Andrew, and Jennifer I. Flores. Drug- and Crime-Related Restrictions in
Federal Assistance Programs. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2012.
most of the sources found on this subject, this book by Allen & Jennifer is
an interesting one. Allen & Jenifer addresses the reasons as to why most
states embarked on this process, with the aim of justifying their courses of
action. The authors of this book defend the decision to test those people who
are applying for the welfare programs for use of illicit drugs. They describe
the process as one which was a necessary one, for the good of the American
taxpayers. According to them, such programs should be carried out so as to
maximize the benefits derived from public funds. However, the authors points
out at the biasness of the program, for its target to the poor.
Babalavi, Parviz.Addiction from Start to the End. 2nd ed. Xlibris
Corporation, 2010. Print.
this book, Dr. Parviz, who has been in contact with hundreds of patients while
he was a Practitioner focusing on Addiction Medicine, comprehensively looks
into the issue of drug-use. Most of the information published in the book
originates from interviews that he carried out on Substance Abuse Addicts while
engaging them in counseling as well as treatment sessions for 30 years. On page
200, he describes drugs addicts as innocent people who have been accidentally
trapped in the issue of drugs dependency. Dr. Parviz valiantly tries to open
the eyes of the readers into the realism of the matter, and goes ahead to
recommend that welfare recipients ought to be tested for substance abuse so as
to make sure that they use the funds allocated to them in the right use. He
suggests that the government should be accountable to its citizens even when
offering welfare services to them.
Ian G. Why Drug Testing Welfare Recipients is Wrong. San Francisco, Calif.:
HarperSanFrancisco, 2009. Print.
book addresses on the reasons as to why the program of testing the people who
are in need of the assistance provided by the different states through the
welfare programs is wrong. The author goes ahead to highlight one issue after
the other, specifying on the cons of this approach. On page 65, he provides the
recommendations that ought to be implemented instead of testing the welfare
applicants for the usage of drugs. The book offers a comprehensive coverage of
the wrongfulness of the program, highlighting significant issues that support
or fails to support the program.
Rachel. "Just as We Suspected: Florida Saved Nothing by Drug Testing
Welfare Applicants." Drug-Testing
Welfare Recipients (2012): n. pag. Web.
27 Oct. 2014.
describes Florida as the first state that passed as well as implemented the
bill requiring that every welfare applicant be tested for drug, prior to giving
them basic assistance. Four months following its implementation, a lawsuit was
filed by the ACLU of Florida, referring the act as being unconstitutional. The
author of the article advances to illustrate how this law by the state of
Florida was a failure, referring to the information that was released by the
New York Times. Among the 4,086 applicants for TANF in Florida, just 108 people
tested positive. This stands for a mere 2.6% of all the applicants. Bloom
therefore describes the law by the state of Florida as being absurd, taking
into account the amount of money that was spent in carrying out the exercise,
that is, $118,140 in just four months.
Robin. Electronic Benefits Transfer, Use of Welfare Funds, and Drug Testing
of Welfare Recipients. Hartford: Connecticut General Assembly, Office of
Legislative Research, 2009. Print.
describes the objective of testing welfare applicants for drugs as a way of
assuring those who contribute in paying taxes that their money does not get
wasted on individuals who subscribe for the welfare programs by the state, and
goes ahead to use the assistance they receive for purchasing of drugs. The
author compares the results of the people who tested positive for use of
illicit drugs within different states. He describes the entire process as being
wrong on the basis that even those people who apply for the funds are as well
taxpayers. In addition, Cohen describes how his family was as well not
financially well-off and that he had to apply for the welfare programs.
However, he asserts that there was no one time that he using funds awarded to
him in purchasing illicit drugs. He opposes the notion that the poor people
abuses drugs excessively and calls for the government to extend this process to
a bigger population so as to avoid being bias.
Bryce. "Tennessee Drug Tests Welfare Applicants, Discovers Less Than One
Percent Use Drugs." (2014): Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
addresses the drug testing program that was initiated in Tennessee, in July,
towards those people who apply for the welfare program that the state provides.
