Every athlete has to agree to random drug testing to be in compliance with NCAA regulation. There’s no changing that.
But how worth it is it to drug test Division III athletes?
It makes sense at Division I and Division II schools to test for performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) like steroids because of the higher levels of competition and nationally televised games and events, especially in Division I. The pressure to perform for both audiences and professional teams is undeniable, so it would make sense to try and keep those athletes away from the seduction of PEDs.
But those pressures are not nearly as relevant in Division III. Most Division III athletes aren’t under the impression that they’re going to go pro.
Division III athletes are generally there to extend their athletic career in the sport they love for a few extra years. Testing Division III athletes for PEDs seems about as useful as doing the same for high-schoolers.
However, the NCAA found that approximately 60 percent of student athletes see drug testing as a deterrent, and support fair repercussions for positive tests in a self-conducted 2014 study.
On the other hand, testing Division III athletes for illicit and street drugs seems useful and almost necessary.
“Across virtually every social drug (including alcohol, tobacco and marijuana), Division III student-athletes reported higher usage rates than seen among student-athletes in Divisions I and II. In some cases (e.g., marijuana), Division III use has reportedly increased while rates in Divisions I and II have remained stable or dropped,” reported the 2014 NCAA study.
The study also reported that, in general, student-athletes are much less likely than other students to use recreational and social drugs in the first place.
If a school is looking to get rid of a drug culture, then drug testing seems to be the obvious way to go. But simply being on a team in the first place seems to be a good enough deterrent for many student-athletes to not bother with drugs to begin with.
Every athletics department is different, but the study also found that drug use correlates with both gender and specific sports.
“Although similar percentages of male and female student-athletes report using alcohol, men use other social and ergogenic substances at higher rates than women,” said the study.
The study also reported that men’s lacrosse had the highest rate of use, while men’s basketball had the least.
“Examined across sport, men’s lacrosse student-athletes reported the highest or near-highest use of many substances including alcohol, cigarettes, spit tobacco, marijuana, synthetic marijuana and cocaine. Approximately 11 percent of men’s lacrosse players indicated that they have used cocaine in the last 12 months. Among women, lacrosse student-athletes reported high usage rates for alcohol, amphetamines, cigarettes, and marijuana. Men’s lacrosse players indicated the highest ADHD medication use, including 20 percent who reported using without a prescription,” reported the study. “Men’s basketball players were among the lowest reported users of alcohol, amphetamines, anabolic steroids, cigarettes, cocaine, ephedrine, marijuana, spit tobacco and synthetic marijuana.”
So it seems like the smart move for a department would be to take into account gender, sport and kind of drug when deciding who to drug test.