|
Author
|
Topic: The problem with drugs.....a rant
|
stat
Member
|
posted 03-28-2007 09:45 AM
 
I wish that science would prevail over polygraph in the realm of drug history detection. I have often thought that drug use would make a better control issue (like alcohol issues) than a relevant one. Why? Because I know that the drug issue will elicit strong reactions nearly every time---regardless of whether the examinee actually uses. I ask myself why and I've come to several very unscientific conclusions. Afterall, there are other very intensified poly questions on a multi-issue test----but none so evocative as drugs. Here are my artful thoughts.Like no other, illegal drug use is a crime which permeates every facet of our society in that most of us are accomplices in the trade, use, and selling of the stuff. If I see a person shoplift in a store, I always quietly inform a store staff. If I see a person assaulting another individual, I dial 911. If I see a person driving 80mph in a suberb, you get the picture. If I see a person smoke a joint---I keep moving. If I see a drug deal "downtown," I pretend I didn't see it. If a family member has a drug addiction, no, I don't tell the authorities---it's a "family matter/crisis." If I go to a party where someone is using drugs, I don't call the DEA---I leave.
By virtue of my behavior towards American drug culture, I am an accomplice to the acts. Perhaps my outlook on drugs is less about me and more about drug policy. I've worked methamphetimine cases and was very invested in the proper prosecution of the criminals----but in my personal life, not so much.
I suppose I'm saying that I grow tired of hearing of so many false positives regarding the D word, and further I am tired of seeing what I suspect to be clean people (people regularly screened on parole--and unable to afford the frequent costs of chemical countermeasures)arousing so heavily to what would make a better control question if we had a better form of scientific/chemical verifier. There have been times when I would have gladly administered a urine drug test just so I could keep this toxic question out of my damn sequence. Any thoughts?
[This message has been edited by stat (edited 03-28-2007).] IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 03-28-2007 12:20 PM
You assume they're false positives, but you don't know that's actually the case. What if most people just lie about drug use? I think they do, and I think it's because the federal drug standards (those with the 15 time marijuana use limit) make the question very tough. How many people know if they used it 14 or 16 times? They'll all say fewer than 15 because they know they have to (or think the standards are the same everywhere), but that's not necessarily the truth, which means when they say they are sure it's fewer than 15, they're lying.I see a lot of drug reactions, but I can only think of one candidate who didn't disclose more drug info in the post-test interrogation, so I don't agree there are a lot of false positives with this one. My guess: a lot more false negatives. IP: Logged |
Ted Todd
Member
|
posted 03-28-2007 01:22 PM
Stat
I have to go with Barry on this one. Drug History is far too important to be exluded from our screening exam process. It is also one of the most frequently lied about questions on the exam.I almost always get additional admissions in the pre-test and even more in the post-test after a DI single issue test. The people out there who have never used any type of illegal drug do exist but they are on the endangered species list. The people who have only used drugs on a "few" occasions remember it like it happened yesterday. A good pre-test interview will help eliminate the fear that you feel the Drug History question carries with it. Ted IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 03-28-2007 01:39 PM
Of course I'm talking about shorter spans of times (3-6 mos) per PCSOT testing when I refer to "drug questions." I concede wholy to your observation that drug use is a subject we see in deceptive individuals. Fortunately, in pcsot circles many false negatives come to light after years of containment. Drug use rarely slips through over the full course of treatment/supervision--by way of drug testing, home searches, and situational ammunities to disclose for long-time productive group members who have banked positive behaviors. As much as PCSOT is either feared and/or looked down upon, it really is a terrific model for researching the efficacy of multi-issue polygraph testing due to the repeated followup work, and the candid disclosures in group and or therapy. I find it hard to believe based on already large reactions to drugs on NDI/inconclusive tests that false negatives are more commonplace than false positives. It is my experience that the drug issue, with my reserved "false positive suspicions" compensates somewhat by being a strong true positive issue. I believe that it's very difficult to "slip one past" on the drug issue. I further believe the issue of pornography to be quite the opposite (higher rates of false negative)---but that's another subject. Too often I've gotten DI results on mixed issue tests largely over the drug issue, broke out in a single issue test, and had a final NDI to drugs. At the very least the issue of drugs consumes too much time.Yes, I do see and value the significance of drug poly q's in applicant screening for LE. It just makes sense. My suspicions are that NDI on multiple issue tests contain significant galvo responses and by the end of the test, they pass by 1 or 2 points----often times too close for comfort. I just find it strange that an NDI arousal to "have you touched the sexual parts of anyone under the age of 16"---a very troubling and serious Monitoring test question--regardless of Examiner assurances of accuracy to Offender John ----should be dwarfed by an NDI arousal to drugs (seperate Maintenance test) while using very similar lie controls to the same "Offender John" in the span of a few months between the tests. I rarely see anything but a very close call on an NDI test which addresses drug use. As you stated though, concealed drug use is so common, but perhaps a little less common by supervised sex offenders (believe it or not.) With sex Offenders, it's alcohol that is most often lied about and used, not so much drugs like in cop applicants. Although, we see our fair share of drugs too.
[This message has been edited by stat (edited 03-28-2007).] [This message has been edited by stat (edited 03-28-2007).] IP: Logged |
Bill2E
Member
|
posted 04-15-2007 07:39 PM
Why would the reaction be to drug usage when the more serious issue is being around or touching children? I would assume the mental processes, the issue of children, would, if your getting a reaction as a result of mental processes, rather then deception, be to the child issue? Hard for me to understand that one. IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 04-16-2007 09:35 AM
When I referred to arousals, I was referring to at the very least---orienting response. The last test I ran (last Friday) had a drug question which showed no arousal whatsoever---so I'm not trying to say that everyone has a great/large response to the drug question----just many. To be clear, I do not mean to say that I run tests with both--touching children's sexual parts--and drug questions on the same test, as those would be mixing a Monitoring test with a Maintenance test---a big no no. I'm just taking the individual arousels from the same examinee on separate but (within a year)proxy tests. In a nutshell, I was just ranting that I see too much arousel to drug questions on NDI tests (multi-issue). Perhaps the problem lays within some limitation of my own to psych set a truthful individual away from the drug question---who knows. Additionally, most inconclusives in my PCSOT work center around the drug question. No one is more suspicious of drug use than me----so if any want to proclaim that my sex offender clients are lying, I suggest that that's an easy answer. However, I would suggest that you polygraph a person who you know to be drug free for the last 6 months (a wife, your mother.) I predict a significantly larger orienting response than on any other common issue. If they pass, (IMO) it will be by the skin of their teeth. IP: Logged | |
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
