|
Criminal Justice Drug Testing Definition: Procedures involving standard sets of guidelines and technologies that are used to examine physical specimens--such as urine, blood, hair, perspiration, and saliva--to detect the presence of illegal psychoactive drugs--such as cocaine, heroin, and marijuana. Criminal Justice Issues: Courts; Probation and pretrial release; substance abuse; technology. Significance: Drug testing is a tool that can be used at every stage of the criminal justice process; it is an especially useful aid to making decisions about the sentencing, supervision, placement, treatment, and release of offenders. Illegal drug use is common within offender populations, which include arrestees, detainees, probationers, prison inmates, and parolees. During sustained periods of drug use, offenders commit more crimes and commit them at higher rates and severity levels. This fact and the continued national emphasis on the enforcement of drug laws have increased the importance and role of drug testing in criminal justice practices. Drug-Testing Procedures and Accuracy Urinalysis is the oldest and most common type of drug-testing procedure. The two primary methods for detecting drugs in the urine are immunoassay and chromatography. Immunoassay tests use human antibodies to reveal the presence of certain substances in urine. Relatively inexpensive, these tests can be conducted in criminal justice agencies and do not require highly specialized laboratories. Drug-testing experts, known as toxicologists, recommend that positive immunoassay tests be followed by chromatography,. The latter is a more costly procedure but is also more reliable and legally defensible test that separates drugs from the biological components of urine specimens. Urinalysis must be performed shortly after suspected use because such tests lose their effectiveness with delays between drug ingestion and drug testing. For example, amphetamines, cocaine, and heroin can be detected by urinalysis for only two or three days following their use. In addition, drug testing has greater deterrent effect on potential offenders when it is conducted frequently and randomly. Urine specimens can be analyzed by instruments in machines or manually, in a noninstrument tests. The former methods uses machines to sample, measure, and produce quantitative results on a numeric scale that specifies the detectable levels of ingested drugs. The latter methods uses manual techniques in which specimens are collected by hand. Point-of-contact strips are dipped into the specimens and produce dichotomous results that are either positive or negative. The two possible types of drug-testing errors are false positives and false negatives. False positives occur when tests indicate the use of illegal drugs when none have been ingested. False negatives occur when tests fail to detect drugs that have been ingested. Ingestion of legal drugs, such as ibuprofen and other anti-inflammatory medicines, can lead to false positive findings. False negative results can occur when quantities of ingested drugs are too small to be detected by the tests, or when the tests are not sensitive enough to detect the amounts of drugs typically ingested. Confirmation, or follow-up, tests can help avoid drug-testing errors. Newer drug-testing technologies are expected eventually to replace urinalysis as the predominant mode of drug testing for offenders. Among the new technologies are hair analysis, saliva testing, and sweat patches. Compared with urinalysis, newer drug-testing technologies are less invasive, easier to administer, and capable of detecting drug use for much longer periods of time after ingestion. Uses of Drug Testing Drug testing can improve assessment and case-management strategies for drug-using offenders, and can be used at the pretrial and post-trial levels, that is, both before and after sentencing. At the pretrial stage, drug testing can be done while arrestees and detainees are awaiting bail, arraignment, or disposition of their cases. Defendants on pretrial release who use illegal drugs are more likely to continue committing crimes and miss their court dates. Hence, drug testing is often used to monitor defendants who participate in pretrial release programs that allow them to remain in their communities under court-ordered conditions of release. Participation in day reporting centers is an example of such a program, in which defendants receive services during the day and return to their residences in the evenings under a curfew restriction. Detection of illicit drug use can help courts determine defendants' suitability for community supervision. The results can also be used to develop specific service plan for defendants in pretrial programs. Positive test results can hold defendants accountable to the courts when judges have imposed abstinence on them as a condition of their pretrial release. In these situations, the detection of illicit drugs often leads to such sanctions as pretrial confinement or the imposition of more restrictive conditions of release. After offenders are sentenced to probation or prison or are released on parole, drug testing can be used to achieve different goals, depending on the offenders' progress in the recovery process. As at the pretrial level, positive drug test results can yield confirmatory evidence that is part of a more comprehensive assessment of drug use. Moreover. the threat of continued testing can increase the honesty and candor of offenders' self-reports of their illicit drug use. During their early stages of recovery, when offenders' acceptance of their drug use problems is paramount, drug testing can produce objective evidence of illicit drug use and be another mechanism to confront the offenders' resistance to treatment. During treatment and relapse prevention, testing can be a barometer of abstinence, encouraging offenders to remain drug free for increasing lengths of time. Drug testing often has been ordered as a condition of release for offenders in intensive probation supervision programs, a popular sentencing option for managing drug-using offenders in the community. Officers who administer intensive probation programs have smaller