TEENAGE DRUG AND ALCOHAL ABUSE AND DEPRESSION

Drug use is the increasing problem among teenagers in today’s high schools. Most drug use begins in the preteen and teenage years, these years most crucial in the maturation process. During these years adolescents are faced with difficult tasks of discovering their self identity, clarifying their sexual roles, assenting independence, learning to cope with authority and searching for goals that would give their lives meaning. Drugs are readily, adolescents are curious and venerable, and there is peer pressure to experiment, ad there us a temptation to escape from conflicts. The use of drugs by teenagers is the result of a combination of factors such as peer pressure, curiosity, and availability. Drugs addiction among adolescents in turn leads to depression and suicide.
One of the most important reasons of teenage drug usage is peer pressure. Peer pressure represents social influences that effect adolescents, it can have a positive or a negative effect, depending on person’s social group and one can follow one path of the other. We are greatly influenced by the people around us. In today’s schools drugs are very common; peer pressure usually is the reason for their usage. If the people in your social group use drugs there will be pressure a direct or indirect pressure from them. A person may be offered to try drugs, which is direct pressure. Indirect pressure is when someone sees everyone around him using drugs and he might think that there is nothing wrong with using drugs. Person might try drugs just to fit in the social norms, even if a person had no intentions of using drugs one might do it just to be considered “cool” by his friends. Today drugs are considered to be an acceptable social phenomenon by many teenagers. Here is a personal example of drug use from a teenager, “When I started using, was only on weekends, at parties. I used drugs ‘recreationally’ and therefore thought I had no addiction problem. I used drugs like nicotine, marijuana or LSD to be happy or to have fun. I needed drugs. I kept using drugs; I used drugs like marijuana to fit socially. I had problems in my life, emotionally, that drugs only seemed to solve. Drugs made my problems worse. I started snorting cocaine. I injected heroin into my veins. I almost died. I was addicted”
In today’s highs schools the availability and variety of drugs is widespread. There is a demand for drugs and the supply is plentiful. Since drugs are so easy accessible, a natural interest in them may develop. A person may hear about drugs experiences, on reactions of drug usage, such as “Hey the weed that he sold us was cool, I got stoned man”. This response will create a sense of curiosity and may convince the person to try drugs themselves. Many teenagers today believe that the first use of drugs is safe. However even though there is no instant addiction with the first try, youngsters tend to experiment further. Soon a person could actively seek the euphoric effects of drugs. Drug addiction is the result of intense preoccupation with the dicer to experience the mental and bodily changes with drug use. The final and the most disastrous stage are when a person needs drugs in order to function adequately. Therefore availability, curiosity and experimentation could result in drug addiction among teenagers.
One of the most devastating side effects of drug addiction and abuse is depression. Depression is the result of chemical imbalance, environmental influence, or a combination of both. Using heavy and very highly addictive drugs as heroin, cocaine, opium and many others will cause sudden mood changes, deterioration of the immune system, nervous breakdowns, unusual flares of temper and many other side effects. Besides physical side effects, drug addiction can create problems in a person’s social circles. The person may run into many conflicts with his family and friends, resulting in desire for isolation. This in turn will create more problems since the person will have no social support. Furthermore, drug addiction is a financial strain especially for teenagers. When a person is addicted to drugs he will do anything to obtain money to fulfill his needs.
According to previous studies, drug addiction is the results of 3 “I’s”. Teenagers may think of their problems as Inescapable, Interminable and Intolerable. Life may seem bleak and miserable. Seeing no way out feeling lonely and no prospects for improvement leads to depression. This can further lead to attempted suicide. Many studies have found that drugs are a contributing factor to suicide. Using drugs may reduce inhibitions and impair judgement, suicide is a possibility. As one statistic illustrates 70% of all young people who attempted suicide used drugs. Illegal drugs, for example, weed; speed, acid, or ecstasy has always been a problem among the younger folks, the problems gets even more serious if it involves additive substances such as cocaine.
The most common seen illegal drug around teens in BC is Ecstasy, or generally called “E”. E’s are usually involved in rave parties; people take E’s and dance overnight. The academic name for E is hallucinogenic stimulant, it generally affects the concentration of the brain, and it can change one’s mood, sleep, sexual behavior, body temperature and appetite. The sensation sight, sound and touch are enhanced, that’s why it’s usually used at discos and parties. It takes about 30 to 40 minutes to “get high” and about three to four hours to wear off. Side effects include heart and blood pressure problems, blurred vision, chills and sweating. The tablet changes every week and counterfeits are always around, it is not addictive. It is illegal to buy, sell, produce or posses any amount of E. Another popular drug is LSD (Lysergic Acid Diethylamide), which is a little similar to E. It alters a person’s perception of sights, sounds, and touch etc, a person that has taken LSD might see or hear things that don’t exist. Known as “acid”, this drug is extremely powerful, once teaspoon can contain up to 25’000 doses. Only 200 micrograms is needed for one trip. The danger of LSD is that the effect of LSD is extremely unpredictable since it depends on a person’s physical conditions and also his/her mood. About one hour after taking LSD it’ll start to take effect, the user will see or feel things that doesn’t exist, images maybe altered, for example, small objects may look huge, and also mysterious experiences, such as seeing ghost or religious objects. The consequences of taking LSD are severe, physical side effects include inducing violent and hazardous behavior, also LSD develops tolerant quickly, so frequent users has to eventually increase dosage. The drug can impair or reduce short-term memory, alter sense of time and reduce the ability to do things that require concentration, quick reactions and effective co-ordination. A common bad reaction to marijuana is an acute anxiety attack. People describe this reaction as an extreme fear of “losing control,” which causes panic. After all, we advise you all to not to get involved with illegal drugs, since it will cost you greatly both physically and emotionally.
The problems of teenage drug use, depression and suicide are evident in our society. These are very real and threatening issues that have to be dealt with. Going into the 21st century we have to face to problems of our future generations. There are many non-profitable organizations that help teenagers to cope with drug use. There are help lines, community services that offer information about drugs, and individual counseling is available almost in every education institution. There is help available to those who seek it. Would we ever be able to live in a drug free environment? Could we ever educate our future generations so those drug problems would be non-existent? Hopefully the answer is yes.

