# Drug Tests For Welfare Recipients? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 21, 2011, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784 "2011-07-21T00:47:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/161 "2011-07-23T04:02:46Z")
> **[Workplace Drug Testing and Worker Drug Use](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1955359/)** > > To examine the nature and extent of the association between workplace drug testing and worker drug use.Repeated cross-sections from the 2000 to 2001 National Household Surveys on Drug Abuse (NHSDA) and the 2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health... It is true, This says 46 percent. ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/162 "2011-07-23T04:38:02Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > Well, I didn’t have to pee in a cup. I see no reasons why welfare recipients should be held to a stricter standard, so there. Well, if you want to go that route, then one could argue that the reason welfare recipients are being held to a higher standard is because they’d be getting free money courtesy of someone else (more than likely that nice conservative/Republican fellow), in which case we want to make sure the welfare recipient isn’t a drug user, as (s)he would be likely to use any money given on his/her drug habit. …But that’s if you want to go that route. > [@](#): > > Also, since there’s no reason to suspect any of these people of using drugs it seems to me that this would be a violation of their privacy as per your constitution. It’s not. In many areas, drug testing is already required. Besides, if you’re so worried about your privacy and don’t want to submit to a drug test to obtain welfare, then don’t look for welfare. Welfare ain’t a right. Receiving welfare should be conditional. > [@](#): > > That turned out to be the case when Michigan tried this a few years ago, it’s no less an invasion of privacy now. That’s great for Michigan then. And? > [@](#): > > As for my straw man, it isn’t one. It’s pretty clearly a value judgement on the OP’s part. There doesn’t seem to be much call for auditing welfare recipients to see they aren’t taking welfare money and blowing it all on lottery tickets or the ponies or movies or the 700 Club. A value judgment based on the fact that a drug user is likely to spend the money they’re given on drugs? > [@](#): > > I have no wish to get into a weeks-long back and forth with you; I remember watching the abortion thread. I’ve said my piece, take it or leave it. I’ll leave it, because it’s wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/163 "2011-07-23T16:55:18Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > It will cost you more in the long run to try and do this (and it’s stupid in any case), and, as Lobohan pointed out, addicts still have kids who still need food, clothing and shelter. You are trying to ‘solve’ a non-problem, and the solution will end up costing more than the problem did…and will have fairly unsavory results. > > If you think drugs are a problem then treat the problem directly instead of trying this dippy back door crap. > > -XT Actually, it would cost less in the long run. If we can separate children from drug addicted parents it would increase the likelihood of breaking the cycle of poverty (as well as future drug use passed on by example). Poverty has little to do with money. It is a social condition brought on by a lack of skills starting with social skills and moving outward. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/164 "2011-07-23T17:01:57Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Actually, it would cost less in the long run. If we can separate children from drug addicted parents it would increase the likelihood of breaking the cycle of poverty (as well as future drug use passed on by example). > > Poverty has little to do with money. It is a social condition brought on by a lack of skills starting with social skills and moving outward. So you’re advocating that we take hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions of additional children and put them into the foster care system. You think this will \*save \*money, and produce \*better \*results for the children? Interesting. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/165 "2011-07-23T17:16:25Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > …Poverty has little to do with money… This is just the kind of fresh, original, outside the box thinking we need! ---
**Author:** ![I\_Know\_Nothing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/f04885/32.png) [@I\_Know\_Nothing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Know_Nothing)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/166 "2011-07-23T17:57:27Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > I see no reason why welfare recipients shouldn’t be held to a similar standard when it comes to receiving and continuing to receive welfare. Replace “welfare recipients” with “people who receive government aid” and I might agree with you. I would really like to be convinced that people supporting the drug testing of welfare recipients are not singling them out just because they are poor, but I’m just not seeing it. What about Pell grants? federally subsidized loans?(the list can go on and on)I doubt I’ll ever see a law requiring college students to stop by a government office and piss in a cup even though the government $$ they receive is just as likely to go to drug/alcohol abuse(if not more so, I’d love to see the stats). The more I read the more I am convinced that laws requiring drug testing of welfare recipients are singling out poor people based on negative stereotypes. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/167 "2011-07-23T18:17:38Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > So you’re advocating that we take hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions of additional children and put them into the foster care system. > > You think this will \*save \*money, and produce \*better \*results for the children? > > Interesting. Yes, I actually do think it would save money in the long run. We have no functioning instrument to break the cycle of poverty. Children born into this cycle are far more likely to repeat it. Whether we use drug abuse as an excuse to rescue the children or some other method is a debatable item. