Board reviews student-athlete drug-testing procedures, asks staff to study saliva testing and privacy safeguards
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
School board members reviewed the district's drug-testing policy and procedures after public concerns about privacy and female athletes. District testing administrator Mrs. Martin described current practice (individual collection, DOT guidelines, instant urine with lab confirmation) and told the board staff will research saliva alternatives and costs.
The Lincoln County School District #2 board spent an extended portion of its meeting reviewing the district's student-athlete drug-testing policy and how tests are administered.
Board members recapped concerns raised at a prior meeting about privacy and application, especially for female athletes, and invited Mrs. Martin (the district staff member who administers the tests) to explain the current process.
Mrs. Martin described the step-by-step procedure used at the high school: "I have the kids sign in. I walk them through the process. I tell them, first thing we're gonna do is sign in. Next thing we're gonna do is I'm gonna have you wash your hands because if you have any chemicals or anything on there, we wanna make sure that that does not taint the test. So it's for your protection." She said students are taken one at a time to the nurse's area, a blue dye is used in the toilet to discourage flushing, and instant urine cups are checked for temperature and appearance before a positive instant result is sent to a lab for confirmation.
Mrs. Martin acknowledged limitations of instant urine tests: "The urine instant ones, they're not as reliable as others. You will get false positives. You'll get false negatives." She discussed alternatives, saying that oral (saliva) testing and mailed lab tests are available and generally more reliable but would increase costs and turnaround time. She also said hair-follicle testing is an option she could research if the board requested more information.
Board members asked about privacy, the randomizer process, and the feasibility and cost of switching to saliva-based testing. Several trustees urged an emphasis on counseling and support for students and requested clearer procedural language in the policy so parents and students understand how tests are selected and administered.
The board directed administration to research saliva testing options, pricing differences (instant vs. mail-in), certification requirements for staff to administer alternate tests, and to return with recommendations about procedure adjustments and communication materials that clarify privacy protections and the randomization process.
The meeting did not change the policy text that night; trustees said they were generally supportive of the policy as written but wanted the administration to present options and cost estimates before adopting procedural changes.