Pubdate: Sat, 30 Sep 2000
Source: Lubbock Avalanche-Journal (TX)
Copyright: 2000 The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal
Contact:  http://www.lubbockonline.com/interactive/edit.shtml
Website: http://www.lubbockonline.com/
Forum: http://chat.lubbockonline.com:90/eshare/

DRUG TESTING OF PREGNANT WOMEN REACHES NATION'S HIGHEST COURT

CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) -  Lori Griffin was about to go home from the 
hospital after an overnight stay for premature labor pains. Instead, she 
was slapped in handcuffs after testing positive for cocaine.

"They told me I was under arrest for distributing to a minor," Griffin 
recalled. "They put me in handcuffs and shackles and put me in a wheelchair 
and took me to jail."

Eleven years later, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday on 
whether testing pregnant women for drugs and reporting the results to 
police violates the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches.

The justices' decision, expected next year, could determine whether other 
hospitals can adopt similar practices.

The South Carolina attorney general contends such programs help prevent 
babies from being born addicted. The state has used its child-endangerment 
law to prosecute pregnant women who use drugs, and South Carolina doctors 
must report as child abuse drug use by women late in pregnancy.

Opponents say the tests discourage pregnant drug users from seeking 
prenatal care.

"People are very frustrated with addiction and drug use and they want as 
big a stick as they can get," said Susan Dunn, a lawyer for Griffin and 
other women whose case is before the court. "This would give a new power of 
coercion."

The American Medical Association, in a friend-of-the-court brief, also said 
the state's drug-testing policy "forces physicians to compromise their 
commitment to patient confidentiality."

Griffin was a patient at the public Medical University of South Carolina, 
where officials in 1989 decided to help prosecutors battling the crack 
epidemic. If a woman's urine test indicated cocaine use, she was reported 
to police and arrested for distributing the drug to a minor.

The program run by the hospital and city prosecutors tested women who had a 
history of cocaine use or whose prenatal exams suggested use.

In 1990, the policy was changed to give drug-using patients a choice 
between arrest and treatment. But 10 women sued the hospital, saying tests 
performed without court warrants violate the Fourth Amendment.

The women all signed a consent form, said Dunn, "but it was not adequate to 
consent to a search."

She and the other women have lost two rounds of the court battle, with the 
4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals saying officials had a substantial 
interest in reducing drug use because of the costs of caring for cocaine 
babies. The searches were reasonable under a "special needs" exception to 
the Fourth Amendment, the court said.

"Do we put mother's privacy first or the baby's right to a normal life?" 
asked Bobby Hood, a lawyer representing the hospital and others.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D