. With the economy still in a vulnerable condition, the idea of spending a lot of money on new controversial legislation like this is something that a lot of states are having a hard time 5 with. Regardless of requalification status, substance abuse treatment participation declined sharply and illegal drug use was prevalent. Our study seeks to illuminate the meaning of these benefits to a group of approximately 40 former Cook County recipients. Drug use by state officials can have even further-reaching effects than drug use by other individuals. For the most part, welfare recipients respect the requirements of their contract with the agency. Florida was among the first few states to consider the drug screen.
So far, 65 individuals have been referred for suspicion-based drug testing. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997. But in reality, they come with few, if any, benefits. Understanding both the pros and the cons of it means that there is no black and white answer when it comes to the best solution. The Debate One of the primary benefits of drug-testing welfare recipients from an economic perspective include potential savings for taxpayers and reduced strain on state aid programs. If so, you're receiving government support, and under the logic the Republicans have advanced you, too, should be subjected to drug testing.
It is as simple as that. One out of every eight people who struggle with a drug issue are also struggling with alcoholism. Drug test should be mandatory. This paper presents the results from in-depth interviews with 30 crack-using women also working in the sex trade to support their drug use. These reports are available online for reports issued since 1996, with older reports coming online soon.
Typically people in those situations as well as long term welfare recipients can be described as low mobility. The policy may make it harder for people to buy drugs with their welfare payments, through income management, but research suggests it will not help them overcome addiction and its costs will exceed any savings it generates in income support. As for the cons, one of the biggest concerns recipients have is the bad stigma drug testing will give against welfare recipients. Substance abuse is a problem that affects the whole of society, not just individuals who are abusing substances. While there are many people who disagree with testing welfare recipients, the truth is that the pros greatly outweigh the cons. Cons Many people worry that taking away the welfare benefits due to an adult failing a drug test only makes that household suffer more poverty.
They can lie on their questionnaires about previous drug use, for example. The individuals who actually work for their money are usually required to participate in the random drug testing. Background Compulsory drug detention is the most frequent way to control drug use in China; however, it has often been criticized. Some might think the obvious answer might be politicians pandering to an uninformed constituency. Last but not least, a lot of people applying for assistance are offended by the assumption that the need for assistance also implies a drug addiction. One of the major issues that were discovered was the cost of the drug screening program.
However, one of the main concerns is the price tag that a law like this carries. Its continuation there, and its extension to other provinces, is not recommended. It creates a negative stigma around the concept of being poor. If an individual is not on drugs then it should not be a big deal, just take the test and move on. Also, it would overall save money and make people more accountable for their lifestyle choices. Although most would consent that not all beneficiaries of government assistance are using illegal drugs, because some may, they believe all should be tested.
The Canadian Health Act stipulates that all residents of Canada are to have access to medically necessary hospital and physician services based on need and not the ability to pay. Do These Anti-Drug Testing Arguments Stand Up? It costs a lot of money to find minimal results. Right now, in American politics, money is obviously quite tight—and welfare testing is incredibly expensive. In some states, the ruling has come back that these mandatory drug tests are unconstitutional. Some report rates lower than 0. This means that the individuals will put the money they get from the program into good use. By drug testing all welfare recipients, the idea is that it would be easier to maintain compliance with program regulations.
Draws on the experiences of Oregon, where welfare offices have addressed alcohol and drug problems since 1992, to help states develop ways to include treatment in a work-oriented welfare environment. Of course, because of this, many people will try to use it as a valid argument against drug testing. After all, we've heard for years about how principle drives all their decisions. United States armed forces men and women are required to get drug tested whenever the military tells them to. Drug testing is Expensive Conducting the drug test is costly since there are a lot of tests to be done. It can increase the shame people feel around applying for welfare benefits in the first place, which could drive them away from getting assistance they may need to get by. Pros It Saves tax payer money When drug abusers are eliminated or identified from the program, it helps to save money that might be squandered.
Those in the poverty class are more likely to be spending money on drugs to alleviate the symptoms of their lack of income. Instead, those individuals are required to enter drug treatment in order to receive their welfare checks. A 1996 report from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism found that there is no significant difference in the rate of illegal drug use by welfare applicants and non-applicants. A positive drug test for someone receiving welfare can be the first step to them getting help. Although many of those who did not requalify lost income, medical benefits, and housing, these losses lessened over time and were not associated with increased psychological or medical problems or with declines in other aspects of participants' lives. Thirteen states have passed legislation and there are currently seven states testing applicants for drugs. You may have been randomly screened once or several times after beginning work.