More handpicked essays just for you.
Welfare mandatory drug testing programs
Should welfare recipients be required to pass a drug test
Should welfare recipients be required to pass a drug test
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Welfare mandatory drug testing programs
Abigail Tobin There are many advantages to drug testing welfare recipients. One advantage is that people that are abusing drugs will stop taking advantage of the benefits that are provided to them by our government. If the working taxpayers are required to take a drug test in order to work, then individuals that are receiving aid from our government should be required to do the same. (Miran, 2015.). These individuals will have to decide what is more important to them, food and shelter or drugs? This proposal could also potentially save taxpayers money by eliminating recipients who are abusing drugs and manipulating the system. They will no longer receive benefits from the government, thus saving the taxpayers money. A great advantage that
...ult, and some times it does not give a result at all. It is unfair because it only targets certain workers; mainly low wage employees. It is unjust because people are automatically accused of using drugs, and that is why the drug test is given. Drug testing should not be abolished, but it should be a more controlled issue since it is something everyone in the US must go through.
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.
25 Nov. 2013. 19. What is the difference between a. and a. Rodriguez, Michael, Heidi Bauer, Elizabeth McLoughlin, and Kevin Grumbach. Screening and Intervention for Intimate Partner Abuse Practices and Attitudes of Primary Care Physicians. The Journal of the American Medical Association 282.5 (1999): 468-474.
, 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 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 welfare of the people in America is put in the hands of the public administrators and political leaders of the United States. These public administrators and political leaders are voted into office to promote new bills and come up with solutions that will be in the best interest of the public’s welfare. When the subject of welfare is debated the first thought that comes to mind is giving underprivileged and disadvantaged people money to help them get out of a financial predicament and/or temporary unemployment. The welfare of the middle and upper class is not as common because the fact that people collect financial support from their employment. There are several biased assumptions about the welfare program in America that leave the subject open for discussion. Such as food stamps, and how low-income Americans are given our taxpaying money to provide food for their households. I’m against the Supplement Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and what toll it’s putting on the taxpayers of America.
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 an effort to make drug testing for employees of the federal government more accurate, to deter false positives and false negatives it has been suggested to use alternative methods of testing. The Associated Press reported a movement by the federal government to "overhaul its employee drug testing program". (TAP, pg 1) Currently, the government tests its employees during the pre-employment selection and when accidents
There has been many cases of fraud that people have lied about housing and unemployment. This leads to questionable debate whether recipients should be drug tested or not. In North Carolina a law has been passes for all of the recipients getting assistance must be drug tested. (Parker 1) “For example, according to The Associated Press, Utah saved $350,000 in its first year of drug-screening welfare applicants, though it found only about 12 people who tested positive” (Parker 1). Many states have questioned this new law to be passed or not because it may save the government money in the long run.
Right now in the United States there are over 2 million people incarcerated in the country’s prisons and jails. Out of this population about one-quarter of these inmates have been convicted of a drug offense. With drug offense arrests increasing nationwide and the prison population increasing there is an alternative to incarceration has been used over the past two decades in many cities across the country. This alternative is in the form of local drug courts that are now found in most major cities in the United States. A drug court is a specialized court in which the judge, prosecutor, public defender or private attorney, probation officers, and treatment counselors work together to help chemically dependent offenders obtain needed treatment and rehabilitation in an attempt to break the cycle of addiction and further criminal offenses. Some argue that treatment rather than incarceration is a waste of time and valuable resources that could be used elsewhere. Research however has shown that court ordered treatment is the best option for drug offenders. Treatments through drug court has proven to be less expensive than incarceration and has also been shown to reduce crime and provide a lower relapse and re-arrest rate for offenders that are placed in drug courts as opposed to those that are not.
I believe that this approach to drug abuse is much more effective and it would be better if our policies actually followed this approach instead of neglectfully pushing it off insisting that this another way to promote the use of drugs because it is not. This approach solves more problems than in causes. Our current methods are to just arrest drug users, get them off the streets, possibly fine them and throw them in rehab or make them do community service hours. We would have less drug related charges if this approach was used more.
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.
Drug testing is essential to the public to prevent substance abuse. Since drug users tend to abuse drugs in any way they can get out of. The benefits of drug testing help society to be safe. Also drug testing can change the community to become more successful. Safety of workplaces often gives drug testing due to preventing violence and safety at workplaces for employees. Drug testing can be a hardship for drug users due to they sometimes need it for medicine, but some other people take advantage of drug usage that makes society unsafe. That’s why drug testing helps eliminate unacceptable substance that happens in the society.
By removing drug abusers from the welfare program, the government is given a chance to save millions of dollars which helps return money back into the pockets of the working social class. It is argued among the masses that drug testing recipients who sign up for welfare would be too expensive, and it can also be viewed as an invasion of privacy. Although it may be more expensive than usual, doing drug tests on members of the community will help decline the number of recipients receiving assistance and using the money for wrongdoings. This new method is also making the individual accountable for their
Mandatory drug tests have proven to help teenagers reduce the use of drugs and alcohol in their daily lives. If young people get used to it when they are young, it’s proven that they would have a difficult time trying to loss their addiction to the substance. Helps the person without any criminal chargers but with all the help needed. They even have different types of drug tests to show the time period of when the person might have taken a drug recently.