An American Addiction Centers Resource

New to the DrugAbuse.com Forums?Join or

Should people on welfare from tax payers need to pass drug tests?

Discussion in 'General Substance Abuse Discussion' started by jutabraonl, Jul 9, 2015.

  1. jutabraonl

    jutabraonl Member

    I realize that not all jobs require drug testing. I would venture to say that a vast majority of jobs in the U.S. do require applicants or employees to pass a drug test to attain the job or to remain employed if random testing was done after employment.

    In light of that, wouldn't it be fair for those folks receiving tax payer money from assistance programs to have to pass a drug screen to get it?
  2. shadowsupernature

    shadowsupernature Senior Contributor

    I want to say yes, however, it would in the long run cost tax payers more. First, the cost of the testing itself. Second, if they do not receive the needed assistance then what should you do with them... drug rehab...jail? Either one cost tax payers money. Or you can just deny them assistance in which case many may turn to crime...that also cost tax payers money. So although my gut says yes the answer is no. On the same topic should we require corporation that receive "assistance money" and they receive more tax payer money then all individuals combined to prove that they are acting in the best interest of U.S. jobs? Not off shoring etc.
  3. MyLife

    MyLife Member

    I believe that people should be tested before being given welfare of any kind. But I don't believe that they should be denied due to a positive test. Instead, they should get a reduced amount (to help them survive) and referrals to treatment with successful completion ending in increased benefits. I think it would be a good way for Child Protective Services to better monitor and help people before it becomes worse. No one should have to suffer in the grips of addiction. and while some may use welfare to cheat the system, many (drug addicted and not) are just trying to survive.
  4. missbishi

    missbishi Community Champion

    This is a really bad idea. How are these people going to be able to live if thier assistance is removed. The only option they will have is crime. How about using these drug tests to identify the people who have issues and ensure they get the help that they need?
  5. Rosyrain

    Rosyrain Community Champion

    I would be inclined to say yes to this question, but like @shadowsupernature said, what would we do with the people who would test positive. If their benefits were stripped, then they would be homeless, and if they were put through rehab that they could not afford, then we would pay more.
  6. MyLife

    MyLife Member

    Very true, but I believe that the amount that we, as tax payers, pay to the prison system and to rehabs and to protective services and probation and parole and to welfare will be greatly reduced if we paid a little more in the recovery side of addiction. Those people who are helped and truly recover, find their way into the job market, and eventually off of welfare. That makes them tax payers who then go on to help support the recovery of others who are seeking government assistance that might also have a drug or alcohol problem.
  7. MrsJones

    MrsJones Community Listener Community Listener

    I shrug at the word 'fair' in the OP. Is it fair to assume that everyone receiving public aid is on drugs? No, because everyone is not on drugs.
  8. Tremmie

    Tremmie Community Champion

    That actually sounds like a really great approach!!!! Giving them just barely enough to survive until they actually get sober is great! There is no better incentive than that, I can't even think of a better incentive right now. Well thought, that would solve the problem in so many ways!! Brilliant!!!
  9. JonnyMacdonald

    JonnyMacdonald Community Champion

    Sure this sounds like a good idea, but it is not.
    I had a post about this before there is a lot of good comments on it.
    It is also illegal. An addiction is a medical problem, and you cannot deny someone benefits for medial reasons.