The author of the article describes the process that is used during the testing
for the presence of any drugs. According to Covert, it is only one individual
out of a possible eight hundred who has ever since tested positive for
substance abuse. In addition, other four individuals were denied to benefit
from the welfare program after they refused to be tested for substance abuse.
Bryce compares the positive rate of substance abuse that was identified during
drug testing with that which corresponds to residents of the entire state. The
rate of positive drug tests is 0.12% among the welfare applicants whereas that
of state residents is 8%. The findings presented in this article disapproves
the assumption that there is a high rate of drug use amongst the poor people.
Smith. The Morality of Testing Applicants for State Welfare. Greenwich,
Ct: Twin Books, 2008. Print.
book by Dodie basically looks into the morality of the subject of testing
applicants for welfare benefits. He describes the issue as a moral dilemma
where the government is faced with the need of making sure that tax paid by
Americans is put in the right use, as well as the need to help those
individuals who are in dire need of the funds to cater for their basic needs. The
book concludes that even though a few welfare recipients are struggling with
the problems of illicit drug use as well as alcohol abuse, there is need for
substance abuse prevention along with treatment services among the groups that
are exposed to high risks.
Boniface, and David Dawson. "Alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence
among welfare recipients." American
Journal of Public Health (2010): n. pag. Web.
27 Oct. 2014.
objective of the article by Grant & David was to find out the national
estimates on the cases of heavy drinking, use of illicit drugs, as well as
alcohol abuse among the individuals who are recipients to the different welfare
programs by the respective states. To do so, they utilize the data obtained in 2008 by the National Longitudinal Drugs
Epidemiologic Survey. The authors analyze the data statistically. According to
their findings, the number of individuals relying on the welfare programs were
generally low in all the states in 2008. In addition, the findings as well
illustrated that there was consistency in the percentages within the general
population in the U.S. The number of people who have been denied access to the
benefits from the welfare programs were found to be relatively low in all the
Alan. "Does Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Save Money?" (2012):
Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
In this article, Greenblatt complains
on how it is hard for Americans to access assistance from the states even as
the nation experiences anemic economic recovery. He argues against the
inclusion of strict laws which are frustrating needy people from getting help.
The author asserts that these programs are aimed at making sure that taxpayers’
money does not end up subsidizing the drugs by some people. He as well states
that those who are supporting these programs are not merely saving costs, but
also encouraging people who are on drugs to change their behaviors.
Justin. Should Welfare Recipients be Tested for Drugs?Thirroul, N.S.W:
Spinney Press, 2011. Print
book by Healey looks into the arguments put forward by the Democrats as well as
the Republicans in 2011 on the debate as to whether those people who receive
welfare ought to be tested for the usage of drugs. According to the author, the
Republicans were by then empowering all the states with the capacity to test
all the welfare recipients for the usage of illicit drugs. Healey presents the
concerns raised by different House Representatives on the constitutionality of
this procedure. This procedure, according to then Majority Leader, Harry Reid,
was motivated by the concern that some individuals will utilize the taxpayers
money for the purchase of drugs.
Pamela. Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients. Hartford: Connecticut
General Assembly, Office of Legislative Research, 2011. Print.
book discusses the essentiality of the program of testing people for the
presence of illicit drug use prior to allocation of welfare funds. However, she
uses the findings collected on the performance of these programs among
different states and recommends that the program ought to be dropped due to its
inefficiency in ensuring that the government is putting the public funds in the
appropriate use. According to her, different states have spent millions of
dollars in conducting the exercise, yet very few welfare applicants have been
found to test positive for illicit drugs. In one instance, she asserts that the
state of Florida spent a lot of taxpayers funds in executing the procedure of
drug-testing, funds which would otherwise have been put into much useful
projects by the state. The author concludes by asserting that even though the
program is an essential one, it is not the most appropriate as it has led to
wastage of public funds.
Manpower Information, Inc. "5."Employment and
Training Reporter. Manpower Information, Incorporated, 2008.
