Should Random Drug Testing Be A Condition Of Social Welfare?

DrumSteve · 03-05-2011 10:51AM #1

The above crossed my mind on my way to work this morning while walking beside the Boardwalk in Dublin City Centre. Anyone who has walked past or on this at any stage will know about the groups of Junkies that hang around on there drinking and banging up all day, usually with thier poor kids in tow.

The money to do this comes from a number of sources, Selling drugs, prostitution and in most cases Dole/SW...? I believe personally that being drug free should be a condition of receiving the full social welfare allowence from the state.(As an addendum to this I also think that birth control should be mandatory if you are on the Phy scheme.)

As anyone can see from my posting history I have no problem with people on the Dole. Many are good people on there through no fault of their own. However, with the state fairly low on cash should we be paying to subsidise someone's drug habit? I don't think so, even with the inherent problems this might bring (i.e rise in crime rates/burglaries).

Guill · 03-05-2011 10:55AM

Test for what?

Caffeine?
Alcohol?
Nicotine?
Paracetemol?
Codine?

Or just drugs you don’t like?

Logical Fallacy · 03-05-2011 10:56AM

Nope. The main issue i would see with it is that you are assuming a possibility of criminality simply because people are on the dole.

dvpower · 03-05-2011 10:58AM

DrumSteve wrote: »

The money to do this comes from a number of sources, Selling drugs, prostitution and in most cases Dole/SW...? I believe personally that being drug free should be a condition of receiving the full social welfare allowence from the state.(As an addendum to this I also think that birth control should be mandatory if you are on the Phy scheme.)

Having to declare income is already a condition of social welfare so that should cover the money aspect.

After that, if someone wants to take drugs, thats (in the main) their own business. If it impacts on their requirement to be 'available for work' then that condition is already covered.

dvpower · 03-05-2011 11:00AM

DrumSteve wrote: »

(As an addendum to this I also think that birth control should be mandatory if you are on the Phy scheme.)

What's the Phy scheme?
(And would the birth control be free?)

DrumSteve · 03-05-2011 11:00AM

Guill wrote: »

Test for what?

Caffeine?
Alcohol?
Nicotine?
Paracetemol?
Codine?

Or just drugs you don’t like?

Mainly non perscription illegal narcotics perhaps?

Also I don't asume people are criminals because they are on the dole. I have been quite vociferous of my defence of people on the dole.

AnonoBoy · 03-05-2011 11:00AM

But what if they were at a party and it's second hand smoke and not their fault like Ross Rebagliati?

Would they get their gold medal dole back then?

jester77 · 03-05-2011 11:01AM

Crazy idea, what would happen if you inadvertently took something on the banned list? Do you have to tell your dr. that you are on the dole so that he can give you only certain types of drugs. Would never work and only increase crime as the junkies need their fix.

DrumSteve · 03-05-2011 11:01AM

dvpower wrote: »

What's the Phy scheme?
(And would the birth control be free?)

Sorry I should have said Methadone. Just used to calling it Phy.:) Birth control would be free in this instance.

bobmalooka · 03-05-2011 11:05AM

DrumSteve wrote: »

The above crossed my mind on my way to work this morning while walking beside the Boardwalk in Dublin City Centre. Anyone who has walked past or on this at any stage will know about the groups of Junkies that hang around on there drinking and banging up all day, usually with thier poor kids in tow.

The money to do this comes from a number of sources, Selling drugs, prostitution and in most cases Dole/SW...? I believe personally that being drug free should be a condition of receiving the full social welfare allowence from the state.(As an addendum to this I also think that birth control should be mandatory if you are on the Phy scheme.)

As anyone can see from my posting history I have no problem with people on the Dole. Many are good people on there through no fault of their own. However, with the state fairly low on cash should we be paying to subsidise someone's drug habit? I don't think so, even with the inherent problems this might bring (i.e rise in crime rates/burglaries).

while were at it we should make them wear black and white stripped jumpers or orange jumpsuits so we can identify them easily

bonerm · 03-05-2011 11:06AM

No. Soma for all. Keep the masses under control.

