Serious question--Drug testing in order to receive welfare benefits?

Question

I have read suggestions on this board, where people suggest that people should undergo drug testing if they are going to receive welfare or be on assistance programs. I think this is a great idea. Is there any reason why we don't do this already? If we are giving people money because they can't work or aren't working, why don't we test them to make sure that they arent' spending the money in the wrong way and if they are, then that assistance can go to someone else. I know there are waiting lists and there is never enough support to go around.

My question is, do you agree this is a good idea, or not?

Answer 1

I think this is a great idea.
BUT what would happen to the thousands of homeless and wandering children whose parents do drugs, and they can't get housing and food, so the kids starve.
And what happens tothe droves of druggies and alcoholics and wackos who no longer have homes or food? Won't they steal and assault people?
I think it is a beginning, but other things have to happen alongside this.
My solution: If you are disabled-you still have to DO something to get paid. If you are a drunk or druggie, you still have to do something.Unemployed? Do something.
You don't do some sort of work for someone-you don't eat, unless you are in a hospital bed or so decrepit you can't function or in a mental institution. Even prisoners should have to work to eat.
This may be reading to blind people or picking up trash, running recycling programs, cracking pecans or baby-sitting or washing dogs or giving blood.
You don't get food stamps-you get FOOD! You don't get money-you get vouchers for your expenses. It is a felony to sell them or buy them.
There would be huge community programs full of people doing something-contributing to our lives-no matter if they have cerebral palsy or lice or drug addiction.
National health care for everyone. Even the poorest child in this country ought to be able to get her broken arm set. Her mother reported for child abuse, and somewhere kind and clean for her to be taken.
Drug addiction is child abuse,too.
I don't like orphanages , but I think they are better than the screwy system we have now. There is oversight, and rules and accountability in orphanages. ONE building. Big kids can help.
It would be costly to administer, too, and what would happen to the people while they appealed????

Answer 2

I think that it is a good idea, but way too many things could get in the way. Plus, even drug users have children that need to be cared for. If we tested everyone applying for welfare, and even a fourth of them tested positive...those with children would need to be taken from the homes, which might be good; might not. It would cause a MASSIVE overflow in the foster care system..who is going to take care of all those children? In the system, they could be lost.
But, on the other hand, they are probably not doing so great at home, with the assistance money gone.
I thought that assitance programs didn't igve you money or checks? I thought that the food was issued on cards...you can only buy food with those.
Even child support is issued through cards now, which you can only use certain places..I'm not sure you can even take the money out of an ATM.
Props for the idea though.

Answer 3

It would be a great Idea but you can pass a pea test so easy and any other form of testing would be to expensive to test everyone. I think they should just get rid of it all together. Help people who can't work do to injury or some other problem, not because they don't want to. You get fired from your job and you can collect for 6 months or longer. You don't have to prove in anyway that you are even looking for a job. I think that 1. people need to grow up a little and take some responsibility for there own life and 2. make a law or something that you have to hand in at least 5 applications a week or something like that.

Answer 4

Yes, drug testing IS a VERY SERIOUS issue. No question that CASUAL, or VOLUNTARY, drug use should NEVER be grounds for ANY TYPE of assistance, government, religious, political, or any other form.

The problem **I** have, with drug testing is that, since I contracted Chronic Asthma, about four years ago, I have been placed on DOCTOR PRESCRIBED medications. Just a few months ago, I learned that atleast one of my medicines contains L.S.D., while another contains "UPPERS". This means that, for the rest of my life, I will, forever, test POSITIVE, for drug usage.

I have to wonder how the states will handle people, whose drug usage is for MEDICALLY DOCUMENTED reasons. In my case, if I do NOT intake these drugs, on a regular basis, my lungs will fill with fluid, and I will die, as too many Asthmatics do, each year. I am NOT proud to be a drug user, but I accept it, knowing the alternative.

Personally, I think that your question should have been worded "Serious question-Should applicants, for welfare benefits, be tested, for RECREATIONAL/VOLUNTARY drug use, in order to be eligible for, and receive, welfare benefits?"

To this question, I would say "HELL, YES!!!!" VOLUNTARY drug addicts have no right to anything except access to rehab programs.

As for the tens of millions of us whose doctors put it in writing "If this patient does NOT take certain drugs, (which Americans call PRESCRIPTION MEDICATIONS), then this patient will DIE.", I say that drug testing MUST be waived, since I, like millions of others, will, AUTOMATICALLY, test POSITIVE, for drug use, due to PRESCRIPTION medications. I deeply encourage you to check this out, and verify my words, with your own doctor. I hope this answer is helpful.

Answer 5

I disagree.... At what point does it stop. Do we drug test kids so that we cut down on overcrowding schools? How about drivers, do we drug test them to make sure we don't have tax payer dollars paying for their roads? How about social security....cuz if you hadn't smoked all that weed maybe you could have saved up for your own retirement?

I am not opposed to time limits on assistance programs and more meaningful training opportunities but drug testing everyone is not the solution.

Answer 6

I agree . There is a clause to getting the cash benefits. If a person has been convicted , or probation for drugs ,using or possession . will not receive the TANF. money. Date back to 1996 the offense happen . This is in Texas.
GOD BLESS

Answer 7

Even drug addicts need public assistance. Are you suggesting we leave those people in the gutters?

Now, if you intended to offer those who test positive a rehab program or the like, then that might be helpful.

Answer 8

Yes they should and also I think they should do some kind of work for the state to help cover there welfare support even if it`s just stuffing envelopes. anything that helps save the state a dollars also helps the working tax payer save some money.

Answer 9

Yes, yes and yes. As I see it beggers can't be choosers. If you have hit hard times the benefits that you receive from the State should be for survival not recreation. Slash your unemployment budget by at least half. Use the other half for education or medical assistance.

Answer 10

I think it's a good idea, only do it randomly and/or
for just cause (prior use etc) what would be better
is a true one -size- fits-all program that would end
the need for welfare without folks suffering (Utopia I guess)