SAME SEX MARRIAGE

Same Sex Marriage
A battle has been in progress for years over whether equal rights and equal protection against discrimination should be extended to homosexuals. Recently this has expanded into the area of marriage. The topic of homosexual marriages is a prevalent issue today. Even in the nation's capital, representatives are finding ways to make this alliance unlawful. This topic has been debated bringing up many valid points, but the fact of the matter is that homosexual marriages are wrong and we, as a country, should not condone such acts. Marriage is the institution whereby men and women are joined in a special kind of social and legal dependence for the purpose of founding and maintaining a family.
Although some same sex marriages may be capable of coping financially, the negative influence on children raised in their household has been statistically proven. Not only would same sex families deal with negative connotations in terms of their children, but also most religions in North America frown upon the union of same sex relationships and restrict marriage to one man and one woman. Many critics hold opposing views, arguing that same sex marriages harm no one and that to deny them the right to marry is unconstitutional. First and foremost, we as a society must think of our future when an issue such as same sex comes in to play. In no way can one change someone's sexual orientation, but it is proven that same sex in the household can be detrimental to a child's upbringing.
According to Debra Busher, an expert on child psychology, Sexual orientation of a parent is critical to the upbringing of a child. Society is based on the ideal of having heterosexual parents, and it goes against values for same sex parents to raise children. Having homosexual parents is also a major stressor for a child due to society's norms and values- it can cause embarrassment and abnormal feelings. Children who are raised in ‘alternative family lifestyles', are more likely to engage in drugs and have negative feelings towards their parents and themselves, than children raised by normal families. To allow an act such as homosexual marriages to continue, it displays that we have blatant disrespect for our children's future. To ensure that the United States remains successful, and remains the prominent leader of the world, we must first take care of our children. Banning homosexual marriages can do this; it will lessen the amount of improper behavior our children see and imitate. Many people believe God created man and woman with the intentions to bear children. In addition, they stress the absence of same sex in the Bible. (Austin Cline, 2007)
Critics of homosexual marriages regard same sex as an abnormal behavior according to the Christian faith, which is the dominant religion in the United States. Same sex has been seen as an unacceptable lifestyle and those who practice it are prone to receive criticism if not outright hostility. Most respectable ministers would refuse to marry two people of the same sex, limiting the couple to being married in commercial areas by materialistic preachers. This choice forces many same sex couples to forego legal marriage and recognize their union themselves.
Homosexuals pursue their lifestyle and marriage at the risk of being ostracized from the religious community. Although many profess that homosexual marriages harm no one, this statement is completely false. As stated earlier, homosexual marriages have numerous detrimental effects on children raised in their household. Not only do the aforementioned influences apply, but also children raised in such an environment would have a higher possibility of choosing that type of lifestyle. Their parents are seen as being normal and looked up to as role models, guaranteeing their lifestyle being accepted by their children.
Statistics show that 45% of gay males, and 20% of lesbians experience physical or verbal assault while in high school, and 28% of these teenagers feel forced to drop out of school because of harassment about their sexual orientation. Children would grow up feeling abnormal, as most everyone around them wondered why they had two fathers or two mothers. All of these reasons negate the faulty reasoning in stating that same sex marriages harm no one.
Supporters of homosexual marriages state the unconstitutional value of its restriction as their strongest suit. In federal law, marriage is defined as a legal union between one man and one woman. As an institution, therefore, marriage transcends the mere self-gratification of the married couple. By admitting homosexual and lesbian relationships to the privileges of the married state we would devalue this transcendent status and weaken the duties and the sense of obligation it entails. According to the nullity of marriage, an unlawful marriage is either void or voidable because of conditions existing at the time of the marriage. A bigamous or incestuous marriage for example, is void, and there is no need to bring suit to obtain a decree declaring it void (Austin Cline, 2007). Homosexual marriages fall under the category of void marriages. In other words, our lawmakers have the right to make all homosexual marriages void, in that they are not legally married. There is no need to explain why such an act should not be allowed under the Constitution of the United States.
In conclusion, homosexual marriages should not be legalized. Marriages were established for man and woman so they could join together and create a family, which is the sole purpose of marriage. This task cannot be accomplished in a homosexual marriage. Not only are homosexual marriages immoral, they can influence children. This influence can cause children to become increasingly disrespectful and promote negative feelings towards themselves and their parents. By taking into account the numerous ill effects of same sex marriages, the choice in its legalization should be easy.

