Dewhurst proposes high-school steroid testing
07:01 PM CST on Saturday, January 27, 2007
Associated Press
AUSTIN – Texas is a hotbed of high school football, where the Friday night lights burn brighter and many of the athletes are among the biggest, fastest and strongest in the country.
A key state leader is pushing to make Texas kids the cleanest athletes as well.
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, a Republican, is proposing a sweeping mandatory random testing program in public schools for steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs.
And it would go far beyond football. Athletes in baseball, basketball, track and other sports likely would be tested, too.
If approved, it would be the nation's largest program of its kind at the high school level, with tens of thousands of students tested every year.
"It will save lives. That's the whole purpose," Dewhurst said. "I'm convinced steroid use in high schools is greater than people want to admit."
The question is whether local school districts, a powerful lobby at the state Capitol, will want to go along. They have resisted in the past.
"Many schools would say they have a bigger problem with alcohol and other drugs," said Charles Breithaupt, athletic director for the University Interscholastic League, the governing body for Texas public school sports. "A lot of them think this is a local issue and way below the radar."
Dewhurst's proposal wouldn't be the first of its kind – New Jersey started a testing program last fall – but it would be the biggest.
Texas had 733,026 students participate in public school sports during the 2005-06 school year, more than any other state.
The New Jersey program only tests athletes who qualify for state championships. Dewhurst envisions a much broader, season-long program in Texas, although he has yet to reveal details.
That's when the questions over local control, student privacy, punishments for failed tests and other issues must be answered.
Some Texas schools already are testing, and their numbers are growing. Of about 1,300 member schools, a UIL survey in 2005 found that 53 schools tested athletes for steroids. By 2006, that number rose to 127.
The 2005 survey also asked the schools that didn't test: "Why not?"
More than half said it was either too expensive or because they did not think steroids are a problem on their campus. Only 39 schools said they considered steroids a problem on their teams.
Of the schools with testing programs in place, only one of 4,100 tests performed in 2005 came back positive for steroids.
And when asked who should decide whether to test, more than 800 schools said it should be handled locally.
School districts worried about cost – the tests can run up to $200 each – scuttled a playoffs-only testing proposal in 2005. With the low rate of positive results at the schools that do test, they wonder if it is worth the money, Breithaupt said.
A state study of substance abuse among 141,000 Texas students in grades 7-12 conducted by Texas A&M University found that steroid use fell from 2 percent in 2004 to 1.5 percent in 2006. Among 12th graders, it went down from 2.4 percent to 1.8 percent.
Tremain Smith, a lanky 17-year-old senior long jumper at Dallas Wylie High School, said he's never taken performance-enhancing drugs or competed against anybody he suspected of taking them. But he thinks testing is a good idea and would be a deterrent.
"It wouldn't be fair. You have to catch the ones trying to get an unfair advantage," Smith said.
His father, Julian, a junior ROTC instructor at the school, agreed.
"I think they should test," Julian Smith said. "These kids these days are trying to buff up their bodies and get bigger and faster."
Dewhurst said schools should be willing to go along if the state pays the bill.
Texas lawmakers began the current legislative session with a $14.3 billion budget surplus for the next two years. A random sampling of 30,000 students, about 4 percent of athletes statewide, at $200 each would cost about $6 million.
"You can't put a price tag on a young person's life," Dewhurst said.
But there's more than money at stake. Schools also worry about privacy – how to collect a urine sample from a 14-year-old female freshman runner, for example – penalties and the litigation that might ensue. Routine disqualifications over eligibility often end up in court.
A look at the New Jersey program might satisfy some of those concerns.
New Jersey contracts with the National Center for Drug Free Sport in Kansas City, Mo., to collect samples and send them to a lab at UCLA. Students and a parent must sign a consent form before the season. The form includes a list of banned substances.
New Jersey randomly selects athletes who qualify for team or individual state championships. The state will test about 500 students this school year.
"It forced parents to take a look at the substances that were banned and maybe take a look at what their children were ingesting," said Bob Baly, assistant director of the New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association.
