Formation of Policy Alternative

Drug-Testing of Welfare
Recipients
Benchmark Assignment B

Ashley M. Carter
SW4710 Fall 2014

Formulating a Policy Alternative

In order to tackle formulating a policy alternative, it was important to
identify the intent of the original policies put into place. It could be argued
that there were several different reasons for implementing policies to
drug-test welfare recipients. Below are two that will be highlighted in this
presentation:

To identify welfare recipients who may be abusing welfare funds in order

to purchase drugs, and remove them from eligibility.

To identify welfare recipients who are drug-users with the goal of

providing them with additional social services to help them and their
families.

To identify welfare recipients who may be abusing welfare

funds in order to purchase drugs, and remove them from
eligibility

Policymakers who are using this stance for implementing drug-testing policies are
concerned that taxpayers are inadvertently subsidizing welfare recipients drug
addictions. Which is just not true.

In states that have tested out drug-testing policies, evidence has shown that this
is not the case at all. In almost all states, less than 3% of all people tested got a
positive result (McKay 2014).

In fact, in many cases the costs of implementing the programs have been very
high, to the point where they have been very close to exceeding the amount of
money saved from people who were removed from eligibility. Any net savings to
taxpayers dollars were negligible.

Most people were removed from eligibility by refusing to submit to drug-testing.

Not testing positive. Welfare recipients are forced to pay the fees to take the drugtest themselves up-front (and then are later reimbursed if the test comes back
negative).

To identify welfare recipients who are drug-users with the

goal of providing them with additional social services to
help them and their families.

Policymakers who are using this stance for implementing drug-testing

policies hope that drug abusers will be motivated to seek help to get
clean rather than lose their benefits.

The problem with this approach is that studies have shown that people
who are facing poverty are more likely to make bad decisions (Kelly
2013).

Combined with the fact that these people are drug users, and it is likely
that completely removing funding for basic needs would only harm these
individuals and their families in the long-run.

Policy Alternative

No drug testing It dehumanizes, stigmatizes, and wastes funding.

Not Holistic - Drug testing does not identify those who are abusing
alcohol.

The problem should be approached from a different perspective. Rather

than working to identity drug users and forcing them to seek help or risk
losing benefits, focus funds and efforts on substance abuse outreach
and treatment efforts that have been proven to work.

Use funds to either back programs in the community that have been
proven to be effective, or work on creating or changing programs to
become more effective.

Tons of evidence and literature about evidence-based drug and alcohol

abuse interventions (Principles of drug addiction treatment 2012)

How does it meet policy goals?

Evidence-based Uses funding in a more fiscally responsible manner

by focusing on programs which have been proven to be successful in
the prevention and treatment of drug and alcohol abuse.

Dignity and Worth of the Person Focuses less on criminalizing and

dehumanizing people who are using government benefits, and more
assisting those who are in need of drug and alcohol abuse services.

For and Against

Stigmatization of the poor, and specifically welfare recipients, permeates our culture. There
are unspoken cultural norms that people who are receiving government assistance should
conduct themselves in certain socially appropriate ways, and those who do not are not
deserving of assistance. It is likely that the majority of public opinion still supports drugtesting welfare recipients:

Make sure to share facts and statistics from failed attempts by other states. Particularly
that any savings to taxpayers were negligible.

Focus on how funds will be used to support programs that have been proven to be
effective. Show that communities benefit from comprehensive drug and alcohol treatment
programs.

Could find allies in existing drug and alcohol treatment and outreach programs and
coalitions throughout the state. Possibly with state Democrats and Democratic party.

Feasibility

Possible, but probably not likely.

Michigan is currently under Republican majority in both the house and senate,
with a Republican governor.

As mentioned before, stigmatization of people in poverty runs deep in our

culture. Media sensationalism continues to push these stereotypes.

It would be hard to convince both lawmakers and voters that outreach and
treatment are viable policy alternatives to drug-testing.

Economically would be possible only if policymakers and voters agreed to

fund such programs rather than funding drug-testing programs.

Administratively could possibly help struggling programs that have been

proven to be effective but are low on funding stay afloat. Or could help to create
new programs and jobs.

Drug-Testing of Welfare Recipients in

other countries.

No other countries have enacted legislation to drug-test welfare

recipients

Policymakers in New Zealand have been in talks about formulating

policy to drug-test recipients of work-based aid.

Arguments for and against drug-testing in New Zealand mirror

arguments in the United States (Radulova 2014)

Seems like policy alternative would be feasible in New Zealand.

Legislative atmosphere and culture seems more liberal.

Role as a Social Worker

As always, one of the roles of a Social Worker is education and

advocacy.

Work to education people about the lack of effectiveness of drug-testing

policies.

Advocate by working to persuade lawmakers to stop rollout of pilot

program of drug-testing welfare recipients in Michigan.

Become more involved in political process in Michigan and encourage

others to become involved to prevent further programs from being
implemented.

Works Cited
Kelly, M. (2013, August 29). Poor concentration: Poverty reduces brainpower needed for
navigating other areas of life. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
McKay, T. (2014, August 8). A shocking thing happened when Tennessee decided to drugtest its welfare recipients. Retrieved November 17, 2014, from
http://mic.com/articles/95794/a-shocking-thing-happened-when-tennessee-decided-todrug-test-its-welfare-recipients
Principles of drug addiction treatment: A research-based guide (third edition). (2012,
December 1). Retrieved November 18, 2014, from
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/principles-drug-addiction-treatmentresearch-based-guide-third-edition/evidence-based-approaches-to-drug-addictiontreatment
Radulova, L. (2014, May 31). Drug tests for dole recipients: Government considers testing
for illicit substances as part of major welfare system overhaul. Retrieved November
17, 2014, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645001/Governmentconsiders-enforcing-drug-testing-dole-recipients-major-welfare-overhaul.html