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/168 "2011-07-23T18:32:29Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > This is just the kind of fresh, original, outside the box thinking we need! Yes, it is. I came from depression era parents and I have a pretty good idea what they went through considering I was unemployed for 3 1/2 years. Poverty is more than a lack of money. A great deal of the success of surviving it was the skill-sets learned from my parents and their parents. they actively taught me the skills needed to function in society and pushed me to learn in and out of school. I can’t begin to imagine how my life would be if they were drug addicted serial welfare recipients. If we, as a society, can’t recognize the damage that this kind of upbringing does to a child then we are lost. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/169 "2011-07-23T18:38:44Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Yes, it is. I came from depression era parents and I have a pretty good idea what they went through considering I was unemployed for 3 1/2 years. Poverty is more than a lack of money. A great deal of the success of surviving it was the skill-sets learned from my parents and their parents. they actively taught me the skills needed to function in society and pushed me to learn in and out of school. I can’t begin to imagine how my life would be if they were drug addicted serial welfare recipients. > > If we, as a society, can’t recognize the damage that this kind of upbringing does to a child then we are lost. It would have been better to have alcohol, coke, oxycotin designer drug, addicted rich parents. But we would never drug test them. Far too important and connected. We forgive all sins of the rich. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/170 "2011-07-23T18:49:35Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > It would have been better to have alcohol, coke, oxycotin designer drug, addicted rich parents. But we would never drug test them. Far too important and connected. We forgive all sins of the rich. I disagree vehemently. Do you really want to be the child of Charley Sheen? How many wealthy people have burned themselves and everything around them down? Look how messed up the lives are of people like Mackenzie Phillips. I’d take the modest life my parents provided over the drug influenced life of Mz Phillips any day. Generational poverty is just that. It’s a social disease passed down from generation to generation. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/171 "2011-07-23T20:28:11Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Poverty has little to do with money. It is a social condition brought on by a lack of skills starting with social skills and moving outward. I disagree. Poverty is _lack of money_. Sure, sometimes it’s a lack of skills. Sometimes it’s your house burning down, or an earthquake followed by a tsunami that washes away everything you own, or losing your job in a bad economy and not being able to find comparable work again for years. Right now, the default assumption is that if you’re poor there is something wrong with _you_ - any attempt to explain a cause like a house fire or natural disaster or whatever is handwaved as an exception. The expectation is that educated, mentally healthy people NEVER experience poverty. That is not true. Now, educated, mentally healthy people are better able to climb out of it… after a long time… but too many services for the poor center around the default assumption of poor people being defective/immoral/addicted/whatever. Treatment is underfunded, job training programs likewise (and often inadequate or focus on skills no longer relevant) and just make it harder for people, not easier. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/172 "2011-07-23T20:30:19Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Generational poverty is just that. It’s a social disease passed down from generation to generation. Oh, I see - you’re talking about _generational_ poverty. I was talking about poverty in general - that is, a lack of money that can arise from a number of causes. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2011, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/173 "2011-07-23T21:17:50Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Generational poverty is just that. It’s a social disease passed down from generation to generation. I’m not disagreeing about generational poverty being something we don’t really have the tools to address in the U.S. at present. Let’s start first by pointing out that it’s really a relatively small number of the poor who are actually trapped in a generational poverty cycle–most are lower-middle-class folks who hit a run of bad luck, especially now. That having been said, how do you propose to properly raise all these children of the poor? The adoption and foster care systems are already overwhelmed (and in the case of foster care, abuse is disturbingly likely). Orphanages have never been a positive step for anyone ever as far as I can tell. There’s this pervasive idea out there, especially among social conservatives in my experience, that there are plenty of willing parents for any child who needs a hand up. In the real world, that’s really only true of defect-free white babies–everyone else spends a lot of time in foster care. