Social Dynamics (Research Paper Sample)

Should Welfare Recipients Be Drug Tested?
Authors’ Names
Institutional Affiliations
Abstract
Debaters have staged debates over the last decade to discuss the moral justification for subjecting welfare recipients to mandatory drug testing before enrolling them in the program. We must consider the obligations that the welfare policy was based on and intended to fulfill, even though we have not yet established fully whether the move infringes on the fourth amendment. Based on paternalist, contractual, and general human-based justifications, welfare beneficiaries must undergo mandatory drug tests for conformity to the required obligations as beneficiaries. Moreover, Drugs are unnecessary expenses.
Should Welfare Recipients Be Drug Tested?
In 1996, the United States of America (USA) government enacted the “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA)” to provide drug testing for all welfare recipients. The Act promotes independence while reducing poverty, unemployment, and overreliance on the public by moving the family, as an institution, from welfare to employment. Given the aim of the Act, drug use and abuse negatively affected the self-sufficiency of the poor in society and led to persistent dependence on the public for assistance. The formation of the PRWORA anchors on the parameters established in the anti-drug campaign (Amundson et al., 2014). There are numerous disagreements about whether or not welfare recipients should be drug tested in the US. However, debates focus on whether drug testing violates the fourth amendment instead of considering real issues faced by drug users living in poverty. There is still a great deal of disagreement as to whether people applying for welfare should be drug tested before being admitted into the program.
Based on contractual, paternalist, and human-related justifications, welfare beneficiaries must undergo mandatory drug tests before being listed as welfare beneficiaries. Created and introduced in America during the 1930s, the welfare social net aimed at giving masses suffering from the acute economic strain the relief required to restructure their life and manage a decent life (Perez, 2016). It was an initiative that helped people whose luck was collapsing regain and become meaningful citizens, not to languish in poverty. The social nets were temporary relief structures for people out of work to enable them to get back on their feet and earn some meaningful employment opportunities. The biggest problem is the economic well-being of its citizens due to medical advances and drugs in the market. Task men and women are falling prey to drugs (Perez, 2016). With welfare policy in place to cater to the needy and out-of-work persons, people opt to keep off workplaces and instead register under the welfare kitty as beneficiaries to the toll-free earnings.
A study by the American Task Force in 2012 showed that over 65% of employees terminated suffered from drug addiction. Of the 65%, 0ver 70% felt no regret about losing their jobs because they could register as jobless individuals and benefit from the welfare funds (Perez, 2016). The motivation for the current debate and legislation on whether to make it mandatory for welfare beneficiaries to undergo a drug test dates back to the association between the drug and voluntary enlisting and participation in welfare programs. For instance, Besonen (2014) states that the occurrence of illicit drug use among American families depending on welfare support exceeds by 50% the number of drug users from non-recipient families. In another study, 9.6% of individuals under the government aid program in the USA reportedly use illicit drugs compared to 6.8% from families that do not rely on government aid. Drug use and abuse positively relate to future overreliance on welfare and a subsequent increase in poverty levels. Drug abuse and welfare benefits contribute to individual failure to acknowledge personal responsibility to the family and work.
In contract terms, a beneficiary must conform to the benefits presented through a formal agreement. The contract between the welfare beneficiary and the government is not legit since beneficiaries come from the same social cooperation. Evaluation of drug effects is challenging as drug use affects social corporations negatively. Welfare is an accepted form of support by the mainstream of American society and the developed world. Drug and substance abuse has been the cause of poverty across many countries. As a result, under the beneficiaries claiming public support, they should agree to maintain moderate behavior at accommodative and cooperative levels. Taxpayers should support the needy through welfare programs, and beneficiaries should use their money responsibly (Besonen, 2014). As such, being subjected to drug tests is one way of showing gratitude and commitment to appreciate the efforts of those paying taxes.
More people are beneficiaries of the welfare kitty than ever before. They depend on the government for handouts to enable them to put food on the table. The workforce is shrinking because employees opt out of work to enlist as beneficiaries of the welfare kitty (Perez, 2016). A move that leads to economic downtown and may render many Americans in poverty. Welfare programs were temporary measures to help people out of work as they looked for new opportunities in the job market. Welfare programs were reciprocal and not a one-way street. Taxpayers provide support for those in need. The recipients should reciprocate by engaging in responsible and constructive behavior that can enrich the welfare kitty.
Drug abuse affects the abuser, the abuser’s family, and the larger community. Paternalist arguments claim that welfare policies were to help break down barriers to employment and eradicate poverty (Mead, 2011). But as it constituted, the welfare program is increasing poverty levels while exposing many children to drugs and substance abuse. With the rise in urban poverty, welfare beneficiaries should help government agencies and institutions break down the fabric of morality. Drug use is one of the intolerable signs of moral and character deficits in society (Besonen, 2014). One of the major causes of urban poverty. Additionally, abuse of drugs is becoming the number one cause of family breakages, loss of employment, death, and a drive into poverty. People who receive government assistance but use the money for drugs rather than taking care of their families or seeking employment are squandering public fund.
Drug and substance abuse remains one of the contagious topics of discussion in the united states among welfare recipients. Both scholars and government agencies continue to cite threats that substance abuse poses to the well-being of the welfare. Analysts have been assessing whether public policies are misused. There is a likelihood of unintended adverse outcomes for those who pay taxes. Equally important, it is worth noting the opportunities created through public policies. According to Wincup (2014), the attention is shifting toward Europe, Australia, and other developed states as they struggle to implement policies to eradicate poverty in their countries. Governments provide funds and other necessities to the poor to support and enable them to live a decent life and provide for their families the commodities of shelter, food, and clothing. The funds driven into the welfare kitty are from taxes collected by the government from the taxpayers and aid provision institutions.
A better way of deterring drug users who fall under the poverty line from the abuse of drugs is by enforcing drug testing. According to McLaughlin (2013), drug testing advocates oppose testing drug addicts from their homes as it causes trauma and psychological effect to the entire family, especially children. To make ends meet, recipients of welfare support should reach out to the government. The torture experienced during the decision-making process to freely surrender to authorities may help more people abstain from drug use when their i