Opinion | Why Workplace Drug Tests Are Illogical
The e-mail from my new job was not the welcome I used to be anticipating. I’d “be required to finish a drug take a look at inside 72 hours,” it mentioned. “Please you should definitely test your e mail for directions.” It was August 2018, and I had simply accepted a suggestion as a college member to develop a analysis program on, of all issues, hashish’s therapeutic results on continual ache. However along with being a hashish researcher, I’ve fibromyalgia, and I had been utilizing authorized medical hashish for practically 10 years to assist handle my signs.
Hashish byproducts could be detected in urine for weeks, however I did what I might: I instantly stopped taking my medication, exercised ceaselessly, drank water always. My take a look at saved getting delayed, which was fortunate in a single sense: By the point I took it, I used to be clear. However I had gone two months with out my solely helpful ache remedy.
And for what? All of the take a look at confirmed was that I had averted hashish and different medication in the course of the previous weeks. I might have partied for the remainder of the yr, and nobody would have been the wiser.
Maybe you’ve skilled this pointless train. A staggering variety of individuals have. Although 38 states have legalized medical hashish, many employers proceed to require their new hires to undergo a drug take a look at.
Usually these employers, together with universities like mine, say the legislation leaves them no alternative. The Drug-Free Office Act of 1988 and the Drug-Free Colleges and Communities Act Modification of 1989 do, certainly, require federal workers concerned in sure professions, like legislation enforcement and nationwide safety, to be examined. That could be altering: Final month The New York Instances reported that over the previous 5 years, the army has given 1000’s of recruits a second likelihood to cross. In any case, these statutes don’t mandate drug testing for individuals not employed by the federal authorities, even — regardless of many claims on the contrary — those that obtain federal funding, reminiscent of educational researchers.
Hashish can, in fact, get you excessive, which impacts consideration, reminiscence and studying. So simply as most workers aren’t allowed to drink alcohol on the job, it is sensible that the majority employers don’t need individuals utilizing hashish whereas they’re working. The issue is that job-site drug screening captures utilization solely within the current previous. It doesn’t assess present impairment or predict whether or not an worker could also be a future security danger.
Additional, many different substances, together with prescription medicines reminiscent of opioids, benzodiazepines and antidepressants, can even trigger impairment. So long as you’ve a prescription, an employer can’t penalize you for taking benzos. Why ought to it’s totally different for medical hashish? As for these utilizing it recreationally, until they’re exhibiting as much as work excessive or impaired, does it matter?
Even CBD merchandise, which might’t get you excessive and aren’t managed substances, might include a compound that may set off a constructive urine drug display.
Given President Biden’s current name for the Meals and Drug Administration to assessment whether or not hashish must be a managed substance within the first place, it’s past time to cease pre-employment drug testing for it. These insurance policies are punitive for the practically three million individuals who have medical hashish licenses, in addition to the thousands and thousands extra who merely use nonintoxicating CBD merchandise. Along with losing substantial money and time and inflicting an excessive amount of pointless stress, such insurance policies might worsen signs for individuals utilizing these merchandise medically — as I came upon firsthand.
I publicly disclosed my medical hashish use on two earlier events: in an article in a serious medical journal in December 2018 and in a big speak I gave in 2022. Neither disclosure resulted in a drug take a look at. I doubt I will likely be examined when this text is printed. (Keep tuned!) Such uneven enforcement makes me suspect that some employers don’t truly care; they’re merely checking a field that doesn’t actually have to be checked. Since there’s no real security or authorized motive to maintain doing this, isn’t it time we let new hires urinate in peace?
Kevin Boehnke is a analysis assistant professor and the director of controversial compounds within the College of Michigan Medical Faculty’s division of anesthesiology and Continual Ache and Fatigue Analysis Middle.
The Instances is dedicated to publishing a range of letters to the editor. We’d like to listen to what you consider this or any of our articles. Listed below are some suggestions. And right here’s our e mail: letters@nytimes.com.
Comply with The New York Instances Opinion part on Fb, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
