Drug Testing Welfare Recipients

It is assumed by many that people who are receiving public assistance funds are using this money to support their alcohol and or drug addictions. Is drug testing to receive public assistance an answer to this problem? Would making this a condition of eligibility actually push people with serious substance abuse and or dependency problems farther away from the help and treatment they need?
Federal Welfare Reform The Federal Welfare reform act which, was passed in the mid 1990’s has changed the way our system addresses these issues. PRWORA (Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act) provided some distinctive features to address the issues, and changed the idea that there was universal entitlement for all, and helped to reinforce the notion that there is a class of the deserving poor. In 2001 California implemented the policies required and created our version of the TANF (Temporary Aid to Needy Families) called Cal-WORKS (California’s Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids program.) This program has allowed for rules to be implemented such as time limits, work requirements and the availability of substance abuse treatment. (Newell, 2011)
The population and the substances. According to the National Poverty Center (2004) the numbers have been overstated and the number of people that are on welfare and are abusing substances are lower than originally estimated. The studies have varied widely in their findings due to the different types of measurements used and the fact that most of these reports include other types of assistance such as General Assistance. The number quoted for the TANF programs are approximately 9.6%, these numbers very similar to the rates of use amongst the general population (Jayakody, Danziger, Seefeldt & Pollack, 2004). The most common substances of abuse have been listed as alcohol, opioids, cocaine, marijuana and methamphetamine. There are also concerns regarding the use of prescription medications as testing for this substance can be confused with some illicit drugs. In regard to alcohol, the window for testing this substance is very narrow and people can be testing clean even if they are abusing this substance. Alcohol has been determined to be the most abused substance among welfare recipients (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011).
Cost effective? There are different types of testing that can be done, and they range in accuracy and cost. There are urinalysis tests, which range from $25 to $44 each as well as hair follicle test which cost from $75 to $150 per test. This does not include the additional staff, time, laboratory fees, and facilities to handle the procedures, not to mention the legal fees the states will incur if the laws are challenged. The overall estimates of savings are minimal considering the cost of testing and the additional administrative costs associated with it. These figures do not even include the added cost of providing treatment to those who have tested positive (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011).
Is it legal? Is it legal to require people who are seeking assistance to drug test as a condition of eligibility to receiving benefits for themselves and their families? According to Spencer, Muroff, and Delva (2000) “The American Civil Liberties Union states that individuals should not have to relinquish their Fourth Amendment right to privacy because they have to ask the government for help. The U.S. Constitution guarantees that no individual can be subjected to search by the government unless there is a reasonable suspicion that they have committed some crime or, based on probable cause the law has been violated” (pg. 5).
Other Solutions to the problem One of the most disturbing aspects of this proposal is the number of families who will not seek assistance due to the possible outcomes of drug testing. This would put a strain on additional systems such as Child Protective Services, the Criminal Justice System and other resources providing relief to needy families. The research does not address the well-being of the children as a result of drug testing. (Dohan, Schmidt & Henderson, 2005) According to Radel, Joyce, and Wulff “Sanctions and benefit decreases have been shown to increase the risk that children will be hospitalized and face food insecurity.” (2011) The children in these families could be harmed unintentionally. Or the fear of drug testing could lead applicants to reduce their use in turn having a positive effect on the children. Through the research it has also been stated that the primary cause to the lack of self –sufficiency in this population is caused more by poor education, lack of transportation and physical and or mental health problems than substance abuse. Under the current Cal-WORKS system each individual would be screened by a social worker for all of these problems and would be provided with a plan to address these issues to help empower and move each individual toward self-sufficiency. This would happen while the client is receiving benefits and they would receive funding for necessary resources such as, child care and help with the cost of public transportation.(Dohan, 2005) Conclusion The benefits of drugs testing welfare recipients has been examined in this research, the findings show that the expense of the testing procedures and everything it would take to implement such a procedure would be costly. It has been found that substance abuse is not the primary barrier to self-sufficiency within this population. There are a variety of issues, including substance abuse that need to be addressed such as lack of education and transportation as well as physical and mental health issues. These things can be addressed within the social service system and these issues can be overcome. This will help empower population and teach them needed skills to obtain and maintain employment. Most importantly the research has shown that testing everyone who is seeking public assistance is not legal. No crimes have been committed, and this would be in violation of their 4th amendment rights afforded to them in the United States Constitution.

References

Dohan,D., Schmidt, L., & Henderson, S., (2005) From Enabling to Bootstrapping: Welfare Workers’ View of Substance Abuse and Welfare Reform. Contemporary Drug Problems, 32(3) 429-455.
Jayakody, R., Danziger, S., Seefeldt, K. & Pollack, H. (2004, April). Policy Brief. NPC (National Poverty Center), (2), 1-4.
Newell, W. (2011). Tax Dollars Earmarked for Drugs? The Policy and Constitutionality of Drug Testing Welfare Recipients. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 43(1), 215-254
Radel, L., Joyce, K., & Wulff, C. (2011, October). Drug Testing Welfare Recipients: Recent Proposals and Continuing Controversies. ASPE Issue Brief Office of the Assistanct Sercrtary for Planning and Evaluation Officer Of Human Services Policy U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ,( 2-28.)
Spencer, PhD, M.S., Muroff, MSW, J.R., & Delva, PhD, J. (2000). Conditional Welfare: A Family Social Work Perspective on Mandatory Drug Testing. The Haworth Press Inc., 4 (4), 3-14.