References
Austin Cline. (2007). Arguments against Gay Marriage: Marriage is a Sacred Religious Sacrament. New York: Sage Publishers.

B.A. Robinson. (2006). Is Same-Sex Marriage (SSM) a Bad Idea? New York: Wiley.

Banning Smoking in Public Places

There are many controversial topics on the minds of Americans today. One of the most controversial is smoking in public restaurants and bars. Many people believe it is okay to smoke in these places since they are places for relaxation and enjoyment. I personally believe that smoking should be banned from all public places. Many things can happen when smokers smoke in public places, for example, causing certain diseases in non-smokers, causing air pollution, and causing severe harm to the smokers themselves. The purpose of this paper is analyzing the most controversial issue of smoking in the public places. Smoking in public areas is an annoyance to many people everywhere, and not only is it aggravating to many non smokers, but it is also very hazardous to people’s health. According to Manitoba Medical Association, secondhand smoke is the third leading cause of lung cancer and preventable death, after smoking and alcohol. (Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, 2006)
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report about 90 percent of nonsmoking people in the United States are exposed to the dangers of secondhand smoke. Most of these encounters are in public areas. Many smokers believe very strongly that they have the right to smoke wherever they please, and that smoking should be allowed in all public areas. People go to the pub to relax. Relaxation is achieved by having a few drinks, a packet of crisps, and having a chat with friends, which include partaking in the legal activity of smoking.
However, does this give these smokers the right to harm the health of other people that are surrounded by them? In some parts of the United States actions have been taken to ban smoking in public areas, especially restaurants and bars. However, smoking should be banned in all public areas all over the world because it is an annoyance to others and ultimately harmful to innocent people. People should be able to breathe clean air when they are doing simple everyday things such as eating, chatting with friends, and working. After all, the concern of people’s health is more important than the convenience of being able to smoke in public.
Secondhand smoking can also be referred to as Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) and passive smoking. The majority of the population today is very unaware of the devastating effects that secondhand smoke has on the body. Constant exposure to ETS in the workplace, in public, and at home, nearly doubles the risk of having a heart attack causing ten times as many deaths from heart and blood vessel diseases as it does from cancer. An estimated 35,000 heart disease deaths are associated annually with secondhand smoke victims. Also, 3,400 people who do not smoke die every year from lung cancer as a result of ETS. It is not fair that people who chose not to smoke for the well being of their health are still forced to breathe in the smoke from other people when they are innocently out in public. When people breathe in this smoke, most are completely unaware that they are coming in contact with over 4,000 chemical compounds, 200 of which are known to be poisonous, and around 60 have been identified as carcinogens. (Rajeev K. Goel, Michael A. Nelson, 2008)
When people decide to go out for a bite to eat it is also very disgusting when they are forced to breathe in smoke as they are taking a bite out of their food. Secondhand smoke also has many harmful effects on children as well as adults. The U.S. Environment Protection Agency (EPA) states that ETS is responsible for 150,000 to 300,000 lower respiratory tract infections. It also shows that between 200,000 and 100,000 kids with asthma have their condition worsened by secondhand smoke. One should not legally be able to act in a manner that harms others. It just is not right. One of the only problems in banning public smoking is the fear of losing business from customers.
In conclusion, Smoking in public areas needs to be banned in all public areas across the world for the many health related diseases and illnesses that secondhand smoke causes. Although many people out there believe that banning smoking is absurd and feel that it is their right to smoke wherever they please, smoking should be prohibited because it is endangering the innocent people surrounding them. If smoking were to be banned in all public places across the country, then we would ultimately have a cleaner healthier country. The health and safety of the people is much more important than the convenience of being able to smoke in public.

