Student athletes not only have to take on college, but a time consuming, stressful sport. These student athletes put in a tremendous amount of work to represent themselves and also to represent their school. Therefore, student athletes should not have to go through unnecessary testing. Although the NCAA should drug test collegiate athletes for performance enhancing drugs, they should not drug test for recreational drugs because too many athletes are getting suspended from athletic activities, there are alternatives to recreational drug testing, money can be better spent on catching cheaters for performance enhancing drugs, and some recreational drugs have actually been proven beneficial for some athletes’ injuries. NCAA drug testing was enacted in 1986 and has been going on ever since. The NCAA staff were uneasy about enacting drug testing from the beginning. This NCAA drug testing has prevented numerous players from participating in events and games because of a failure to pass a drug test and then getting suspended. Instead of having to suspend these athletes from their seasons, there could be education and intervention. This would have a way better chance of getting athletes to stop using these drugs. It’s like trying to teach someone how to get rid of bad habit. Either you could punish them every time they were to perform this bad habit, or teach them why their bad habit should be stopped and the negative effects of their bad habits. People often talk about collegiate athletes getting suspended because of marijuana and other recreational drugs, but we really don’t hear as much about steroids and performance enhancing drugs. Steroid use is becoming more popular among collegiate teams and by getting not testing for recreational drugs, colleges can focus more on catching these cheaters. Lastly, recreational drugs do not provide a competitive advantage for an athlete and also can help an athlete with life threatening injuries. Medical marijuana is often beneficial for head injury, which is very common in almost every sport. There is a clear difference between performance enhancing drugs and recreational drugs; a change in NCAA drug testing should be made.

On January 15th, 1986, the National Athletic Association authorized drug testing to be performed on college athletes. This was the first time in NCAA history that, “allow[ed] the association to examine random athletes entered in those events for any of eighty-six prohibited drugs” (White, 1).  Failing to pass a drug test resulted in suspension of the current event and a further ninety days from competition. Men’s and women’s cross-country were the first subjects to be drug tested during their championships in November of that year. Furthermore, they ruled that during bowl games, at least thirty-six players of each football team would be drug tested before the game. The school would get to choose twenty-two of the players but the NCAA staff would get to choose the remaining fourteen players. It was estimated that for each bowl, drug testing would cost around $14,400. One of the former presidents of the NCAA, John Toner, thought that “maybe this isn’t the perfect answer. But at least we’ve gotten started. This is a beginning in the right direction for colleges finally facing the seriousness of this problem” (White, 1). This direct quotation from White’s article indicates that from the beginning, NCAA officials and members started off uneasy about the act of drug testing collegiate athletes. 

Many collegiate athletes are getting suspended from activity, many of them being football players being suspended from bowl games due to testing positive for marijuana. With legalization of marijuana in a few states, marijuana’s popularity among the country is rapidly growing. Outside of alcohol, marijuana is the most used recreational drug among college athletes. The Orlando Sentinel expresses, “According to the latest NCAA research, nearly one-third of college athletes said they have used marijuana at least once in a twelve-month period. Marijuana is among several substances on the NCAA's list of banned street drugs, along with amphetamines, cocaine and synthetic marijuana. Among these substances, marijuana (21.9 percent) was rated among the highest in usage by athletes during a twelve-month period” (Murschel, 1). The NCAA performs year-round testing but specifically only tests for marijuana during Division I sports at championship level and bowl games. Consequences for testing positive for marijuana result in suspension from the championship event or bowl game and sitting out half of the following season. Many big-time athletes have encountered this problematic system. For example, Darren Carrington, a wide receiver for the University of Oregon, was not only suspended from a bowl game, but pestered by the press and media for testing positive for marijuana during an NCAA test. Carrington had to sit out the season’s national final against Ohio State all because he failed a drug test for marijuana. Drawing conclusions from the stats of the high number of users of marijuana, there was most likely other users that played in the game but didn’t get caught. This NCAA testing is unfair and uncalled for. The NCAA’s drug testing of recreational drugs is prohibiting many people from striving to reach their dreams and goals because of their random tests. 

Although drug testing helps limit the number of athletes who use performance enhancing drugs, it does not for recreational drugs. Research found that “drug testing hasn’t deterred recreational drug use, with marijuana use remaining stable, alcohol use dipping only slightly and prescription opioid use increasing” (“NCAA To Eliminate Testing for Marijuana”, 2). Instead of banning athletes from their sport, there could be education and intervention about drug use. The “use of recreational drugs should be discouraged, the committee members said; but because they do not provide a competitive advantage, alternative approaches to testing should be developed” (“NCAA To Eliminate Testing for Marijuana”, 1). Because recreational drugs aren’t enhancing an athlete’s performance, why can’t we leave it up to the athlete to decide if they want to use any recreational drug or not? The athletes are the one who put so much time and dedication into a sport, it should be their choice if they want to risk their ability to perform due to recreational drug use. The NCAA chief medical officer, Dr. Brian Hainline, wants to end NCAA testing for recreational drugs. Hainline said “the NCAA should focus on catching cheaters who gain a competitive advantage by using performance-enhancing drugs – year-round testing is still in place with a one-year suspension the punishment for a positive test – and leave it mostly to the schools to deal with athletes who are caught using rec drugs” (“Q&A on drug testing with NCAA medical chief”, 1). Hainline wants to look at recreational drugs as an issue that can be resolved instead of just doing random testing throughout the year and banning athletes during championships. He thinks it better to work with athletes within their individual campus versus the NCAA just setting bans on athletes. Hainline would supply the member institutions with the tools and factors to work with those collegiate athletes that use recreational drugs. He would allow campuses, along with a set group of people, to address the issue with whatever therapy and intervention they want their player to go through. Shannon Terlep, a WSJ speaker who discusses Hainline’s decision making, claims that this “set group of people” is necessary so colleges would still be operating by the same rules instead of each college doing their own thing (NCAA Tournament: A New Way to Look at Drug-Testing?”). This change would not prevent the NCAA from testing, its’s the post testing that would be different. The NCAA would make more of a separation between recreation-only drugs (marijuana, alcohol, and opioids) and performance-enhancing drugs. For recreational drugs, the NCAA would like to have education to try to prevent student-athletes from using these drugs instead of suspending athletes from their sport. There should never be suspensions taken place resulting from failure of a drug test due to a recreational drug. 