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2011, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/174 "2011-07-24T04:17:29Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Right now, the default assumption is that if you’re poor there is something wrong with _you_ - any attempt to explain a cause like a house fire or natural disaster or whatever is handwaved as an exception. The expectation is that educated, mentally healthy people NEVER experience poverty. The standard assumption during low unemployment is that anybody without a job for any length of time has something wrong with them. It prevents people from getting an interview because on paper they appear to be slackers. It’s an unfair assumption because reality can’t be written down on paper. This is a brutal assumption to make during high unemployment. In my area people are competing for entry level jobs at a 1000 to 1 ratio and companies are still laying off. This is why there should be no gaps in unemployment on a resume. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2011, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/175 "2011-07-24T04:43:44Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > I’m not disagreeing about generational poverty being something we don’t really have the tools to address in the U.S. at present. > > Let’s start first by pointing out that it’s really a relatively small number of the poor who are actually trapped in a generational poverty cycle–most are lower-middle-class folks who hit a run of bad luck, especially now. > > That having been said, how do you propose to properly raise all these children of the poor? The adoption and foster care systems are already overwhelmed (and in the case of foster care, abuse is disturbingly likely). Orphanages have never been a positive step for anyone ever as far as I can tell. > > There’s this pervasive idea out there, especially among social conservatives in my experience, that there are plenty of willing parents for any child who needs a hand up. In the real world, that’s really only true of defect-free white babies–everyone else spends a lot of time in foster care. I’ve never been a huge fan of foster care. Seems to me kids are just punted from home to home without a game plan beyond rotating them as needed. I’d rather go with an orphanage system. But then again, that would require a government agency with some degree of competency. I fear that ship has sailed. ---
**Author:** ![Indygrrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@Indygrrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indygrrl)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2011, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/176 "2011-07-24T07:09:11Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Yes, I actually do think it would save money in the long run. We have no functioning instrument to break the cycle of poverty. Children born into this cycle are far more likely to repeat it. Whether we use drug abuse as an excuse to rescue the children or some other method is a debatable item. I think most children are far better off with parents who have drug problems than they’d be in the foster care system. Outcomes after years in different foster homes cannot be better than growing up with imperfect parents. Again, the stereotype of addicts being degenerate losers is not accurate for most. And considering the fact that addiction affects all income classes makes this idea wildly unrealistic. ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2011, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/177 "2011-07-24T14:15:26Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Actually, it would cost less in the long run. If we can separate children from drug addicted parents it would increase the likelihood of breaking the cycle of poverty (as well as future drug use passed on by example). > > Poverty has little to do with money. It is a social condition brought on by a lack of skills starting with social skills and moving outward. That assumes that children placed in foster care are healthier, better educated, develop social skills and are better able to receive higher education or training than kids whose parents are _functional_ addicts. Given what we see coming out of the foster care system now (kicked out at age 18 with $100 and no where to live, even, less follow on help than someone released from prison) there’s no reason to assume that to be true. > [@Magiver](#): > > I disagree vehemently. Do you really want to be the child of Charley Sheen? How many wealthy people have burned themselves and everything around them down? Look how messed up the lives are of people like Mackenzie Phillips. I’d take the modest life my parents provided over the drug influenced life of Mz Phillips any day. Those stories aren’t solely about drug use, though, they’re also about fame and celebrity, undeserved privilege and access, itinerant and unsupervised lives and a revolving cast of adult influences in and out of the homes. You can’t compare celebrities and celebrities’ kids to mundane folks and say “aha look at that!” Apples and oranges. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2011, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/178 "2011-08-25T15:50:33Z")
[http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/25/only-2-of-welfare-applicants-in-florida-failed-drug-tests/](http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/25/only-2-of-welfare-applicants-in-florida-failed-drug-tests/) So as stated earlier, testing for drugs often costs a lot more than it saves. In Florida, the welfare recipients are being drug tested. two percent are positive. That is probably a lesser than the walking around ,working population. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2011, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/179 "2011-08-25T18:30:09Z")
But isn’t it worth millions so that those impovershed drug addicts can get LESS help in life? I know I’m sleeping better. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784/180 "2011-08-25T18:52:55Z")
Run the same tests on Wall Street and you would find a hell of a lot more than 2 percent. Include alcohol and it would be a stunning indictment of our money gods. They are not offering them help. The plan is to DQ them from welfare. How does that help them? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/589784.md?page=10)