It is imperative that practitioners are well trained in the use of these techniques and that each step is closely monitored to maintain the credibility and integrity of the drug detection process. In 2011, there were about 460 juvenile courts in the United States, and statistics suggest that they are addressing a significant need in their communities. Nearly one in five (17%) minors entering the juvenile justice system meet the criteria for substance use disorders, a figure that rises to 39% when inmates are included. After the verdict, almost half (47%) of youth who are placed in safe placements have substance use disorders. While adolescents who meet the criteria for other behavioural disorders are also included, the overall figures increase as follows: 35 per cent of adolescents have mental health or addiction disorders when ingested; 59% of inmates have mental health or addiction disorders; and 64% of secure post-arbitration placements meet the criteria for a behavioural disorder. Drug detection techniques are systematic and standardized assessment techniques for detecting the signs and symptoms of drug abuse. All areas studied are observable physical reactions to certain types of drugs. Three key elements of this process are chromatographic methods of urinalysis, which extract the drug from the urine in concentrated form. This is then processed by laboratory instruments using heat or liquids, causing the metabolites to separate from the drug. These methods include gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS), gas chromatography (GC) and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). These are the only other methods that provide a quantitative reading of the level of drugs in one`s own system.
GC/MS is considered the “gold standard” for urinalysis tests and, although it is the most expensive, it is often used to confirm positive results from initial tests. Thin layer chromatography (TLC) was one of the first methods developed, but it has proven to be extremely unreliable and is not recommended for use in criminal or juvenile justice (Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1990). Drug detection techniques were originally developed by the Los Angeles Police Department to help law enforcement officers identify drug-impaired motorists in a traffic arrest situation. The Orange County, California Department of Parole then applied and adapted the techniques to be used in community corrections and used its findings to extend the detection period for illicit drug use. A positive result can be confirmed in three ways: a statement of admission by the adolescent, a second test using the same methodology, or a second test using a different methodology. For judicial proceedings, especially where a minor`s freedom may be restricted, a second test using a different methodology may be required. GC/MS confirmation is required in some jurisdictions as it is the most accurate test. If the results are used for treatment planning or for internal program procedures, alternative methods of confirmation may be acceptable. The use of drug detection techniques provides immediate results that adolescents may face. These techniques are minimally intrusive in detecting the use of illegal drugs, compared to the collection of bodily fluids necessary for urinalysis. The process is systematic and standardized, reducing the possibility of distortions or errors by trained personnel.
Agency staff or laboratories should take steps to regularly document the accuracy and reliability of the testing program. Without such measures, the Program may be subject to legal liability issues. The use of drug detection techniques is cost-effective because they can often eliminate the need for expensive urinalysis by eliminating adolescents who do not have symptoms of current or recent substance use. This does not mean that these young people have not used illicit drugs; However, if symptoms are not evident through drug detection techniques, it is unlikely that enough of most drugs or their metabolites will remain in the body for urinalysis to test positive. (Marijuana and PCP may be exceptions, as low concentrations can sometimes be detected by urinalysis for 3 to 4 weeks.) Initially, training staff to master these techniques can be costly, but once staff are trained, operating costs are minimal.