This
proliferation has occurred despite the paucity of evidence
that widespread suspicionless drug testing results in safer
workplaces and schools, reduces substance abuse problems,
combats crime, or is more effective at achieving these various
goals than less costly-and less intrusive-alternatives (e.g.,
performance testing for workers, honest drug education and
extracurricular activities for high school students, etc.).
While
drug testing has expanded, so too have drug testing technologies-from
urine testing to hair testing, sweat testing, saliva testing
and the use of so-called "Drug Recognition Experts."
Positive results from these drug tests are used to impose
a wide array of sanctions, from revocation of probation or
parole and immediate return to jail or prison, to loss of
parental or custody rights over children, to dismissal from
work, inability to participate in extracurricular activities,
denial of public benefits, and so on. Unfortunately, many
of the newer drug testing technologies are not sufficiently
reliable and yield a significant number of "false positive"
test results - that is, drug screens that appear to show drug
use when none has taken place. In addition, an increasing
number of prescription and over-the-counter medications and
even foods produce positive drug test results even though
the person being tested did not ingest drugs. The unreliability
of many drug testing technologies is a matter of grave concern,
particularly when the negative consequences that flow from
positive drug tests are so enormous.
Lastly,
drug testing has largely been detached from its therapeutic
underpinnings. A true positive drug test provides little information
except that a particular substance has been ingested. It does
not indicate when that substance was ingested, if the person
was under the influence of drugs at the time of testing or
while on the job, if the person can carry out his or her parenting
responsibilities, if the person suffers from an addiction
disorder (or is simply a one-time or occasional drug taker),
or even if the person knowingly ingested the substance. It
is a rare employer, school district, government bureaucracy
or law enforcement agency that uses drug testing not to sanction
individuals but to determine whether the people being drug
tested suffer from addition and, if so, to provide those persons
with treatment options and support services.
Drug
Policy Alliance, together with the
ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project, and the
National Advocates for Pregnant Women is involved in a
variety of legal challenges to expansive drug testing policies
and unreliable drug testing technologies. These challenges
attempt to uphold and strengthen the right to privacy found
in the Constitution, ensure due process for all persons, and
to promote rational drug testing policies rooted in science
and public health rather than conjecture and fear.