Drug and Alcohol Testing Q&A - 2006

[ Q&A Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]

 

Re: Impairment vs. positive drug screen

From: Dr. Steve
Password: orange
Date: 09 May 2006
Time: 16:50:20 -0700
Remote Name: 12.10.202.94

Comments

As you stated, a positive drug test merely tells you that the drug or substance was present in the donor's urine (or specimen) at the time of the drug test. It does not prove by itself that he/she was impaired. Your "standard answers" are accurate, but I often use the phrase "illicit use" when it comes to illegal substances like cocaine, marijuana and methamphetamine. For example, you can testify that the presence of cocaine, in a screening test and GC/MS confirmation tests, without a medical explanation, that one can conclude that that this individual is using that substance illicitly. Having said that, most states have laws to the effect, that after an accident, that a positive drug or alcohol test, is the presumptive reason for the accident and is grounds for denial of workers compensation benefits. And also if an individual is terminated for misconduct (i.e. a positive drug or alcohol test), that individual is disqualified from unemployment compensation. Check the state laws that govern the individual case. I testify in many hearings around the country. Before I testify, I familiarize myself with the state statutes and laws. A very helpful publication that I use is "Guide to State and Federal Drug-Testing Laws". Hope this helps a bit.