• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Drug use/drug testing in the CF (merged)

Excuse me? Codeine not a problem? Give your head a shake.  It is a highly addictive substance as it is an opiate.  Detox is difficult as unlike drug addictions with just a physical addiction, codeine also has a psychological aspect.  Go google codeine addiction.
 
Remember being given bottles and bottles of codein based cough / cold medicine while being a young Pte/Cpl..... You mean it was addictive?

Coulda fooled me!
 
a) Codeine is metabolized into Morphine in vivo. Approx 200mg of Codeine = only 30mg of Morphine. Go ahead, take 200mg of Codeine and see how far you get. (Incidently, Codeine is not avail on its own. It is always mixed with another substance, by law. Therefore you will overdose on the other substance before the effects of the Codeine are realized or even hurt you, ie: Acetaminophen)
b) Codeiene has a 'ceiling effect'.  ie: you hit a certain plateau, no matter how much more you take, you don't get higher.
c) The majority of drugs have a phys & psych addiction, what's your point?
d) Codeine is avail in over the counter preparations, therefore, having it in your system does not mean you are a drug abuser, no more than having Ibuprofen in your system means your a drug addict.
 
Keep in mind drug testing allows for trace amounts of things to be in your body, the "fail" occures when the %'s are higher than trace.

 
Good news - as I've been popping the Tylenol 3's for a couple of weeks now - NTF - sometimes it's worth it to pay somebody else to climb that damn ladder and paint......

I wonder if NIS is watching any of the folks who tested positive? I'd also have to wonder about how long somebody could use cocaine without their co-workers noticing something odd in their behaviour.......there's very very few people who can do it as a 'recreational' use without building an addiction.

Geo - don't worry - your liver has probably turned to stone by now. Just watch out for Mr Burns' brain tonic - it's been known to cause gigantism.......
 
Sadly, not where it'd matter - old Simpsons reference - Ken Griffey Jr and his massive cranium from Brain Tonic.....
 
Maybe the CF should be asking more questions before the testing ..

Have you taken any of the following since enrollment in the CF

"insert list of Drugs here"  ...list when and reason why

"insert list of masking agents here "  list when and reason why


Drug testing is fair game IMHO.. when ever where ever...should happen for every deployment and randomly homeside.

Don't make it a witch hunt but be proactive.... those doing their job in accordance to the rules have nothing to fear...

To hear it in the news is embarrassing...
 
Question:

Whats the probability of any of these failures using the testing as a reason not to go?
I recognize that the vast majority of our soldiers are dedicated professionals who volunteer to serve and want to go, but the mind does crazy things when it is scared.

To this end, is there any other testing conducted other than on pre-deployment and enrollment? (I know it can be done, but is it frequently?)
 
Meridian said:
Whats the probability of any of these failures using the testing as a reason not to go?

I doubt the probability of that. The fact is that while drugs will get you off the tour, it will also potentially get you booted out of the Forces
 
Sig_Des said:
I doubt the probability of that. The fact is that while drugs will get you of the tour, it will also potentially get you booted out of the Forces

Noted. I would assume dishonourably too, no?
 
Meridian said:
Noted. I would assume dishonourably too, no?

Release as Item 1, Misconduct, most likely (b) as a service misconduct
 
To hear it in the news is embarrassing...

How true.

I have been in for 17 years and have yet to be tested. (Not that they would find anything except Motrin.) I have been on a few tours and was never tested before going overseas. I guess going to a country where the majortiy of the worlds Opium in produced is a little different though; may be a bit tempting for certain addicts. The fact is, you can't trust a drug addict. Watch Intervention on A&E for proof!
 
Sig_Des said:
Release as Item 1, Misconduct, most likely (b) as a service misconduct

Could also be a 5F ... Unsuitable for Further Service.
Applies to the release of an officer or non-commissioned member who, either wholly or chiefly because of factors within his control, develops personal weakness or behaviour or has domestic or other personal problems that seriously impair his usefulness to or impose an excessive administrative burden on the Canadian Forces.

Most of the things we do to deal with Alcohol & Drug problems are administrative in nature .... therefore not a service misconduct for which the individual has not gone before a service or civilian tribunal (court)

The fella gets caught,  he is placed on C&P, is caught a 2nd time, an Admin Review is done and ..... he's gone bye, bye.
 
