Drug tests need limits
The Ministry of Education plans to introduce rapid saliva drug testing in schools as early as September, aiming to address the challenge posed by emerging drugs such as etomidate, which are metabolized quickly and can be difficult to detect through traditional urinalysis.
It is a sign that the government is responding to drug-related risks on campus, and a commendable step. However, parental concerns should not be overlooked.
The concern is that if saliva testing requires student or parental consent, it might create a situation in which those willing to comply are tested, while those at highest risk slip through the cracks.
At the same time, ignoring proper consent procedures risks infringing on students’ privacy and bodily autonomy and might turn testing into a tool for stigmatization.
Campus drug prevention should not swing between loopholes and overregulation. It should establish a clear and trustworthy system.
Before implementing saliva testing, the government should, at a minimum, put three supporting measures in place.
First, establish a clear legal basis and conditions for implementation to prevent schools from requiring tests based on subjective individual judgments.
Second, ensure that trained professionals conduct sampling and communicate explanations, reducing conflict between teachers and parents.
Third, a positive rapid test result must not be treated as definitive proof of drug use; there must be mechanisms for confirmatory testing, notification, appeals and counseling.
Drug prevention in schools requires tools, but these cannot replace education and support.
The value of saliva testing lies in early risk detection, not in punishing students.
If the government can integrate family support, psychological counseling, social work intervention and addiction treatment — positioning testing as a gateway to support rather than a means of control — it should be possible to balance public safety, child protection and procedural justice.
Fan Chen-jia
Taipei
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is
RSS