To protect student privacy, samples are collected by a monitor of the same sex as the athlete. The athlete must take off most of his or her exterior clothing but is allowed to step into a closed stall to urinate. At the college and professional levels, the monitor watches the athlete produce the urine sample.
"We have not violated their rights," Baly said.
Athletes caught with banned substances must sit out compe ion for a year and attend counseling. Although students and their families are notified, overall results aren't made public until the end of the school year.
Rather than catch a lot of cheaters, Baly said, New Jersey officials hope the program's real impact will be keeping kids from taking steroids or other drugs in the first place.
"They are worried about being caught and being labeled as the cheater," Baly said. "Adolescents, if you tell them speeding is dangerous, they're still going to speed. If you tell them about the cop around the corner with the radar gun, hopefully they slow down. It's the fear of being caught."
Dewhurst's plan has drawn support from Don Hooton, who became an activist for steroid testing after his son Taylor committed suicide at the age of 17. Doctors said they believe Taylor Hooton became depressed after he stopped using steroids.
"I hope his plan to curb steroid use in Texas will become a model for this nation," Hooton said at a Dewhurst campaign stop.
D.W. Rutledge, president of the 18,500-member Texas High School Coaches Association, said he believes coaches do a good job steering athletes away from steroids.
Rutledge hasn't surveyed his organization's members, but said coaches would likely have the same worries as school administrators about how such a program would work.
He also said testing would probably be a good thing for the students.
"It gives them a chance to escape the peer pressure, to say 'I can't get involved with that,"' Rutledge said. "It gives them an out."
I read that yesterday. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think it is a good thing though. If they can get them away from roids early on, maybe they would be less likey to do it later in their careers. A player caught with roids at the high school level would ruin the rest of his career. What college would take him?
Oh, I strongly disagree.
Guys with criminal records are highly recruited, guys with no obvious academic skills are highly recruited. A recruitment of a kid on steroids will be portrayed as "making sure this kid learns the right path."
I love how this would be random testing and yet college athletes are tested once a year prior to reporting to the first practice of the season. That makes a lot of sense, make it really hard for high schoolers but college players get to schedule their tests.
I hate the NCAA.
So, they want to blow 6 million a year to address something that affects less than 2% of the demographic?A state study of substance abuse among 141,000 Texas students in grades 7-12 conducted by Texas A&M University found that steroid use fell from 2 percent in 2004 to 1.5 percent in 2006. Among 12th graders, it went down from 2.4 percent to 1.8 percent.
That's ing stupid. If they have this huge budget surplus, take it and go build a big ass wall on the border. That will do more to secure the future of our youths than steroid testing.
what a stupid headline, it should read -drug, not steriod testing. What a waste of time by Dewhurst, no way in texas can afford it, no ing way, the education system is ed and it will cost significantly more than 6 million, they might as well just build toll roads connecting all high schools
Like most things having to do with public education in Texas, this is just a political move to generate headlines and has ntohing to do with improving the quality of schools or the welfare of the students.
i hope they do this...you'd be surprised at how many high school players use steroids....i actually think the study by A&M is conservative. it failed to mention if students were tested or if student athletes were tested. if student athletes were tested, what sport? i have a hard time believing a tennis or soccer player, or any girls for that matter, would use steroids in a ratio higher than to male football players. i can say with 75-90% certainty that more than 2% of high school football players are taking steroids, from talking to players and coaches.
my guess...its more like 10% of football players, maybe higher...maybe lower.
10% of the players at Churchill, Reagan, Westlake, Plano, SouthLake, Woodlands type schools
geez, now i think thats crazy. i don't have a problem with kids that want to smoke some weed or whatever...but i have a big problem with performance enhancing. as long as people want to handicap themselves/tread water....by all means do your thing....
Anyone ever seen Euless Trinity play? I couldnt believe how big their Oline was at the state game 2 years ago, I think they averaged like 270 pounds and dwarfed Judson's line
what about if you play chess or debate, weed and coke would be performance enhancing
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