Nijmegen · 03-05-2011 11:07AM

Don't play silly, it's a simple list of illegal drugs, including cocaine, heroin, E, etc.

Why should we give the dole to people who spend it to fund criminal activities?

joseph brand · 03-05-2011 11:08AM

What a a stupid question. I can understand drug tests for traffic controllers and positions that require employees to be in control of their faculties.

But does a person really need to be sober to be able to collect the dole and sit at home and watch telly??

Best idea I have heard so far is to make people on the dole (that'll be me pretty soon), attend a gym maybe 2 or 3 times a week. It's good both mentally and physically. We need to help people on welfare instead of trying to target them and give them more hassle. Positive thinking.

This is negative thinking. Something I would expect from the US.

dvpower · 03-05-2011 11:08AM

DrumSteve wrote: »

Sorry I should have said Methadone. Just used to calling it Phy.:) Birth control would be free in this instance.

What's the logic of forcing people on a methadone programme to use birth control?

And what would be the sanction if they became pregnant? Would we cut their dole of a mother to be?

I do recall a US charity that was active here (maybe it was the UK) a couple of years ago who were incentivising women on drug treatment programmes to use birth control. They were paying for the pill and giving them cash rewards for not becoming pregnant.

bonerm · 03-05-2011 11:09AM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

But what if they were at a party and it's second hand smoke and not their fault like Ross Rebagliati?

Would they get their gold medal dole back then?

Wow, they give gold medals for that sport?!

dvpower · 03-05-2011 11:11AM

joseph brand wrote: »

But does a person really need to be sober to be able to collect the dole and sit at home and watch telly??

It is a condition of recieving the dole that recipients are actively seeking work. If youre intoxicated watching telly all day, youre not entitled to payment.

AnonoBoy · 03-05-2011 11:11AM

bonerm wrote: »

Wow, they give gold medals for that sport?!

Who with the what now?

03-05-2011 11:13AM

Dole is for keeping you alive and fit to find work.. I know I spent a large chunk of my dole on pills when I was on it for two months. A bit of a joke and I wouldn't have thought it unreasonable at the time to be tested.

Ireland's taxpayers were paying for me to get high as a kite which obviously isn't right.

tayto lover · 03-05-2011 11:13AM

I don't agree with drug-testing dole claimants at all.
The only requirement for dole or social welfare are that you are unemployed, unable to get a job and not in the black economy.

fedor.2. · 03-05-2011 11:18AM

DrumSteve wrote: »

Sorry I should have said Methadone. Just used to calling it Phy.:) Birth control would be free in this instance.

Prison officer are ya?

Iwannahurl · 03-05-2011 11:18AM

Let's suppose for a minute that it's a good idea.

Why stop -- or start -- with social welfare recipients?

In our current socio-economic situation, maybe it would be better to start with TDs, senators, judges, public servants, An Garda Siochana, managers and employees of state agencies and semi-state companies, etc?

IIRC, a few years some newspaper secretly swabbed the toilets of Dail Eireann and found traces of illicit drugs. Everyone employed in that establishment is in receipt of state payments. Apart from their payments being much higher than social welfare rates, they are also in positions of responsibility and we wouldn't want them making important decisions about the affairs of state while under the influence of psychoactive substances.

Speaking of which, why limit the random testing to illicit drugs? What about random breath testing for all the above to check for alcohol ingestion during work hours? Dail Eireann has its own bar, subsidised by the taxpayer I believe. What other workplace has a drug supply like that on tap?

Nijmegen · 03-05-2011 11:21AM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Let's suppose for a minute that it's a good idea.

Why stop -- or start -- with social welfare recipients?

In our current socio-economic situation, maybe it would be better to start with TDs, senators, judges, public servants, An Garda Siochana, managers and employees of state agencies and semi-state companies, etc?

IIRC, a few years some newspaper secretly swabbed the toilets of Dail Eireann and found traces of illicit drugs. Everyone employed in that establishment is in receipt of state payments. Apart from their payments being much higher than social welfare rates, they are also in positions of responsibility and we wouldn't want them making important decisions about the affairs of state while under the influence of psychoactive substances.

