Letter

[gryde]

Someone ( a teacher or anyone else) can test positive for a drug and not be an addict. They might not need rehab. I'm sure we all know someone who uses on occasion.

Just a thought. People seem to equate a positive test with addiction.

[djs]

Kam School wrote:

I think they should drug test Mufi.
Mufi stay teaching his "students" (supporters) how for lie, cheat and steal.
Dump Mufi.

If that's true, then he obviously learned from the republicans - the true masterminds of deception, sort-of/kind-of lies, and smoke and mirrors.

[Sam]

Gryde...You are right , a person can test positive and not be an addict, but using drugs does alter your ability to think correctly and make important decisions that could prove to be dangerous.
It gives you a false sense of right and wrong and can alter your personality.
This is not what our children deserve.
We need teachers with clear minds and able to make snap judgements and to be able to teach without hindrance. Someone who can keep our children safe.
It's the same if someone came to class drunk, doesn't make them an alcoholic, but it does hinder their ability to teach.
There are many kinds of drugs, none belong in the classroom.
So if someone is protesting a bit too much, makes me wonder what is being hidden.

[snort]

Kapolei wrote:

<quoted text>
So I suppose you'd rather have ice addicts teaching our children?

Why not?
The kids are on ice as it is....

[gryde]

Sam wrote:

Gryde...You are right , a person can test positive and not be an addict, but using drugs does alter your ability to think correctly and make important decisions that could prove to be dangerous.
It gives you a false sense of right and wrong and can alter your personality.
This is not what our children deserve.
We need teachers with clear minds and able to make snap judgements and to be able to teach without hindrance. Someone who can keep our children safe.
It's the same if someone came to class drunk, doesn't make them an alcoholic, but it does hinder their ability to teach.
There are many kinds of drugs, none belong in the classroom.
So if someone is protesting a bit too much, makes me wonder what is being hidden.

I agree with you 100%, I just meant that someone could drink a couple of beers tonight, or smoke marijuana tonight, and tomorrow test positive even though they weren't under the influence at the time of testing.

But I do agree with you there is no place for drugs in the classroom.

[Yeah]

gryde wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree with you 100%, I just meant that someone could drink a couple of beers tonight, or smoke marijuana tonight, and tomorrow test positive even though they weren't under the influence at the time of testing.
But I do agree with you there is no place for drugs in the classroom.

I must be missing something. It sounds to me like you're advocating drug use as long as you don't get caught.

Is that right or am I off base?

[alice]

The test scores for Hawaii DOE schools are so low and so unacceptable that it might well be that teachers are on drugs. Sadly though, it likely has to do mroe with their own lack of education and drive.

[gryde]

Yeah wrote:

<quoted text>
I must be missing something. It sounds to me like you're advocating drug use as long as you don't get caught.
Is that right or am I off base?

No I'm not advocating drug use as long as you don't get caught. I had an earlier post saying that you it is possible to test positive for a drug (any drug, legal or illegal) and not be an addict, therefore rehab. wouldn't need to be paid for.

There was a reply about drugs (legal and illegal) affecting decisions in the classroom etc. I was just pointing out someone in any line of work could use a legal drug like alcohol or an illegal drug like marijuana the night before, not be under the influence at the job site and yet test positive.

A positive test indicates a substance has been used, not if someone is an addict and doesn't say if the person was under the influence at the time of the test.

[alice]

True enough.

[Yeah]

gryde wrote:

<quoted text>
No I'm not advocating drug use as long as you don't get caught. I had an earlier post saying that you it is possible to test positive for a drug (any drug, legal or illegal) and not be an addict, therefore rehab. wouldn't need to be paid for.
There was a reply about drugs (legal and illegal) affecting decisions in the classroom etc. I was just pointing out someone in any line of work could use a legal drug like alcohol or an illegal drug like marijuana the night before, not be under the influence at the job site and yet test positive.
A positive test indicates a substance has been used, not if someone is an addict and doesn't say if the person was under the influence at the time of the test.

So I could, in theory, shoot up ice in the morning but not be under the influence or be considered an addict? Is that about right?

If so, I still don't agree. What would be the guideline to be considered an addict? And how would you prove it?

You may as well make ice (and any other illegal drug) legal and create a legal limit that one can used to not be considered "intoxicated." Then you would be "legally" within the law.

[gryde]

Yeah wrote:

<quoted text>
So I could, in theory, shoot up ice in the morning but not be under the influence or be considered an addict? Is that about right?
If so, I still don't agree. What would be the guideline to be considered an addict? And how would you prove it?
You may as well make ice (and any other illegal drug) legal and create a legal limit that one can used to not be considered "intoxicated." Then you would be "legally" within the law.

No, but you could shoot up ice in the morning, be high for 2 or 3 days, get tested on day 5 and still test positive. Now, you wouldn't be high on day 5 just testing positive for the use you did 5 days earlier.

As to whether you are an addict or not, there are definitions as to what an addict is. No I don't know them myself, but they can be found in drug counseling books.

I could go out tonight and get drunk. That doesn't mean I'm addicted.