CANSFORD LABS
on Jul 5, 2016
The results of a hair drug test can have life-changing consequences for a donor. The findings could potentially be the difference between a donor gaining or losing access to their child in court. This makes it all the more important to ensure the results are interpreted correctly.
As a Family Lawyer, it can be tempting to interpret the findings and relay them to the donor. In cases where the results clearly indicate that no drugs were detected, Lawyers can relay this information to their client and present these results in court.
Yet, drug testing is never usually as simple as this as there tend to be a variety of factors that need to be taken into account when interpreting the results. This includes donors who are on medication or donors potentially trying to cheat the test and the need for input from social workers/lawyers supervising the test.
Firstly, during the sampling process donors are always encouraged to disclose any medication they may be taking. This is because medications such as codeine will appear in a drugs test, but if the donor fails to disclose this as prescribed medication, there is no legitimate reason for the presence of this drug. In Family Court, this could have very negative consequences when the Judge makes their final decision. That’s why it’s important to take circumstances such as these into account.
Before interpreting hair test results, it's also important to consider the potential for donors to try and cheat the test. There have been cases, especially in cases where urine samples have been taken, where donors have diluted their sample with water or have consumed large amounts of water prior to sampling.
In the case of hair testing, although it’s much more difficult to subvert the test, donors have still made attempts to do so. Mostly, this is through bleaching or dyeing hair prior to sampling. Although this process tends to reduce the amount of drug metabolites found in the hair, it doesn’t stop hair tests from finding drugs altogether. This is what labs need to take into account to guard against possible misinterpretation.
Situations like this tend to be noticed with input from the social worker/lawyer supervising the test. In these cases, they may notice that on the day of sampling, the donor’s hair colour has suddenly changed. For example, there was a case where a donor presented with fair hair, but hadn’t disclosed her use of bleach and hair colouring. Still, the social worker on the case notified the lab that the donor was in fact a natural brunette. Two weeks later, a surprise hair test was conducted and drugs were detected in the sample.
This case example reflects the importance of cooperation between the lab personnel and clinical support staff who care for the donor. It demonstrates the important point that test results should be interpreted with reference to the context of the individual being tested, asking the questions ‘do the results make sense in the context of what we know about the individual in question?’ and if they don’t, ‘why?’.
Ultimately, the results of a drug test shouldn’t be interpreted simply as they are. Important factors that need to be taken into account include whether the donor is on medication, potential attempts to cheat the test and what we know about the donor from their social worker/lawyer. Interpreting the results of the drug test is best left to the clinicians in the lab, who can use their expertise to ensure an accurate and reliable conclusion is reached.
