Judges rely on urine drug screening (UDS) tests in a myriad of criminal and civil settings. In criminal cases, defendants are often ordered by the court not to use or possess alcohol or mood altering chemicals as a condition of their pretrial release or probation. In family court cases, parents are often ordered to undergo UDS as part of a court-ordered child custody evaluation. The results of the UDS can have tremendous adverse consequences for defendants (incarceration or loss of privileges) or for divorcing parents (loss of custody or parenting time). The potential for false-positive urine drug screen (UDS) results presents a due process dilemma for the presiding judge. When and under what circumstances can a judge feel comfortable relying on the results of a urine drug screening test without a secondary confirmation test? This training update will address the following six topics:
- WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT FALSE POSITIVE RESULTS
- WHAT COMMON SUBSTANCES CAN CAUSE FALSE POSITIVES?
- MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY RECOMMENDATIONS
- WHAT SHOULD JUDGES DO?
- SPECIAL CONCERN – CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS
- URBAN MYTH – FALSE POSITIVES BASED ON 2nd-HAND SMOKE
CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE
These days, I truly enjoy reading about the law. Even the most rudimentary understanding of it will be of great use. I recall being placed on probation after being charged with DUI. It was a tremendously challenging time in my life, and regular testing and exams from https://ampprobation.com/services/assessments/ogden/ were the norm. After serving that time, I made sure to learn the fundamental laws and act as a responsible citizen.