caseloads than those who manage offenders on standard probation supervision. They use drug testing to evaluate drug problems, monitor offender behavior, and deter continued drug use. The results of drug tests performed at the pretrial and probation stages can be used to make decisions about the placement of incoming prison inmates. For example, offenders who violate their probation and are sent to prison because of positive drug-test results might be housed in special drug treatment units or facilities. In these situations, drug-test results are used to develop drug-treatment plans. As with all criminal justice clients, both drug testing and treatment must be mandated to be most effective. Numerous studies have shown that offenders in mandatory treatment programs remain in treatment longer--an essential component of successful recovery. Mandatory testing can exert more leverage over offenders by being a deterrent to continued drug use, but only if positive test results lead to swift, consistent, and meaningful sanctions. Limitations of Drug Testing The current technology of drug testing is limited in several respects. For example, it provides no specific information about the quantity of drugs ingested, the precise times of drug ingestion, the modes of ingestion, the degree of functional impairment experienced by drug users, or the severity of the users' problems. Some offenders who test positive are only occasional or "recreational" drug users who experience few problems from use. Others who test positive may be addicted to drugs and experience intense cravings and an inability to function without the substances. As a general rule, offenders who test positive on multiple occasions are more likely to abuse or be dependent on drugs and should be further assessed. Little evidence suggests that drug testing by itself significantly reduces pretrial arrests or failure-to-appear rates. In addition, drug testing during pretrial release has questionable utility in predicting rearrests before sentencing. The use of drug testing as part of pretrial or post-trial supervision programs might actually increase the sizes of jail populations by giving defendants and offenders additional ways to violate the conditions of their release and to be returned to detention as a consequence. Drug testing is also a costly and sometimes unreliable method of detecting illicit drug use. Moreover, results can infringe on constitutional or due process rights when, for example, persons who test falsely positive for illicit drug use lose their freedom. Because of its limitations, drug testing should be used judiciously. Positive tests should lead to further assessments, increased contacts with case managers, and plans for treatment and other interventions that are designed to reduce drug use. For defendants on pretrial supervision, the lengths of time they spend on release may be too brief to produce lasting benefits from treatment. Therefore, participation in treatment readiness sessions may be a more appropriate option for drug-involved defendants. For probationers, positive test results must be linked to drug treatment services and interventions to reengage them in the recovery process. These same principles apply to parolees with drug-use problems. In short, drug testing and treatment together are more effective than drug testing alone in changing offenders' drug-using and criminal behaviors. At all stages of the criminal justice system, professionals must recognize that addiction is a chronic brain disease, and relapses are to be expected in the recovery process. For this reason, one or two positive test results should rarely, if ever, be considered sufficiently serious violations of supervised release to justify termination of treatment or other services. Instead, positive drug-test results should be seen as valuable opportunities to identify and challenge the factors in individual offenders' lives that precipitate relapses, and case workers should refocus the offenders on the elements of their treatment and other community resources that promote sobriety. Drug testing is a useful tool for managing drug-involved offenders at the pre- and post-sentencing stages. At the pretrial stage, drug-test results provide objective indicators of the need for further evaluation and placement in treatment readiness programs. At the post-sentencing stage, drug-test results confirm the findings of more comprehensive assessments, help motivate offenders to continue their recovery, and identify episodes of relapse that can be exploited as opportunities to facilitate treatment. Arthur J. Lurigio Further ReadingBelenko, S., I. Mara-Drita, and J. E. McElroy. "Drug Tests and the Prediction of Pretrial Misconduct: Findings and Policy Issues." Crime and Delinquency 38 (1992): 557-582. Professional study of correlations between drug-test results and criminal behavior by defendants during pretrial release. Goldkamp, J. S., M. R. Gottfredson, and D. Weiland. "Pretrial Drug Testing and Defendant Risk." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 81 (1990): 585-652. Similar study on the connections between drug-test results and pretrial release behavior. Mieczkowski, T., and K. Lersch. "Drug Testing in Criminal Justice." National Institute of Justice Journal 3 (1997): 9-15. Brief but broad overview of the uses of drug testing in the criminal justice system. Drug Treatment in the Criminal Justice System. Washington, D.C.: Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2001. Federal government report on drug-treatment programs through the criminal justice system. Wish, E. D., M. Toborg, and J. Bellassai. Identifying Drug Users and Monitoring Them During Conditional Release. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice, 1988. Federal government report on the use of drug testing to monitor defendants in pretrial release. See Also DARE programs; Drug courts; Drug Enforcement Administration; Drugs and law enforcement; Parole; Privacy rights; Probation, adult; Sobriety testing; Toxicology. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
SALEM PRESS, INC. · 131 North El Molino Avenue · Pasadena · CA 91101 © Salem Press, Inc. All Rights Reserved. |