Speaking of which, why limit the random testing to illicit drugs? What about random breath testing for all the above to check for alcohol ingestion during work hours? Dail Eireann has its own bar, subsidised by the taxpayer I believe. What other workplace has a drug supply like that on tap?

Drinking on the job isn't illegal, nor is the drink.

But I'd agree with drug testing TD's etc. ANyone under the public employ. Gardai are subject to random drug tests, AFAIK, as are soldiers.

Anyone paid by the state should submit to random drug tests.

Indeed, as an employer I can submit any of my employees to them also, if I felt the need.

Logical Fallacy · 03-05-2011 11:22AM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Let's suppose for a minute that it's a good idea.

Why stop -- or start -- with social welfare recipients?

In our current socio-economic situation, maybe it would be better to start with TDs, senators, judges, public servants, An Garda Siochana, managers and employees of state agencies and semi-state companies, etc?

IIRC, a few years some newspaper secretly swabbed the toilets of Dail Eireann and found traces of illicit drugs. Everyone employed in that establishment is in receipt of state payments. Apart from their payments being much higher than social welfare rates, they are also in positions of responsibility and we wouldn't want them making important decisions about the affairs of state while under the influence of psychoactive substances.

Speaking of which, why limit the random testing to illicit drugs? What about random breath testing for all the above to check for alcohol ingestion during work hours? Dail Eireann has its own bar, subsidised by the taxpayer I believe. What other workplace has a drug supply like that on tap?

Just test the whole population on a random basis. If you fail and are employed you lose your job and go to jail, freeing up job spots for people on the dole who are not using drugs.

RichieC · 03-05-2011 11:22AM

Nijmegen wrote: »

Indeed, as an employer I can submit any of my employees to them also, if I felt the need.

Was it in their contracts that you can?

Nijmegen · 03-05-2011 11:24AM

RichieC wrote: »

Was it in their contracts that you can?

It is. If we feel the need to test any of them we can. For practical purposes, a guy driving a forklift under the influence of drink or drugs is a danger to himself and his coworkers, and if we suspect anything is amiss we can search his stuff and have him tested.

And why not?

MagicSean · 03-05-2011 11:28AM

tayto lover wrote: »

I don't agree with drug-testing dole claimants at all.
The only requirement for dole or social welfare are that you are unemployed, unable to get a job and not in the black economy.

And are actively seeking work

RichieC · 03-05-2011 11:30AM

Nijmegen wrote: »

It is. If we feel the need to test any of them we can. For practical purposes, a guy driving a forklift under the influence of drink or drugs is a danger to himself and his coworkers, and if we suspect anything is amiss we can search his stuff and have him tested.

And why not?

article 12 Universal Declaration of Human Rights - "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy".

Nijmegen · 03-05-2011 11:32AM

RichieC wrote: »

article 12 Universal Declaration of Human Rights - "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy".

I'll trump yours with Article 1 of common sense, unless you value your privacy more than being skewered by a drugged up warehouse forklift driver.

jumbone · 03-05-2011 11:35AM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What other workplace has a drug supply like that on tap?

A pub? Or if you mean state-subsidised alcohol, then an army barracks.

Iwannahurl · 03-05-2011 11:35AM

"Due to Oireachtas subsidies, alcohol sold at the Dáil bar is among the cheapest in Dublin. A 2007 Leinster House audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) found that a pint of Guinness cost just €3.70 – 35% cheaper than the average cost in the capital at the time." Irish Examiner, May 2010.

Last year Ciaran Cuffe of the Green Party got into a bit of trouble for tweeting this photo of people enjoying the taxpayer-subsidised legal drug dispensary in his erstwhile workplace.

MagicSean · 03-05-2011 11:37AM

I don't think the point of drug testing would be to catch people who like to get high. It would be more for the people who are spending their dole where they should not be. Dole payments are supposed to provide you with enough to live on. If you are spending it on drugs then you are getting too much.

Should Random Drug Testing Be A Condition Of Social Welfare?

Should Random Drug Testing Be A Condition Of Social Welfare? 193 votes

Comments