Pubdate: Sat, 22 Jun 2002
Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Copyright: 2002 Globe Newspaper Company
Contact:  http://www.boston.com/globe/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/52
Author: Francie Latour
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Testing)

DRUG TEST FOR HUB OFFICERS STIRS BIAS FEAR

In the three years since the Boston Police Department began a random, 
mandatory drug test based on hair samples, nearly twice as many minority 
officers have tested positive for drugs as their white counterparts, 
prompting advocates for the officers to question whether the test is 
racially biased.

According to figures released by the department yesterday, 45 officers have 
tested positive for drugs, 2 percent of the 2,178-member force. All 
officers are tested annually, but at random times.

Of those 45 officers, 16, or more than one-third, were white, while nearly 
two-thirds of those testing positive were minorities. Of the 29 blacks and 
Hispanics who tested positive, the vast majority, 26, were black. No Asians 
have tested positive for drug use.

In an interview yesterday, Commissioner Paul F. Evans stressed that the 
number of officers testing positive was small. He said he would not comment 
on the high number of black officers testing positive for drug use, mostly 
cocaine.

''The numbers are what the numbers are,'' Evans said. ''Ninety-six percent 
of my minority officers all passed the test.''

But in a department where non-whites make up just one-third of the 
department, the lopsided numbers have led the NAACP and the department's 
association of minority officers to challenge the hair test's validity, 
citing studies which have shown that the dark color and texture of black 
hair react differently than light hair in drug tests.

Advocates for the officers contend that darker hair tends to absorb and 
retain drug substances in higher concentrations, including drugs they may 
have been exposed to on the job or elsewhere, increasing the chance for 
false positives.

Also, they argue, because drug residue remains in darker hair longer than 
lighter hair, officers with lighter hair who have used drugs may escape 
detection.

A 2001 study by the Center for Human Toxicology at the University of Utah 
showed that drugs, including cocaine and amphetamines, can accumulate in 
higher concentrations, binding to the melanin pigment in the hair of rats. 
In 1995, a study by the National Institute on Drug Abuse concluded that 
dark hair absorbed drug residue from the air more intensely, creating 
opportunities for false positive results.

But recent studies of narcotics officers in Miami, who are exposed to drugs 
routinely, showed no disparities among light- and dark-haired officers in 
connection with drug use.

In Boston, no officers in the drug control unit have tested positive for drugs.

The controversy over the hair-based drug tests, fueled by competing 
scientific research, has led dozens of blacks in law enforcement, the 
military, and other fields nationwide to cry foul after they were fired or 
denied employment based on the results of hair-based drug tests.

In Chicago, seven black applicants to the police department sued the city, 
saying they received false positive tests. They lost in court.

So far in Boston, 14 of the department's 552 black officers have resigned 
or been fired for drug test violations. The fates of three more hang in the 
balance, after they refused the department's policy of drug treatment and 
suspension following a first offense.

''We're not naive enough to think there are no minority officers out there 
doing something stupid,'' said Larry Brown, president of the Massachusetts 
Association of Minority Law Enforcement Officers.

Brown said he supports the concept of random drug testing of officers. The 
current policy, which tests all officers randomly inside a 60-day window 
around their birthday, was hard-won by the department, agreed to by the 
unions in exchange for millions of dollars in salary and benefit increases 
under the education incentive program known as the Quinn Bill.

Brown also said he personally vouched for some of the black officers, 
insisting, as they do, that they are drug-free. Referring to research by 
the University of Utah and the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Brown 
said, ''I find it hard to believe that nothing outside of ingesting cocaine 
will give you a false positive. There must be some question as to whether 
it has an adverse impact.''

Leonard Alkins, president of the Boston branch of the NAACP, who along with 
Brown met with Evans earlier this month to debate the validity of the test, 
compared the disparities in positive drug tests by race to disparities in 
hiring and promotional exam scores when blacks first entered the department.

In both cases, Alkins said, the disproportionate numbers raise a red flag 
about the test.

''It just does not make sense that black people have more of a drug problem 
than white people,'' Alkins said. ''You are putting a person in a position 
where, if they don't sign that paper and take a suspension and agree to 
drug treatment, you will be fired.''

Evans said yesterday he was willing to examine any evidence presented by 
Brown's organization or the NAACP that refutes the validity of the hair 
test. But with a follow-up test and a high threshold for a positive result, 
police officials said the chances of false positives were next to impossible.

''The way our hair testing is done, there is an amount of cocaine that has 
to be present, and it has to be over a certain level,'' said Alicia 
McDonnell, an attorney for the department.

In order to reach that threshold, McDonnell said, requires ''repeated use 
of cocaine over a period of time. You cannot consume enough cocaine in one 
sitting to test positive. You would die of a heart attack first.''

Many law enforcement agencies and the federal government continue to use 
urine tests to detect illegal drug use, including the Massachusetts State 
Police. But Boston's police department is one of dozens that have begun 
using the more stringent hair test since the early 1990s. Police 
departments in New York, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and Chicago also use 
hair samples to test officers.

Because human hair can reveal drug use dating back as far as three months, 
the use of hair is widely considered to be superior to urine, which only 
keeps traces of drugs for about three days. The hair tests not only look 
for the presence of drugs, but for unique byproducts that people produce 
after ingesting drugs.

Bill Thistle, vice president and general counsel for Psychemedics Corp. of 
Cambridge, a leader in hair testing, dismissed past studies connecting dark 
hair and greater drug concentrations as bogus.

''The concept that someone will get drugs in their hair because of their 
race is asinine,'' he said. He said the studies cited by the minority 
police officer's group either only tested animals, such as rats, or tested 
a small number of humans in artificial circumstances.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom