Term Paper on "Drug Testing"

Term Paper 5 pages (1704 words) Sources: 3 Style: MLA

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Drug testing without the consent of pregnant women [...] this question in the moral terms of utilitarian considerations, including who will be helped and who hurt over the long-term, and the matters of rights for all involved. In March 2001, the nation's Supreme Court ruled that drug tests of non-consenting pregnant women could not be taken against their will or turned over to police as evidence. They noted this is unreasonable search and goes against the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (Roubister). Hospitals are in the business of saving lives and curing illnesses, so it makes sense they do drug testing of pregnant women. They must ensure that every patient receives the best treatment possible, including those who have not yet been born. However, the mother also enjoys a right to privacy, guaranteed by the Constitution, and this is where the moral dilemma presents itself. Some believe the rights of the child outweigh the rights of the mother, while others believe the rights of the mother are paramount. Moral issues such as these are difficult decisions for both sides and the arguments for and against are equally compelling. A woman's rights are guaranteed by the Constitution, and she should not be forced to take a drug test without her consent, nor should that test be used as evidence for criminal prosecution, just as the Supreme Court decided.

Morally and ethically, this question of drug testing is difficult at best. The original Supreme Court ruling covered the case Ferguson v. City of Charleston, where a city hospital turned over drug test results from a pregnant patient to the police for prosecution when they found evidence of drug use. The patients had no knowledge their results were turned over to police. As a result, 30 women were arrested and ten sued the city. One legal writer notes, "Petitioners were ten women arrested after seeking obstetrical care in a public hospital, some after giving birth. The women were arrested because they had tested positive for cocaine and were therefore suspected of having distributed illegal drags to a minor, namely, their fetuses" (Colb). The city maintained the drug tests were simply an attempt to get the women into drug counseling, but the women maintained their doctor/patient confidentiality had been destroyed. Author Colb continues, "Petitioners claimed that the hospital had violated their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. In reviewing their claims, the Supreme Court concluded that the hospital was required to obtain consent from the women before performing drug tests" (Colb). While the women initially consented to the tests, they did not consent to the tests being sent to the police, and that was central to the court's ultimate decision on this case.

Several important issues are at work in this decision, including the consent of the pregnant woman. The women might not have given their urine for testing had they known it might implicate them in the courts. In addition, the woman's right to privacy was violated, as she expected the tests to be used for the good of her unborn child, rather than against her. This is akin to a warrantless search and seizure, as the woman did not give her consent for release of the test results. It was done behind her back without her knowledge or consent. Clearly, the two forms of utilitarian and deontological reasoning can be used in this case.

The hospital saw their testing as a duty, and that they were obligated to carry out that duty, no matter whether they obtained consent or not. Their duty was to the patient (to get drug treatment) and to the unborn child, who could be born addicted to the drug or with severe birth defects because of drug use by the mother. Either way, it was clear the hospital felt they had a moral and ethical duty to obtain the tests and then pass them along if they showed drug use. There is also an implied duty to the community here, as the pregnant, drug-using mother is a higher cost socially and morally. The drug-using mother may resort to crime or other means to support herself, and she may even give up the baby, or utilize the welfare system to help raise the child. All of these social costs add to the societal costs of a community, and the hospital may feel they have a duty to the community to turn the mother in or at least get her help for her addiction.

In addition, the mothers were all cocaine users, and cocaine is an illegal drug. That means they were engaging in illegal activity, and putting their child at danger. The hospital also may have seen it as their duty to report the illegal activity of the mothers, since it was against the law as well as morally and ethically the wrong thing for a pregnant mother to do. Again, the main purpose of a hospital is to save lives and treat patients effectively, and the patient's rights are secondary to treatment concerns in many cases. The duty of the hospital is to treat patents effectively, and that includes seeing that they obtain necessary offsite treatment, such as addiction or psychiatric counseling.

Some of these same reasons fall under the category of utilitarian reasoning as well. The hospital may see the end (the mother getting off drugs) as ultimately good for the mother and the community, and so, they drug test the mother without her knowledge to protect her, her baby, and the community at large. This may not be what the mother wants, but ultimately, the good of the many is warranted over the good of the few. Indeed, the mothers who sued proved this. They felt their doctor/patient relationship had been violated with the release of their drug tests, and the court agreed.

