IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v17y1991i2p183-196.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Unconvincing Case for Drug Testing

Author

Listed:
  • Lennart E. Henriksson

Abstract

The Mulroney government has recently proposed a program of mandatory drug testing in Canada's transportation industries. Following a brief discussion of drug testing in Canada, the paper reviews the relevant literature and describes the necessary components of conducting a cost-benefit analysis. It will be seen that this literature does not provide persuasive evidence of the usefulness of drug testing in addressing illicit drug problems in the workplace. The final section of the paper explores the legal environment surrounding drug testing, as it is reflected by constitutional statute and case law, as well as the work of legal scholars, and other writers. Special attention is given to the privacy issue which underlies many of the legal challenges to testing programs in the United States. The paper concludes that much more remains to be learned about the efficacy and consequences of drug testing programs before widespread Canadian applications can be endorsed.

Suggested Citation

  • Lennart E. Henriksson, 1991. "The Unconvincing Case for Drug Testing," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 17(2), pages 183-196, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:17:y:1991:i:2:p:183-196
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0317-0861%28199106%2917%3A2%3C183%3ATUCFDT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Noren, Ronny, 1998. "Industrial Transformation in the Open Economy: A Multisectoral View," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 111-117, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:17:y:1991:i:2:p:183-196. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iver Chong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.