• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Hillary wants to implement universal drug screening for children & teens

BobStackFan4Life

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
31,661
Reaction score
1,538
But they decided not to announce this aspect of her drug prevention program during the election.
On the screening point, will let policy get into details, but it's the major pillar of the 'prevention' goal. Would folks be more comfortable if it said something like [CAPS=ADDITION] "ensuring every child and teenager is annually screened for substance use DISORDERS, JUST AS THEY ARE ALREADY SCREENED FOR OTHER ILLNESSES"?
schools and doctors regularly screen for all sorts of diseases, and substance abuse screening /= random drug testing.
to confront the drug addiction crisis head-on. My plan sets four goals: first, ensuring every American family has access to affordable and effectivetreatments; second, ensuring that we work with pediatricians to be sure that every child and teenager is educated about and screened for substance use disorders as part of their annual doctor’s visit, just as we do for hearing, eyesight, developmental delays and so much more; third, ensuring all first responders have access to naloxone, which stops overdoses from becoming fatal; and fourth, requiring that all health-care providers receive training in recognizing substance use disorders and consult a prescription drug monitoring program before providing opiates.
(1) The American Academy of Pediatrics came out with a strong policy statement in 2011
https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/AAP-Recommends-Substance-Abuse-Screening-as-Part-of-Routine-Adolescent-Care.aspx?nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token
that every child/teenager should be screened for substance abuse disorders when they visit the doctor for their annual child check up or for an accute care visit in which it might be suspected. HRC has a long history of working with AAP and supporting their efforts to do more screenings. When she was First Lady, she worked on the Newborn Hearing Screening to make sure all babies get hearing screenings, and in the last several years she has pushed for and supported the AAP's effort to screen young kids for symptoms of "toxic stress." This is not "mandatory," but it is part of prevention and wellness and it is about supporting the AAP in making this happen by raising awareness, making sure pediatricians get reimbursed for their time in doing these screenings, etc. I have tried to clarify with edits to the speech, pasted below and attached.
Even though they describe the screening as the major pillar for Hillary's drug prevention effort, they decide they'll bring it up after the election.
Hi all - I am hearing separately that even with this change that the screenings could be misconstrued and likely more trouble than they are worth. Let's kill it and I'll revisit it as a good policy idea on the other side of this election but not one for campaign fodder.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9373
 
Last edited:
It's entertaining how Trump-shills denounce every action of Hillary's that is even remotely shrewd or savy as if it's something nefarious or dishonest. I've talked about the "private & public stance" email to multiple people in various leadership positions, and unanimously they all said they do the exact same.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
 
Clinton's staff realizes that a decent policy idea will be twisted by political opponents into something totally unrecognizable; wisely decides to delay rollout in the heat of campaign; emails leak and political opponents promptly twist decent policy idea into something totally unrecognizable. Does BSF enjoy proving Clinton's campaign right?
 
And if they don't pass the drug screening, they don't get WIC and Welfare when they turn 18 !
 
Is this a bad thing?

Working with a respected organization like the American Academy of Pediatrics to take on a major public health initiative could only be a bad thing in this idiotic election.
 
Drug testing the poors? Great!

Including drug screening in pediatric exams? Sad!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ITK
Screening doesn't necessarily mean testing anyway. Everything in the OP seems like a great idea, including tabling it for now because it could be misconstrued.
 
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Do I think drug screening kids is a good thing? That doesn't matter. The question is: "should the Government be drug screening kids?"

I'm a federal criminal defense attorney. The issues that I could see stemming from this policy are so repugnant that it harkens back to Bill Clinton's Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act disaster.

A screen is not a test. A screen identifies risk, it doesn't require any search or seizure. Usually it's just a survey or taking a patients history.
 
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Do I think drug screening kids is a good thing? That doesn't matter. The question is: "should the Government be drug screening kids?"

I'm a federal criminal defense attorney. The issues that I could see stemming from this policy are so repugnant that it harkens back to Bill Clinton's Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act disaster.

They are not talking about invasive drug testing. They are talking about things like this.
 
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Do I think drug screening kids is a good thing? That doesn't matter. The question is: "should the Government be drug screening kids?"

I'm a federal criminal defense attorney. The issues that I could see stemming from this policy are so repugnant that it harkens back to Bill Clinton's Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act disaster.

Schools (actual "Government" with a capital G) already have prevention programs in place, and have for a long time. That's all this is--an extension of prevention policy to the area it should already be in, our healthcare system.
 
ITT the idea of tabling a great idea,as indicated by people that understand what it actually means ,because it will be misconstrued and twisted by people that don't understand it is proven the right thing to do.
 
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Do I think drug screening kids is a good thing? That doesn't matter. The question is: "should the Government be drug screening kids?"

I'm a federal criminal defense attorney. The issues that I could see stemming from this policy are so repugnant that it harkens back to Bill Clinton's Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act disaster.

Yes, this is one of the early concerns a staffer makes:
Democrats are going to have a field day with it. It is also probably unconstitutional violation of 4th amendment, isn't it?
Keep in mind, they're crafting a speech, so they're trying to make it sound as palatable as possible.
 
ITT the idea of tabling a great idea,as indicated by people that understand what it actually means ,because it will be misconstrued and twisted by people that don't understand it is proven the right thing to do.

prescient

one minute later, a wild misconstruer appears!
 
ITT the idea of tabling a great idea,as indicated by people that understand what it actually means ,because it will be misconstrued and twisted by people that don't understand it is proven the right thing to do.

ITT shills who support their candidate lying by omission when it comes to major policy initiatives much of the public are likely to oppose. For the shills, ignorance really is bliss. "Just turn off your mind and trust Hillary, don't question her, she knows best."
 
Back
Top