How money is spent on a college campus is often troubling and controversial. Money could be better spent on catching cheaters who gain a competitive advantage by using performance enhancing drugs and leave it to the schools to deal with athletes caught using recreational drugs. Steroids are easy to buy and the testing is weak for this substance. Football’s use of steroids is growing significantly and they are getting away with it. “The sport's near-zero rate of positive steroids tests is not an accurate gauge among college athletes. Random tests provide weak deterrence and, by design, fail to catch every player using steroids. Colleges also are reluctant to spend money on expensive steroid testing when cheaper ones for drugs like marijuana allow them to say they're doing everything they can to keep drugs out of football” (Apuzzo, Goldman, Gillum, 1). Don Catlin, a worker in NCAA’s laboratory, explains that the collegiate system is designed to not catch steroid users. Players are often notified a number of days before a test and then the school doesn’t even test for steroids. “It’s nothing like what’s going on in reality,” said Don Catlin (Apuzzo, Goldman, Gillum, 1). Colleges are reducing the number of positive tests to keep players safe and refrain from having embarrassing drug scandals. By making recreational drugs secondary to performance enhancing drugs, colleges will have to test the proper way, pulling out those athletes that cheat. This will make collegiate athletics justified and fair: the way it should be. 

Although marijuana doesn’t help with an athlete’s performance, it can help with multiple injuries. Marvin Washington, Brendon Ayanbadejo, and Scott Fujita all are Super Bowl champions. Marvin Washington played eleven years in the NFL and is now a concussion advocate for retired players. Brendon Avanbadejo played thirteen years in the NFL and now works for Fox Sports as an analyst and writer. Scott Fujita played eleven years in the NFL and is now an NFL broadcaster and sports writer. They discuss the hardships and struggles with having to endure each NFL season. They encountered several injuries that ranged from just a bruise to something much more serious. They distress that “many former and current NFL players use or have used marijuana to treat pain associated with injuries sustained on the field. There is a compelling body of research showing that marijuana can help treat pain and brain injuries” (Washington, 1). “A traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a disruption of the normal function of the brain caused by a bump or blow to the head. A mild brain injury, or concussion, can cause temporary brain cell dysfunction, while a more serious injury can cause the brain tissue to bruise, tear or bleed and result in long-term complications or death” (Traumatic Brain Injuries – Medical Marijuana Research Overview, 1). Medical marijuana is highly known for treating brain injuries. “In the case of trauma, a lot of inflammation occurs, which affects cognitive functioning and neural connectivity. A compound in which marijuana called cannabidiol (CBD) has shown scientific potential to be an antioxidant and neuroprotectant for the brain” (Washington, 1). After a blow to the head, “the body releases harmful mediators that lead to excitotoxicity, oxidative stress and inflammation and causes secondary, delayed neuronal death” (Traumatic Brain Injuries – Medical Marijuana Research Overview, 1). Medical marijuana is better the opioid painkillers because opioids are highly addictive and can affect a player long after their athletic career. The NFL has expressed they would consider the medical use of marijuana for players if medical experts think it’s a good option. For this to happen, the NFL would have to abandon drug testing and punishing players for use of marijuana. This is similar to collegiate athletes in every way. Student athletes are at as much risk as an NFL player for getting seriously injured. Head injuries are prevalent in almost every sport. Because of this, the NCAA “should be doing everything it can to help keep their players healthy during and after their careers” (Washington, 1). Many people would probably be concerned with athletes smoking cannabis and damaging their lung health but a “twenty-year-long study, which involved over 5,000 adults, concluded that regular marijuana smoking (a joint a day for seven years or a joint a week for 20 years) had no negative impact on lung function” (Hsu, 1). Receiving a head injury during a sport can easily affect the rest of your life. Players should not have their lives traumatized because medical marijuana cannot be used when they develop an injury. The NCAA should abandon its policy of drug testing players for recreational drugs, especially marijuana, and stop punishing them due to failure of passing. These recreational drugs have potential to actually benefit a student athlete. 

Freedom is a thing that is highly stressed in this country: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, etc. Most people want freedom in some way or another in their lives. Collegiate athletes are already restricted freedom of social time and benefit due to the high demand of their sport. Collegiate athletes deserve the right to freedom of recreational drugs because of the devotion and time they put in. They should not be punished for using these recreational drugs that by no means help contribute to their athletic performance. Collegiate athletes should have every right to use recreational drugs if they want to. If the NCAA and colleges still don’t deem this moral, they can use as much intervention and prevention as they want. Educating collegiate athletes as much as possible can perhaps affect their decisions about use of the drug more than suspending them can. By letting these collegiate athletes have this little freedom, benefits arise. The NCAA, colleges, and both of their expenses for drug testing can be focused on catching those who use performance enhancing drugs and cheat. This will ensure fair play in all collegiate sports. Lastly, medical marijuana could then be prescribed to athletes who experience head injuries or endure horrible pain. The NCAA should change their ways to steer their way to this path of freedom. 
