1.
Welfare and Drug Testing in
the USA
A presentation on communication and barriers

2.
Background
• American Congress adopted the Anti Drug Abuse Act in 1988
• In 1995 the policy was further refined and the government started
implementing its drug free policy
• The drug free policy enforce denial of federal benefits to users,
possessors and traffickers from one to five years and the third timers
permanently. This included grants, contracts, licensing, loans, but
excluded welfare and public housing.
• In 1996 the government enacted Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act, created Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) to make people move from welfare to work, a
mandatory state run drug test.

3.
The administration and why it is a concern to
the public?
Administrative Issue: According to (Israel & Covert, 2015),
• The state of Missouri spent $336,297 to test 38970 welfare applicants and
found 48 positive results.
• The state of Oklahoma spent $385872 to test 3342 welfare applicants and
found 297 positive results
• The state of Utah spent $64566 to test 9552 welfare applicants and found
29 positive results
• The state of Kansas spent $40000 to test 2783 welfare applicants and found
11 positive results
• The state of Mississippi spent $5290 to test 3656 welfare applicants and
found 2 positive results

4.
The administration and why it is a concern to
the public?
Public concern:
• The rate of drug test positive is very low than national average of
9.4% drug users. It is not effective enough as a mechanism.
• The states are spending huge amount of money to conduct the test
while they could spend the money on other programs for people.

5.
Stakeholders impacting communication
Identified stakeholders in the process are
• Welfare applicants
• The state
• The tax payers
• The TANF
• The testing agency
• The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and so on.
Each of their interest is different:
• Welfare applicant demands welfare
• The state needs to deliver welfare opportunities to the righteous and qualified candidate without being
biased
• The tax payers want a part of their money to go for the poor
• TANF wants people to work rather than stay with the welfare program
• Governmental laws and other policy bodies want to go drug free

6.
Communication barriers impacting the
addressing of the issue
• According to (Smuddle, 2009) in public private issues the communication
barriers remain activated in multidisciplinary mode and have wider span of
presence to impact the communication. This include
• Absence of interagency collaboration and coordination
• Absence of dialog with citizens
• Absence of public awareness on government welfare and the drug testing
• Absence of communicable and universal standards for drug testing, the
testing agency, the experience the testing agency to deliver to welfare
applicants
• Uniform decision making process for welfare applicants

7.
Cultural considerations impact the issue
• According to (Diep, 2015) women drug users fear going to doctor if
the babies are taken away from them. Such fears work among drug
user parents, pregnant moms and other unemployed ones. The kid
will not have food – concerns the people the most.
• In another study it is found that people without Supplemental
Security Income (SSI) benefits show higher dependency on drug and
are least likely to get a job.
• The US is a land of immigrants.

8.
Ethical considerations
• A deep concern raises on the permissible scope of searching, as many
believes the drug test is unconstitutional as it is under the scope of
Fourth Amendment for unreasonable searches and seizures.
• Pledging the body for the bread.
• The drug testing decision is mandatory with and without history of
drug use, possession and trafficking.

9.
Diversity skills requirement
• Taking advantage of knowledge from the diversity skills to develop
communication based on cultural considerations
• Educating and motivating staffs, enforcers, stakeholders
• Establishment of cultural network
• Knowing cultural assumptions
• Knowing cultural assimilation.

10.
Possible outcomes
• There is only one outcome based on the communication plan for the issue,
people stop being worried about the drug testing for welfare or not.
• The diversity issue based on culture is not sufficient.
• Agency based stakeholders perspective still remains as very important
factor.
• Agency interests keep changing with time and developments.
• State is right in spending thousands to get below the national average drug
test positive cases wiped from the welfare system. Public concern for the
same is shaping differently and should not be of much concern.
• The constitutional contradiction as iterated, is footed wrong since
constitution gives state endless authority and power to continue doing
better for its people. State is not in violation but the perception and beliefs
are.