drug search at school

[hahaRainbow]

Is this legal? my ds has come home from school (state comp) where (he says) during a science class, a teacher arrived announcing that 'this is a drug free school and now we are going to have the sniffer dogs in'.

Apparently the kids were then lined up while a dog ran up and down sniffing them and another dog sniffed the classroom.

of course I'm not happy about drugs at school but I do wonder about the legalities of this and what IF a kid had been caught.... am I wrong to be worried?

kawliga
Eton is a private school. It can do what it likes.
State schools have to find a place for any child they expel.

Suburban in area where there is an existing mistrust of the police and children are subjected to stop and search multiple times, this policy could do a couple of things off the top of my head. Children will feel that school is not a respite or safe haven from that, as any minute I might have to stop my lessons and be stopped and searched (sniffed) by the police. For the same reasons children's attitude to the police might be hardened. The consequences of that are wide-ranging as I'm sure you're aware.

I'm not saying this will happen, or that there are not ways round it, just surely to proceed with caution is advisable. This policy is not the one size fits all, why not what on earth could go wrong, people won't be scared unless they're guilty that some posters think of it as.

And FOR ME and the point I started with and throughout is that I have an absolute visceral reaction to the idea of children being stopped in their lessons and lined up. That is what I have been saying all the way through, and I've been ascribed all sorts of positions that I have never said I hold.

Frankly I think it's just one of those threads where everyone's enjoying ploughing in. But I'm not the only one who has reservations about this (others may have them for different reasons) and it's not unreasonable to be really uncomfortable at the idea of what the OP describes.

Quite normal at local schools (secondary). When I worked at a local college (more regular searches and spot checks with metal detectors) we also got the joy of being a visiting place to socialise the trainee puppies. Utterly adorable, slightly disruptive but a blissful one for those with no concerns. Amazing to watch them at work. A lesson in itself for students being lured by dealers etc.

All I have claimed is that I do not like the idea of what the OP describes.

I have been ascribed all sorts of positions by people and I think people are probably just enjoying putting the boot in.

But it is not WRONG for me to FEEL that I have a visceral reaction to the idea of what the OP describes.

Kawliga just to be clear then, you think a child urinating in a plastic beaker (with someone else in attendance) and having that urine tested for drugs is a better option than a child lining up and having a dog run past them?

I mean, I don't have an issue with either, but would prefer the second option for my child, given the choice.

Well, it is utterly shameful if children at private schools get to have only positive experiences with the police (because drug dealers are dealt with without lining all the children up for searches) while children at state schools grow up thinking it is normal for them and their classmates to be lined up and searched like this. This is not ok. Parents should protest, not say they are 'delighted' because after all their dc are not drug dealers so they have nothing to hide.

Pilchard is just putting in words what anybody with an awareness of history that has unfolded in our own lifetime should immediately know. Greater societies than this one have disintegrated because of such practices. Human dignity must be a common experience, shared by everybody, or it is worth nothing. You can't have enclaves where children never experience this and others where everybody thinks it is normal and ok for this to happen at school. In the end we all pay the price.

Eve I would prefer that personally.

I would also prefer if the dog was in a room and the children came to them.

I can't explain adequately (obviously) how deeply uncomfortable the process described in the OP makes me.

At work I would prefer to pee in a pot / have a swab / go in a room with a dog than people suddenly appearing through the door, stop what you're doing get up and line up you are going to be checked now.

It would totally shit me up even if I hadn't done anything, that's honest.

I'm not sure about someone else being in attendance though either!

Can't they do a saliva swab?

Kawliga that assumes that it's the Police doing the searching. There are numerous private companies that offer these services to companies and other private entities. I would expect that these are used a fair bit rather than the Police, who aren't at the beck and call of private schools to turn up with a dog whenever they decide it's time.

Call me old-fashioned, pilchard, but I have a pretty visceral reaction to the thought that my child could be sold drugs in school.

That won't catch dealers necessarily mind, just users.

kawgila yes I agree with that, there are class or wealth issues around this all as well, plus obviously the race issues that I've been alluding to.

The OP was about the police UncleT and that's what I've been reacting to.

If it is different entities for rich / poor, state / non state then you are in this situation (as old as the hills) where there are one set f consequences for the haves and another for the have nots. That's a general idea around social commentary I guess and while I can see kawliga's point I don't know that it will be of interest to many.

All urine based drugs tests have to be done with someone else watching, otherwise the sample could be adulterated or someone else's given instead.

I'm a grown woman used to living in pretty crappy circumstances and little or no privacy, but still feel awkward when providing a sample for CDT - my 12-year-old-still-trying-to-get-used-to-periods self would have been mortified.

Urine tests won't work for the dealers that PPs are interested in though, they won't necessarily be using.

The practices with random testing at work etc are around catching use aren't they so not sure how relevant here.

If people are talking urine testing then are they interested in children who have used drugs as well as ones supplying?

Pilchard I know - purely in response to Kawliga's point about private schools.

Urine testing is also expensive and takes a while to do in comparison with running a dog around. You'll cover far more people more efficiently with a dog than any kind of individual testing.

Up until this thread I would have thought that children who have been targeted and pressured by gangs would feel that they had a safe haven if they had a school in which it was clear none of that would be accepted once they were through the gates.

Maybe it depends how deep you are in the gang culture and what your role in the gang is. I don't have direct experience, my school was rough but I managed to avoid problems. I've read Girl A which isn't exactly the same but she does talk about how changing to a more permissive school made it easier for her to become a victim.

callooh I was just about to point out that the biggest difference between stop and search and sending a sniffer dog into a secondary school is that in the former case, we all know that certain racial and social stereotypes are unfairly applied when selecting who to stop, whereas in the latter everyone is checked, regardless of their race, social class, etc.

So it might just be that the sniffer dog has a positive effect on those who feel unfairly targeted by stop and searc, in that they see the rule being applied in a non-discriminatory way.

My dd has never been searched for drugs at school. She has never been asked to wee into a beaker either. I also have never been searched for drugs in my life, ever, unless you count being present in an airport arrivals hall when the sniffer dogs are going round the baggage carousel. I guess I don't work in a workplace where drugs have to be searched for. Neither do any of my friends. And their dc have never been searched for drugs at school. For that matter I've never been stop-and-searched by police while going about my daily business.

So: I am only saying this because some posters seem to think the OP's scenario is normal and that it happens at all schools and is considered perfectly ok and even delightful. No. Some people are living a life where this never happens (call it privilege) and others are being made to think it is normal and they should put up with it or even be grateful.

Yet drugs are a problem everywhere: what differs is how it is dealt with. I haven't yet taught my dd to say no if someone tries to sell her drugs, but I do teach her how to say no to stuff and I think this is my job - no, I would not prefer that it should be dealt with by having police swarm her school to take out the 'drug dealers' with dogs.

That's a good point oddboots. In that if they are being regularly "sniffed" at school they can say no way can I bring this into school.

My worry would be won't they get the pressure to do it out of school instead and you've lost the opportunity to pick it up at school and take some action. Don't know.

Going to read your link

Oh OK it's a link to a book!

Rochdale (and all the other cases) were fucking appalling. Not sure how it relates to this though. In those cases the authorities were told what was happening multiple times and failed to act. The victims reported to the police, SS knew, etc. There is no suggestion from anyone on this thread that if the authorities know a child is using / dealing drugs they should not act.

Screening for sexual abuse would be possible maybe? Ask questions - that sort of thing? What are you thinking.