Each of these reasoning processes work in certain situations, however, they do not work with this scenario, as the Supreme Court ruled. The laws of the Constitution must be followed, rather than following the laws of reason. The Constitution rules that each American is to enjoy the same rights and freedoms, period. The rights of the mother were violated when the hospital chose to share her test results with the police, for whatever reason - good or bad. They mother's rights are paramount in this case, even more compelling than the rights of the unborn child, as they court ruled.

There is another important aspect of this case that relates to both reason and right. Ultimately, giving the police drug test results of the pregnant women without their knowledge amounted to unwarranted search and seizure, an issue that has much broader implications than just the drug tests of pregnant women. In the war against terror, the President has given much broader powers to many legal agencies in the United States. There are instances where these powers allow unwarranted search and seizure in the case of suspected terrorists. The implications are clear. Once the practice becomes commonplace, what is to keep the law agencies from applying these warrantless search and seizures to other purposes? It is the duty of the courts to protect the American people from laws such as these, and cases such as Ferguson v. City of Charleston may seem to only apply to some situations, but in a broader sense, they can apply to many other situations, especially during the war on terror.

Clearly, there is another aspect of this case that applies to the laws of reason. A pregnant woman should not do drugs. It can indelibly harm her unborn child, or even make the baby an addict before it even has a start in life. Ethically and morally, it is reasonable to expect the mother to do the right thing for her unborn child, and stop doing drugs. Some women may actually be helped by drug testing in this regard. It may force them to take stock of their addiction and get treatment for it. As a mother, it is their duty to make sure their child has every advantage in life and in a healthy life. It is also the right thing to do. Every mother must make a choice, and not every mother can choose the same result. It is a matter of personal ability and desire, and some women simply do not have the strength to kick their addiction for the sake of their child.

However, not all drug addicts are simply able to give up their drug of choice, whether it is alcohol or cocaine. Hospitals test for illegal drugs, but do they test for alcohol abuse, which is legal? This is another aspect of the case that has not been addressed, and it bears looking at more closely by researchers in the field. The mother might have had just as big a problem with alcohol addiction, and drinking during a pregnancy can also harm the unborn child. However, the only women who were reported were women who tested positive… READ MORE

How to Reference "Drug Testing" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

Drug Testing in High School Not Just Dealing With Drug Testing Athletes but All Students Research Proposal

Drug Testing in High School

The objective of this work is to examine the issue of drug testing in high school and not just in terms of drug testing athletes… read more

Research Proposal 6 pages (1700 words) Sources: 6 Style: APA Topic: Drugs / Alcohol / Tobacco

---

Drug Testing in Businesses and for Employment Thesis

Drug Testing for Businesses and Employment

Since the passing of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (Hagan, 2001) employers have had the right by law to screen applicants for positions… read more

Thesis 2 pages (687 words) Sources: 2 Style: APA Topic: Drugs / Alcohol / Tobacco

---

Drug Testing in the Workplace Term Paper

Drug Free Workplace

In Favor of a Drug-Free Workplace

Implementing and enforcing drug testing programs in the workplace is overdue and has the potential to save literally billions of dollars… read more

Term Paper 8 pages (2623 words) Sources: 8 Topic: Drugs / Alcohol / Tobacco

---

Persuasive Argument That Drug Testing Be Allowed in a Business Thesis

Drugs Testing

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM subject: DRUG TESTING MEMO

Illicit or "recreational" drug use is an irresponsible and potentially dangerous behavior that is damaging to the individual and detrimental to the… read more

Thesis 2 pages (446 words) Sources: 4 Topic: Drugs / Alcohol / Tobacco

---

Pro's Con's of Random Drug Testing of Employee Term Paper

Pro's/Con's of Random Drug Testing of Employee's

Drug Testing

Pro's/Con's of Random Drug Testing of Employee's

In this paper, we shall argue against random drug testing within employment practices. Drug… read more

Term Paper 8 pages (3109 words) Sources: 8 Style: APA Topic: Drugs / Alcohol / Tobacco

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>