home

Officers Challenge Hair Testing

By TChris, Section Civil Liberties
Posted on Wed Aug 24, 2005 at 06:06:02 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Seven African American police officers who tested positive for cocaine use are suing the Boston Police Department. They all say they didn't ingest cocaine, although they may have been contaminated with it during the course of their work. They contend that tests of their hair are unreliable and racially biased.

Their civil rights lawsuit is one of many legal challenges against hair drug tests, which are used by companies and police departments nationwide. Employers like the test because it can detect drugs up to three months after use; urine tests go back only a few days and can be easily altered.

But studies have found dark-haired people are more likely to test positive for drugs because they have higher levels of melanin, which allows drug compounds to bind more easily to their hair.

A few days after the positive tests, six of the seven officers had negative hair tests. Yet departmental policy requires officers with a positive test to enter into a rehabilitation agreement during a 45 day suspension or be fired. The six officers refused. They hope the lawsuit will lead to their reinstatement.

"Here you have police officers on the front line whose reputations have been horribly tarnished, if not destroyed, and who are out of a job because of a drug test that may have identified them for being guilty of nothing more than the color of their skin," said ACLU attorney Allen Hopper.

< New Harris Poll: Bush at Lowest Rating Ever | Iraq Draft Constitution Imperils Women's Rights >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Officers Challenge Hair Testing | 15 comments (15 topical)
    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Aug 31, 2005 at 05:43:33 PM EST
    I'm not talking legally or philosophically here - does anyone know, based on scientific research, how long pot or hashish stays in one's system Thanks Scott

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#1)
    by wishful on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:42 PM EST
    I tend to believe the officers. I wish them good luck in confronting the unconfrontable.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#2)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:42 PM EST
    Read "Steal This Urine Test" by A. Hoffman (yes Abbie). Yes good luck.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:42 PM EST
    I long for the day when a man is judged by the contents of his character, not the contents of his hair or urine.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#4)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:43 PM EST
    kdog-never happen. Knowing what a person does in his/her private life gives too much of a sense of power to those in charge. I for one, believe that every politician must take a hair analysis every month. Also, every cop must submit once a month. And every jag-off CEO. Also, I am kidding. Prying into my dopamine levels is almost as scary as prying into my bedroom.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#5)
    by jackl2400 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:43 PM EST
    The writer Barbara Ehrenreich (Nicked and Dimed, about minimum wage lifestyles) spoke at a NORML conference a couple of years ago, tying the fad for drug testing to the other anti-labor and union busting activities of the Reagan administration (as well as earlier "anti-working class pleasure" movements as the early capitalists' campaign against traditional May Day celebrations). Her point was that the only reason to drug test, e.g., Wal-Mart employees was to establish a sense of domination and authority over the workers, to humiliate them before offering them a job by making them urinate into a cup and by suggesting that their private and off-job habits should be controlled and surveilled by the employer. It is interesting that one of the big pushes for drug testing now continues to be Johnnie Walters and the ONDCP, which goes around the country pushing student drug testing as a supposed "magic bullet" against adolescent drug (marijuana) use, and giving students some external reason to "just say no". It is also interesting that drug testing by corporations is down in the past few years, because, as critics have suggested, no benefits can be extablished (studies have shown those with positive tests are equal or better employees in non-safety related occupations, such as your typical office job). Lastly, drug testing, whether urine or the newer hair techniques is all about marijuana. Most other illicit drugs are cleared from the system over a weekend, marijuana metabolites remain in urine for up to six weeks, typically. The hair test can supposedly detect marijuana for three months. Drug testing is a billion dollar industry now, and testing companies (which include pharmas) are obviously some of biggest cheerleaders for a ratcheting up of the drug war and tubing any proposals here or in Canada to relax marijuana enforcement.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#6)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:43 PM EST
    Lastly, drug testing, whether urine or the newer hair techniques is all about marijuana.
    Well this one was all about cocaine. Test em again. If they're positive. Fire em.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#7)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:43 PM EST
    They DID test them again Patrick. They were clean. At least 6 of the 7. And still, they are gonna go to treatment and booted off the force for 45 days. What time frame do you recommend for between testings? What if it shows up as a different drug? What if What if What if? Paranoid power hungry control freaks get off on making people pee in a cup.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#8)
    by jackl2400 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:44 PM EST
    Well this one was all about cocaine. Test em again. If they're positive. Fire em.
    Patrick: interesting post. Couple of questions: (1) so if it was marijuana rather than cocaine, than the officers shouldn't be fired, in your view? (not getting the distinction you're trying to draw), and (2) is it just LEOs that should be drug-tested because they enforce the law, or schoolchildren and corporate employees?

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:44 PM EST
    "because of a drug test that may have identified them [by hair analysis] for being guilty of nothing more than the color of their skin" This is pure BS. Hair color is not race-dependent. Far from it. If a test shows a true positive, it's either due to environmental exposure or actual drug use, neither of which is race-dependent. Either you can get false positives from environmental exposure, or you can't. If you can, then any dark-haired person is more likely to get a false positive than any light-haired person regardless of race. If you can't, then a true positive must due to drug use. "studies have found dark-haired people are more likely to test positive for drugs because they have higher levels of melanin, which allows drug compounds to bind more easily to their hair." Exactly, the results of the tests are more accurate for dark haired people, ie., fewer false negatives and more true positives for dark haired people than for light-haired people regardless of race. There are so many valid arguments about racism, every invalid use of the argument weakens the cause.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#10)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:45 PM EST
    Analysis of Race Effects on Drug-Test Results. Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine. 41(7):612-614, July 1999. Hoffman, Benjamin H. MD, MPH Abstract: Substance abuse has become one of the most pressing public health problems of our times. Its impact on the US workforce is staggering, both in terms of lost productivity and the cost of providing medical care to its victims. Employers usually have programs in place to reduce the impact of substance abuse, which include testing prospective and/or current employees' body fluids or tissues for recreational drugs. Although urine testing remains the test of choice among most employers, the use of hair as a testing matrix has increased substantially in recent years. There has been a legal concern that there may be racial bias in hair testing. In studies of human populations, there has been limited investigation of this issue. This study investigates this question by evaluating the hair-test results of a large cohort of applicants for employment with a major metropolitan police department. The results of the study failed to show any racial bias and thereby suggest that hair-testing methodology would not create a disparity among applicants.

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#11)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:45 PM EST
    Should a cop lose his job for smoking pot?

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#12)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:45 PM EST
    Jackl, Read the thread. If you still haven't figured it out, too bad. Che, Is smoking pot illegal where the cop works?

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    Should a cop lose his job for smoking pot?
    Hell no, he should be promoted, probably one of the smarter guys on the force:)

    Re: Officers Challenge Hair Testing (none / 0) (#14)
    by jackl2400 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    Read the thread. If you still haven't figured it out, too bad.
    You didn't say explicitly so, I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't an (insult pre-deleted by author) 24/7 about everyting.

    Officers Challenge Hair Testing | 15 comments (15 topical)