A New Chapter In R.J.'s Story

(CBS)  CBS News correspondent Sandra Hughes introduced Wednesday a young man named R.J. Feild, whose life has been a lesson in overcoming adversity.

Now, there's a new chapter in R.J.'s story, CBS News anchor Katie Couric reports.

R.J. was in Sacramento Thursday to personally introduce a bill - that literally has his name all over it.

R.J. was born addicted to heroin. His mother abandoned him at the hospital. No one thought he would ever survive. In fact, tasks many take for granted - reading, writing and walking - are a daily struggle for R.J.

If his legislation, called "R.J.'s Law," passes, it would offer drug rehabilitation to welfare recipients who test positive for illegal drugs.

If they refuse, they could lose their benefits.

The 16-year-old sophomore wants to make sure other children don't go through what he battles every day, and he wants to save taxpayers the millions of dollars his care has cost through the years.

---

Watch the original report: R.J.'s Story.c

Read Sandra Hughes' report on R.J's quest.

---

His idea is controversial - the law would require random drug-testing for those on welfare. But R.J.'s never given up a fight that he thinks is worth winning.

"I just hope it to work out. It's going to take a little while, but I'm not too worried about it," R.J. said.

[mteverest3]

I am so glad I was able to see this story. This young man has changed my life. He is an inspiration and a hero who will influence and guide my life in the future.

[canzady]

RJ is absolutely right. Too many children are suffering innocently for a lifetime due to their parents'' negligence. By enforcing this bill, it gives the mother the chance to reclaim her life as well. I don''t feel this is discriminatory any more than asking someone to take a drug test in order to earn their money.

[ivybrooke1]

Steve you are right about the class discrimination issue. The beauty though is that at least the issue is proposed and brought to light - then we negotiate and figure out how to make this work within the constitutional guidelines. Maybe a different way to address the issue can now be proposed - but don''t take away the beauty of this child''s bravery to introduce and "put it on the table". Hopefully someone like YOU can take it from there and "tool" it to make it fall within approriate constitutional limits. He did, however, make a difference in my life just by the the issue being reported upon ... and seeing him so brave - much braver than myself!

[glasscutter7]

I am very supportive of a bill that does random drug testing to welfare clients.

I work in the welfare system, and I had to take a drug test to get my job and earn the tax money that goes to pay welfare clients monthly benefits.

I find it extremely discriminatory to have to have a drug test to work in the welfare system, but those who live off the welfare system do not.

[ivybrooke1]

Dear RJ, I wanted to tell you something. I had worked all my life to get through school and to take the bar exam - I failed a couple of times and was just sitting here feeling sorry for myself as I struggle to study for the exam in a few days. Wondering how I was going to pay my student loans (1,200/month) no job and well ... some personal stuff. I never had any kids (feeling sorry about that too) Then you came into my life on CBS tonight.

About a year ago - when I was feeling particulary down - my brother in law said "Keep trying and don''t give up you don''t know who in the world you might be able to help someday ... some crack kid or something". When he said that to me - something made sense in my life again. So even though I lost my job and realized that that I had to take this stupid exam again.

RJ when I saw your story I started to cry and I realized that you are who my brother in law was talking about! You are the most beautiful person I have ever seen!

I don''t know if I ever will pass this test. But whether I do or not - I hope I get a chance in this lifetime to make a difference in this world for even one person - the way you have just made a difference in my life today!!!! And you story and your bravery I''m sure has made a differnce in many other lives!

RJ you are wonderful - God Bless you and God Bless your family. You have done more than you realize!!! You are a special gift in this world from GOD!

[sdance1]

I agree that we don''t want to be discriminatory toward welfare recipients. The issue addressed by RJ''s Law seems to be pregnant welfare drug addicted mothers whose actions have irreversible sffects on their babies''lives. I concede that there are other expectant women who are not on welfare that may be drug addicted as well. We should also investigate ways of identifying and holding them responsible for the lives that they are harming. We have to start somewhere and it is unfortunate for the welfare mothers but fortunate for their children!

[missingamerica]

*** this campaign season - now I seem to spell hilarious wrong EVERYWHERE!

[alricstrong]

I personally think that RJ''s Bill should be passed not only in California, but in all 50 states or made a federal law. All persons qualified to get welfare should be screened for narcotics and alcohol. First offense for a positive result would be mandatory drug rehab and temporary suspension of monetary benefits (pending a clean bill of health). Second offense, sanctioned for one year. Third offense, permanently sanctioned. The consequences only affect the guilty party. If poor people can find a way to sell welfare funds to buy drugs, alcohol or tobacco, then they should be working a minimum wage job for at least 30 hours per week instead of using drugs and making babies and forcing the government support the unborn child. I would wholeheartily support RJ''s Bill in all 50 states. The time has come for us to stop welfare-for-drugs abuse. My heart goes out to RJ Field. This young man is a national role model. Please don''t stop, RJ!! You are a winner!!

[missingamerica]

I said it before and I''ll say it again:

Restricting such actions to just welfare recipients is class discrimination, plain and simple.

If somebody wants to have an impact on drug use and wants to avoid being discriminatory, then anybody who gets a tax credit, a tax deduction, earned income credit, loans insured by a government, a government contract for goods or services, has an FDIC-insured bank account - in short, anybody who receives any funds from or legally avoids paying taxes to the government - should also be randomly drug-tested.

Fair is fair.

Besides, it would be hillarious - especially if they post positive results in the paper like they like to do with OMVI/DUI arrests.