Washu and test

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

dcham

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
179
Reaction score
0
Points
0
  1. Medical Student
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Washu's drug testing now? What's up with that?
 
dcham said:
Washu's drug testing now? What's up with that?

guess i better get myself off the smack then... :idea:

i actually kinda figured all schools would do some sort of drug screening, at least before any kind of patient contact begins...
 
dcham said:
Washu's drug testing now? What's up with that?


Woah, are you serious? For the pre-clinical years at least it seems like an invasion of privacy to me.
 
Oak said:
Woah, are you serious? For the pre-clinical years at least it seems like an invasion of privacy to me.

why? if someone's not on drugs, they have nothing to hide...and if they are on drugs, it doesn't really seem that they should have any privilege or right to hide that fact. i've never really understood what privacy is being invaded by simply verifying that someone isn't on drugs (i.e. breaking the law).

but, at the very least, it seems that any students working with patients should be allowed to be tested...i certainly wouldn't want to be a patient of someone using drugs...
 
jbrice1639 said:
why? if someone's not on drugs, they have nothing to hide...and if they are on drugs, it doesn't really seem that they should have any privilege or right to hide that fact. i've never really understood what privacy is being invaded by simply verifying that someone isn't on drugs (i.e. breaking the law).

but, at the very least, it seems that any students working with patients should be allowed to be tested...i certainly wouldn't want to be a patient of someone using drugs...

FYI, the "unreasonable search and seizure" provisions of the US Constitution protect your privacy right to your bodily fluids. The "nothing to hide" analysis you have indicated above is contrary to longstanding tenets of US law -- you are innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa, and the government has very limited rights under which it may intrude on innocents' rights.
But there is no "right" for you to work in certain fields/professions, and so employers (and in this case certain professional schools) can reasonably require drug testing if there is a legitimate reason for doing so.
I think more important than "working with patients", as you suggest, there is a legitimate reason to do drug tests on people who are involved in the handling and administration of medications. Virtually everyone who works for the pharamaceutical industry has to go through drug testing, so it seems like common sense that you test those who are also going to be on the distribution chain - actually administering the drugs.
(A better question would be how limited in scope the drug testing should be, and whether there should be any sort of limitation as to what kind of drugs or substances they can test for.)
 
Top Bottom