, there’s a way.” Change in the welfare system is a must now more than ever because the government is in such a bad economic state, and it must and should be ensured that the tax payers know exactly where their money is going once those welfare checks are administered. Drug testing is a top priority in welfare reform and it should be; tax payers’ money should not be used for the purchase of illegal substances. The state of Texas and the United States face problems with misuse of welfare funds and there must be a change in the system in order to combat this. The purpose of welfare is to aid those that are in financial need to purchase the essentials required for survival. Individuals receiving welfare should subject to a drug test at any moment to ensure that the assistance they are getting is not misused. There are a number of reasons why the recipients should take a drug test and these are the top three: ensuring that tax payers money is not misused, reduce drug use, and to be fair to the working citizens of America.
it. We cannot afford to do this with the drug problem. There are the lives of
When employees get hired, they get a drug test due to the fact that the drug testing can prove if the person they are hiring is a good person for their business. For an example “Approximately eighty-one percent of companies in the United States administer drug testing to their employees.” Drug testing also proves that people who passes it are clean and responsible people who the company can trust on doing their job well done and showing overall percentage of the US using drug testing (Chodorow). People who cheat on a drug test and gets a job will later ruin their job of getting into accidents during working and or start a fight with the boss or coworkers unknowingly just because they were high on drugs. That is why companies strive to do drug tests every time they hire an employee now due to the fact that they don’t want to be reliable for an employee who isn’t responsible and trustworthy of their time at their company. Which it will affect the company financially once employees gets hurt on their job. An employee who is not a drug abuser can really benefit a company by not causing trouble for themselves getting hurt in the company and also the business not being reliable for anything that is caused by the employee; who was not responsible. Another example is that reports confirm that 80% of those injured in “serious drug related accidents are innocent coworkers.” And after it began requiring accidents drug