References
Risa Lavizzo-Mourey. (2006). Tobacco Control Policy. New York: Jossey-Bass.

Rajeev K. Goel, Michael A. Nelson. (2008). Global Efforts to Combat Smoking. New York: Ashgate Publishers.

Drug Testing of employees

Many employers are now requiring mandatory drug testing for applicants and current employees. Drug use has risen sharply over the past years and employers now need to take further precautions in order to maintain a reputable work environment. I believe this extra precaution will improve the workplace by creating a safer atmosphere, keep integrity and honesty in the staff, and eliminate many illegalities that go along with drug use in the workplace. These qualities would be further infused if drug screenings were mandatory.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the issue of Drug Testing of employees in the workplace. And also to know the effects of such mandatory requirement for the employees retention and business running

Drug Testing of Employees

Although many people think that drug testing is a nuscience, it is essential to improve the workplace. Seventy-four percent of all drug users are employed, and one out of every six has a serious drug problem! Would you want them working for you? Plus, the financial impact on business is severely staggering because of drug using employees.

According to federal experts, ten to twenty-three percent of Americans have used or currently using dangerous drugs while on the job, and forty-four percent of drug users even admit to selling drugs on the job. Drug abusers cost an employer on average $7,000 to $10,000 per employee annually. Today, millions of workplaces have begun giving test, hoping to eliminate drugs from the employees and the workplace. The majority of drug testing is done in large factories and offices or on people who transport goods, such as by truck or plane. The large companies that use testing today are Exxon, IBM, Federal Express, United Airlines, AT&T and the New York Times.

Drug testing has become an important safety issue in the workplace for Human Resources and Safety professionals. The majority of all the Fortune 500 companies do drug testing. The purpose is to lessen the impact from drug abuse in the workplace, including tardiness, absenteeism, turnover, attitude problems, theft, decreased productivity, crime and violence. The US Department of Labor estimates that drug use in the workplace costs employers $75 to $100 billion dollars annually in lost time, accidents, health care and workers compensation costs. Sixty-five percent of all accidents on the job are related to drug or alcohol, and substance abusers utilize 16 times as many health care benefits and are six times more likely to file workers compensation claims then non-abusers. (Lori Harrison-Stone, 2007)

The tests usually look for drugs such as cocaine, marijuana, heroin, PCP, barbiturates and amphetamines. In most companies applicants applying for new jobs that test positive are given a second chance to apply. About sixty-eight percent of companies do mandatory screenings before they hire a person, such as if they were a candidate for the job, rather than part of their application. A variety of test can be given. About eighty-two percent of companies use urine test, the most popular because they are inexpensive. Twelve percent use the blood test for an even more accurate reading. Hair testing is used by about one percent of companies. This method is one of the most accurate tests because it can detect any drug used in the past ninety days; this test is used by about 1,700 corporations alone. Only about one percent use performance testing, such as walking in a straight line or having a person touch his nose with his finger. (John Gilliom, 2002)

Employers claim that workers who use drugs have lower productivity rates and an increased number of days missed, sixteen times more to be exact. As well, they are at a greater risk of getting themselves injured or injuring a co-worker. When this happens it is bad for the company because it may have a lawsuit filed against them, costing the company even more money.

Furthermore, lost productivity by drug users costs business an estimated one-hundred billion dollars each year, because they is one-third less productive that other workers. Workers who use drugs also make more medical claims than others. In fact, they cost their employer 300 percent more in medical costs and benefits than non drug using employees. Thus, they drive up the premiums of health insurance paid for by the company. In addition, it is a proven fact that drug addicts are more likely to cheat their companies or even steal from them, which eighteen percent admitted doing.

