Amen to that, Bobert.

The aid recipients would be responsible for the cost of the screening, which they would recoup in their assistance if they qualify.

Some people, including my daughter back East in recent times, and myself a long time ago, would not have the money for a test AND would NOT test positive.

Also, the ability to designate someone else to receive the money for their children proves nothing. Is the designated recipient going to have to pay to be tested, too? And, do you really think if someone is under the influence of drugs, including alcohol, that they won't be devious enough to figure out how to get around it by having the designated recipient just hand it over?

IF someone can afford drugs it is because they are addicted and unable to get off drugs without help. I am NOT excusing them, but the physiology of it is proof enough. What matters is treatment for drug addiction, counselling, etc. which this country is loath to provide to anyone who dares to have no money or insurance to cover the costs.

This is just another way of damning the poor and painting them with a broad brush which makes the hoity-toity feel superior and self-righteous. It will do nothing to help the children and, in most cases, mothers.