Parents Express Anger Over Drug Dogs

Several parents expressed anger, outrage and dissatisfaction at last night’s School Committee meeting when the floor was opened for public comment regarding the canine unit drug search that took place at Natick High School on March 12 after Superintendent Peter Sanchioni presented his report on the search.

Calling it “part of a comprehensive plan to eliminate drugs on campus” and “part of saying we will not tolerate drugs,” Sanchioni said that doing a search like this, where students remain in the classrooms (called shelter in place) while the dogs go through the hallways, helps keep drugs out of Natick and acts as a deterrent to drug use.

“I guarantee that bringing in canines isn’t a deterrent,” said Emily Tobin, who identified herself as a parent of a high honors student at the high school. “They’re just going to get more creative. You’re treating [the students] like inmates in a prison.”

The search, which took place three weeks ago today, was explained in a little more detail than it had been previously. Sanchioni stated that nine dogs arrived at the high school and the search of the inside of the building, which only covered hallways and common areas (no classrooms or on-person searches), took 20 minutes. The outside area, which includes three parking lots, took 30 minutes. Two vehicles were alerted on.

Parent Tom Campbell, who appeared to be speaking for a group of parents sitting together, raised several questions to the School Committee. Campbell noted before he began to speak that he didn’t expect most of the questions to have answers right then and there, but he said he feels that these are questions should be looked at when deciding whether to continue with the policy of drug-sniffing dogs conducting searches at the high school. One interesting theme of Campbell’s questions was research: many of his inquiries surrounded what kind of data there is that shows whether or not using canine units to search for drugs in high schools deters drug use among students and what other factors play a role in this, as well as how the information is gathered.

Let Patch save you time. Get great local stories like this delivered right to your inbox or smartphone everyday with our free newsletter. Simple, fast sign-up here.

Here is a partial list of Campbell’s questions that he brought to the attention of the School Committee last night:

• Do we know the policy is the reason nothing was found in the building?
• How many false alerts were there? We all know these dogs make false alerts.
• How does the faculty feel about it? Perhaps a survey would be appropriate.
• What other schools have used canines? Which have not? Why?

A couple of other parents in attendance brought up the issue of cost. This search did not cost the town anything as it was used as a training exercise for the dogs and their handlers; however, one resident in attendance, David Babic, brought up the question as to whether future searches would also be free.

Interestingly enough, School Committee member Dirk Coburn was in the high school for a meeting with one of his son’s teachers when, unbeknownst to him, the search began. He relayed that experience to everyone last night, saying that to him it seemed like business as usual because at that time very few students would be outside a classroom and in the hallway.

The most important point of discussion that may have developed further from last night’s School Committee meeting may have been Campbell’s first question: “What was the overall effectiveness [of the canine search]?”