The percentage of workplaces that give drug tests rose from about eighty-five percent to eighty-eight percent in just one year alone. The number of tests given has risen 300 percent in a ten year period. Since companies have started using tests they say that they have seen a major improvement in work quality, discipline and employee morale. (Edward A. Ward, 2005)

Secondly, drug testing promotes better health for all people. Increasing the number of drug tests in the U.S. will give potential drug users a very good reason not to start using them. Since drug tests are becoming cheaper and more common, people are starting to invest in them more. The tests that are currently done today are including urinalysis and blood analyze, along with tests on hair, saliva, brain waves, breathe, and some even keep it as simple as to walk a line. As the technology increases in this world so does the accuracy of the tools we use. In the future, it can be assumed that the drug tests will diminish most drug use.

As soon as drug testing was introduced, the usage of drugs and the positive test rate began falling steadily. The fear of being caught is a major deterrent for not using drugs. People know that if they use drugs now, they have a lesser chance of getting a good, high paying job in the future. Not only is drug testing being given to employees, but is also being given to students, prisoners and arrestees. This is probably a good idea because drug usage hinders the progress of a students learning.

Now days people argue that drug testing is a violation of privacy, but those people don’t know the true effects of drug use. The people who are giving the tests are hoping that the person being tested is clean because they want him healthy so he is not at risk for himself or others. Furthermore, they also claim the tests are not fair because they monitor the employees off duty activities, and they believe that is their own business. However, as long as a person is employed by a company, that has the right to keep checking in on a person to make sure he is not putting himself or others at risk. Plus, it is cheaper for the company to give the tests than to have workers that are high on drugs and not making much progress. In addition, there is no better example of caring for a person’s health than parents giving their children these tests. Parents don’t want to have their children harm themselves in any way, and they just want to do what is right and the best for them. Not many parents give home drug tests, instead most of the testing goes on in clinics and other treatment centers. (Robert P. Decresce, 1999)

People still argue that drug testing is unfair because they say it is inaccurate, it makes them prove they’re using drugs and a person should be innocent until proven guilty. This doesn’t make sense because if the test is actually inaccurate, the person can repeal it and take another test. As for the innocent until proven guilty theory, it is a person’s choice to take the test, but if he refuses he might not have a job. It is the employer’s right to know if a person is currently capable of completing the tasks that are needed. If the person is not able to he is costing the company money and putting everyone in danger.

Lastly, drug testing must be done because it promotes a better society for everyone. By using these tests, more people will think twice about using drugs. They know that drug use may keep them from getting the job they dream of. There is evidence that this is working, for it is known that the number of people that use drugs is on a steady decline. By detouring people away from drug use we can make a safer, more perfect society. (Ray H. Liu, Bruce A. Goldberger, 2006)

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act were passed by Congress in 1996. This act authorizes states to impose mandatory drug screening on all welfare recipients. Then in 1999 the Michigan state legislature passed a bill that required welfare recipients to submit monthly urine tests to see if they are using drugs. If they refuse to give the urine samples their benefits will be denied, and if they continue to refuse to take the tests, their benefits will be terminated. Experts say that the incidents of drug use among welfare recipients is about the same as the general public, but the state doesn’t want the money they give them to go to the purchase of drugs. Today the only state doing this is Michigan, but experts hope that the trend will catch on in others states. (Robert P. Decresce, 1999)

In Charleston, South Carolina, a hospital, in cooperation with the local police department, requires that health care providers give positive drug test results of pregnant woman to the police. While it is not unusual for laws to require health care providers to report evidence of child abuse, this concept is not usually applied to pregnant women who abuse their fetuses by taking illegal street drugs. This is a pretty good idea for the most part, but using this method might scare woman who use drugs from going to the doctor or any health care providers. This could possibly harm the child even more. This case is now in the Supreme Court to see if it qualifies under the search and seizure or discrimination laws in the Constitution of the United States.

In conclusion, major league baseball, the National Football League and several other sport organizations, both professional and amateur, have teamed up to crack down on players that use illegal drugs. They are following the example set by the Olympic Games. If a player tests positive for using drugs he is usually suspended for a few games and given a fine, but in the Olympics athletes who use drugs are not allowed to compete and are a disgrace to the country.

References

John Gilliom. (2002). Surveillance, Privacy, and the Law: Employee Drug Testing and the Politics of Social Control. New York: University of Michigan Press.

Edward A. Ward. (2005). Employee drug testing: Aalberts and Walker revisited. New York: International Council of Small Business.

Lori Harrison-Stone. (2007). Safety trumps privacy in employee drug testing debates: An article from Arkansas Business. New York: Journal Publishing, Inc.

Ray H. Liu, Bruce A. Goldberger. (2006). Handbook of Workplace Drug Testing. New York: American Association for Clinical Chemistry.

Robert P. Decresce. (1999). Drug Testing in the Workplace. Washington: Bna Books.