Home drug testing needs regulation
Campus Times
October 18, 1996
by Monica Schwarze
Editorial Director
When Sunny Cloud returned home from work early one Sunday evening to
the the sight of her 15-year-old son smoking a joint, it was the shock of
a lifetime and the beginning of a political debate.
Concerned that her child was dabbling in harder drugs, she dragged him to
the nearest hospital for a routine drug test, only to balk at the insensitivity
of the nurse and the $120 price tag of the test.
Since reality is often the mother of invention, Cloud's next step was to
develop a $40 home drug testing kit that can be used by parents worried
that their children may be abusing amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine,
marijuana, PCP, benzodiazepines, opiates or alcohol.
Parents began buying the test in droves and Cloud's career as an activist
and a businesswoman had begun. However, she had missed one small detail-the
test had not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
Cloud claims that she has not applied for approval because the administration
has a history of only approving such tests with a doctor's prescription.
She says she wants the very personal ordeal of drug testing to remain within
the home.
Now, Republicans have jumped on Cloud's invention as a campaign issue, using
the possibility of limited FDA approval as an example of the Clinton administration's
soft stance on drugs.
This has prompted the FDA to bend under the pressure of the GOP and voting
parents. Approval is becoming more of a possibility, and, only last week,
Vice President Al Gore used Cloud's plight as an example of unnecessary
government red tape.
However, before the FDA grants parents the rights to test their children
for drugs and alcohol at any time, with only a $40 fee, they should reconsider
why they have only offered such tests limited approval in the past.
Cloud's test is a good idea born of a genuine need. Her statement that "drug
use is more the norm than the exception now," is a sad truth in many
areas of the United States. However, no matter how useful her test is, Cloud
and the FDA should consider the many ways that it can be misused.
It is true that, like Cloud, many parents would have a valid reason for
wanting their children tested for drugs. For those parents who would receive
a positive result, the test would be a life-saver. Yet, there are overly
suspicious parents who would abuse the test, using it as punishment for
the many times their children have come home late, received less-than-positive
grades or misbehaved in any way. Such use of Cloud's test would border on
child abuse.
There is also the possibility that drug users may order the test for themselves,
to ensure that their drug use is below the noticeable level before undergoing
a school or company test.
If the FDA approved the test with a doctor's prescription, these and many
other methods of misuse would be prevented. The doctor would be able to
ask specifically why the parent needed to test their child, and they would
be able to judge whether the test was being used correctly.
The test would not be any harder to obtain and, in the process of FDA approval
and regulation, it would become a much more reliable means of testing for
drug abuse.
Cloud should consider this before she makes the decision not to submit her
test to the FDA. She should consider that even the best ideas can go astray.
And, if Cloud does submit her test, the FDA should remember that its job
is to maintain the health and well being of a nation-a task that is not
attached to any political agenda.
Monica Schwarze, a senior journalism major, is editorial director of
the Campus Times. She can be reached by e-mail at schwarze@ulvacs.ulaverne.edu.