State will join New Mexico and Oregon in attempting to educate to stop use of performance enhancing drugs before it starts.
By Jon Buzby
MaxPreps.com
Barry Bonds. Mark McGwire. Sammy Sosa. Those are just a few of the big names usually associated with steroid use.
But how long will it be before college athletes using steroids becomes the headline in the sports pages? And then not long after that – high school athletes.
Four states have already implemented random steroid testing for high school athletes: Florida, Illinois, New Jersey and Texas. Others, including New Mexico and Oregon, choose to educate instead of test.
The Delaware Interscholastic Athletic Association (DIAA) announced last week it will not test for steroids, but instead move toward educating athletic directors and coaches about the dangers of using performance enhancing drugs so that they, in turn, can look for warning signs and do everything in their power to ensure their athletes are well-versed in the dangers of using non-prescribed medications.
“We felt that investment in education will generate a greater return than investment in testing,” DIAA Executive Director Kevin Charles said.
This announcement came following a five-month study into the issue – done as a result of House Resolution 44 sponsored by Representative Greg Hastings - by a task force made up of legislators, doctors, school administrators and several members of DIAA.
In Texas, according to a June 30 story published in the Houston Chronicle, only 2 of the 10,000 students tested came back with positive results. The testing cost of $3 million means that each student “caught” cost the state $1.5 million.
In Delaware, the cost would be between $150 and $200 per test. Michael Valania, a sophomore varsity wrestler at St. Mark’s High School in Wilmington, agrees testing is not a good use of money.
“To waste money and find just a couple of users instead of further developing an education program to impact hundreds would seem foolish,” Valania says.
The legislators have not mandated the education program but have strongly recommended that athletic directors and coaches attend training once every two or three years. With the decision to educate rather than test now decided, the bigger issue becomes money. With budget cuts in the state’s Department of Education as well as school districts statewide - and next year’s budgets already finalized - program implementation could still be a year or more away.
“The National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) has an excellent coaches training tool that I’d like to see serve as the basis for the training,” Charles said. “The course costs only $35 and can be taken online. It includes information on substance and performance enhancing substance abuse as well as examples of teachable moments.
“I would like to see DIAA implement a voluntary program starting this year and, if we go to a mandatory program, phase that in over the next couple of years. If we did adopt a mandatory training program we would require member schools to monitor compliance and then submit a report to DIAA listing their coaches and training dates.”
Some critics might question should someone other than the coaches be educating the athletes. Should experts in the field be brought in? Or maybe even athletes who have abused steroids in the past and learned from the consequences. However, the consensus among coaches and athletes seems to be that the head and assistant coaches – experts or not – are in the best positions to educate.
“If anyone should educate, I think it should be the head coach because I believe that if the athletes respect the coach then they will listen to him or her above anyone else,” Valania said.
Lincoln Lamberton, a sophomore at Salesianum High School, echoes Valania’s thoughts.
“I think that coaches should be responsible for the education of their athletes," Lamberton said. "I feel that players respect their coaches and will be more receptive to the message of not using steroids if it comes from their coach rather than someone else.”
Head coaches readily admit that coaching “the game” to high school athletes is just part of their job. The other segment is developing young men and women for success after their playing days are over. This includes keeping them abreast of moral and health issues – good and bad – that they will face not only as athletes, but as citizens.
“I don't mind being responsible for the education piece, as a matter of fact, I feel as though it is part of my job to educate the young women that I coach,” Loveita Moffett, head field hockey coach at William Penn High School, said. “Of course, I must teach them how to be better hockey players, but it is also important for me to teach them how to be safe and warn them about the current issues surrounding athletics.
“I would hope that when my players are faced with an ethical decision, they remember the daily discussions that come up during practice times. There are many days when we sit down at the beginning or end of a practice and discuss "hot topics" that are affecting our team or school.”
The players and coaches interviewed for this article do not think that the use of steroids is a major issue at the high school level in any sport in Delaware. However, all agree that it’s better to head off a potential problem than just wait for warning signs and/or assume players will continue to not get involved in performance enhancing drug use.
Educating players when they enter high school is one of the keys to preventing them from even experimenting with steroids.
“Most kids will stay away from steroids once they know the dangers involved,” Lamberton said. “The key is making them aware early on.”