According to a survey conducted by the organization,
psychiatric disorders among employees in the place of work occurs due to a
variety of causes, one of them being misuse of drugs. Manpower Information,
Inc. asserts “this was what motivated this organization to study the cases of
drugs in different companies, as well as how this issue should be addressed.
Research by Manpower Information, Inc. illustrates that employers are
relatively unable to monitor their employees in terms of drug use, and most
problems are usually discovered when the problem has escalated. On page 393,
Manpower Information, Inc. From the findings presented from twenty-five
organizations in 2008, one-sixth of the recipients were reported to be using
illicit substances over the past six months.
The recommendations that the organization provides include the testing
of chemicals among the employees so as to find out illicit drugs that some of
them may be using.
Conference for State's Legislature (NCSL). "Drug Testing for Welfare
Recipients and Public Assistance." (2014): Web.
27 Oct. 2014.
journal by NCSL looks into the different proposals that have been brought
forward by different states in relation to testing of welfare applicants for
the usage of illicit drugs since the year 1996. According to this journal, the
federal rules allow the testing for drugs among the people who are applying for
assistance from the welfare programs by various states. This approach is
particularly used for screening the applicants so as to determine who will
receive assistance from the welfare program kitty. According to the journal,
most of the proposals by the states to implement these proposals have been met
with a lot of resistance, hence resulting to many lawsuits between individuals
or organizations and the respective states. The journal describes the states
that have enacted the proposals in the past as well as the developments that
Walker. "Tax Dollars Earmarked for Drugs?: The Policy and Constitutionality
of Drug Testing Welfare Recipients." Columbia Human Rights Law Review.
43.1 (2011): 215-254. Print.
points out that there have been cases where individuals have applied for the
welfare programs and ended up using the funds to buy illicit drugs. The author
describes this act as one that is not morally upright as there are some other
individuals who need the funds to carry on with their daily lives. As a result,
Newell asserts that the program as one that had very good motives, having the
interests of those who direly need the funds allocated to welfare programs for
the right reasons. However, the author questions the constitutionality of the
program asserting that it is the right of every American in need of assistance
to apply for the funds, regardless of whether they use illicit drugs or not.
this book, the author describes the unconstitutional aspects of testing welfare
applicants for drugs. Szyperski refers to a number of sections from the U.S.
Constitution in elaborating why he thinks that the approach is
unconstitutional. The book as well provides a lot of insight into various
interpretation of the Constitution. The readers get enlightened on a number of
legislations that have been well put forward by the author. Szyperski develops
well-argued points in explaining why the testing of applicants is not moral or
constitutional. On page 45, he asserts that the unconstitutionality of this
program is the reason that will lead to its failure. He concludes by asserting
that all Americans have the right to receive welfare benefits if need be.
Calculate The Price Of Your Order
Total Price After Discount:
Frequently Asked Questions
All our writers are PHD prepared individuals. All the writers have vast experiences in specified fields for example for nursing orders the writers must have (nursing experience and major exposure to healthcare)
We get our articles from PubMed (for medicine orders and nursing) and whatever we can access through Google and scholarly references. We use professional sites and any relatable recent references within ten years.
We have a strict 0% plagiarism policy. All our papers are written from scratch and are properly cited.
Furthermore, we use premium plagiarism checkers to scan all documents before delivery.
The paper you will receive will be 100% original.
Email everything to us at email@example.com. You will receive a confirmation email from the support staff.
First, proceed to place your order then you can attach and send everything else the writer will need via email.
Yes, any alterations will be free of charge as long as they are in line with the initial instructions provided. No "surprises" regarding the price.
Any feedback from her professor will be taken seriously, and the writer (under our terms) will work on all changes without any extra payments (we do not have any hidden charges).
We will conduct a free plagiarism check, chapter by chapter. Editing is free of charge since the writer works hand in hand with an assigned editor.
The account will automatically be created for you by our database. The account only notes your order details and the price for your order, nothing much.