I received a phone call from a sales lady wanting to sell our probation dept. on the idea of doing drug tests on probationers' hair.
As I recall the conversation, each test costs $75. If you use hair shaved off the leg of a typical man, the results would go back about 10 mos. Head hair would reveal drug use going back to how ever long ago it was that the end of the hair was grown, which with some women and male hippies, could be many years. She said hair growing above the neck grows at about 1/2" a month. She also said that the hair would reveal drug use no matter how much bleaching, coloring, etc. was done to the hair.
It sounds like its a million times better than urine testing, which only finds the metabolites from drug use for a matter of days or even hours after ingestion, and is subject to all kinds of tricks by probationers.
I asked our PO what a urine test costs, and he said he thought it cost about $8.00 for the collection kit and office tester, but it cost more if you send the sample on to the lab to confirm drug use, but he didn't know how much it cost.
Has anyone had any experience with probation hair testing? What do you think? Also, can we make the probationers pay for the test as a condition of probation?
Now let's be fair, John merely shows them a picture of the jury. (I really should insert a clever picture here, but I don't have his resources or his iPhone.)
I dont know if its standard across the state, but CPS in our area uses hair tests to test people they are keeping an eye on. Maybe you should check with a CPS attorney and see if thats the case in your area and see how it works for them.
CPS uses hair strand testing up here, it seems more than UAs any more. What we have always been told is that it shows about 3 months' worth of use. Also, I have always heard that bleaching or coloring or doing other things to your hair can affect the outcome of the test. There have been fathers who show up with very closely shaved heads, and I assume closely shaved other regions, although that's never been confirmed.
The problem that we have with any kind of drug tests, in all cases, is finding someone who can be brought into court to get the tests admitted and testify as to what the numbers mean. I agree that the admission of use is the best and cheapest way to go. To get someone from the testing companies, which are always several thousand miles away, requires going through a lot of hoops and having a lot of lead time.
Posts: 366 | Location: Plainview, Hale County | Registered: January 11, 2005