Here is my opinion.  Take it for what it is worth.  I have two points:

First, the CF has a zero tolerance drug policy, and always has.  In my 20 years experience I have bee tested twice: once about 12 years ago during a phase of random testing across the CF and just last month as part of Roto 3 testing.  In my opinion, anyone who tests positive, regardless of time in, rank, and experience should be given an automatic release - upon confirmation of a positive result with a second test.  We all know the rules and those who use non-prescription drugs must bear the consequences of their choices and actions. 

The only exception, in my opinion, would be a member who voluntarily came forth and admitted they had a drug problem and requested help.  However, the time to come forth and admit you have a problem is not immediately prior to a drug test or after the fact.  During the period of rehab the member would be suspended from duty until they are rehabilitated then the member can resume his normal duties without penalty. 

My second point is that the results of the drug test that were made public should not really come to surprise anyone.  For years the Canadian public has demanded that the CF be a reflection of our society.  Such reflections include upholding Canadian values, being demographically representative, the list goes on....However, reflections of society also has negative aspects to it as well.  Not too long ago, the former Liberal government was considering to de-criminalize marijuana use.  Our justice system does not lay down strict sentences for those found guilty of drug use.  It is legal in Canada to form a political party whose platform openly celebrates the use of marijuana - and that party gets thousands of votes.  I would suggest that the Canadian public has become more accepting towards drug use and if the CF is to be representative of our society then the results show the negative aspects of our society. 

I would even go further and suggest that because the CF has a zero tolerance policy that the results are lower than what a random sample of the Canadian public who would test positive.  My point here is that the Canadian public cannot demand the CF be held to higher standards than the standards to what the public holds itself to.  The public cannot have it both ways. 

Just my opinion.       
 
1175CMR said:
My point here is that the Canadian public cannot demand the CF be held to higher standards than the standards to what the public holds itself to.  The public cannot have it both ways. 

If that's the case, do you think the same public would be willing to lower the standards it expects law enforcement officers to meet in this respect as well? 

In both cases (CF & LEOs), we have people with a mandate to protect society (at one level or another), using lethal force if necessary.  If this is the agreed-to general job description, can EITHER of these groups tolerate anything less than zero tolerance for impairment?  Would the public settle for less?
 
Do LEO's get drug tested?  I do not know.  it would be interesting to know what results they come up with..

I agree with the zero tolerance policy and I would have no problems showing anyone of the troops under my command the door if they failed a drug test.  I agree with what you are saying about impairment, in any job.  Is it acceptable for a general labourer, plumber, accountant, city official, or a store clerk to be impaired on the job (or at home)?  Are they not part of society as well?  I know what you are saying about job description but should the public not hold everyone to the same standard?     

Would the public settle for less? The public never does.  However, maybe it is time for the public to look at the direction they are taking regarding drug use.     
 
The (two strike and your out rule) is appropriate for now as this drug testing is in its initial stages of progression.

In the future, when Drug Testing is the rule, then the (one strike and your out rule) should be enforced.

 
Now, the legal beagles seem worried - shared with the usual disclaimer....

Forces switched gears on firing soldiers for failed drug tests
CHRIS LAMBIE, Halifax Chronicle-Herald, 25 Jan 07
Article Link

The military decided not to immediately can soldiers who failed drug tests, fearing the move could set them up for a legal battle the Canadian Forces stood to lose.

The head of the army was keen to rush soldiers out the door who either failed drug tests or provided diluted urine samples. Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie wanted to send a message to the troops that the military will not tolerate drug use, documents obtained under the Access to Information Act show.

"Releasing members without due process will place the (Canadian Forces) in a position of having to fight grievance and/or human rights challenges that we stand to lose," Cmdr. Tony Crewe, the military’s director of careers administration, said in an Oct. 20 e-mail to a Defence Department policy adviser.

"We would then face the possibility of having to reinstate these members at considerable loss of (Canadian Forces) credibility and possibly the ability for the (Canadian Forces) to conduct drug testing in the future."

Any soldiers who failed the drug testing must go through a full administrative review, Cmdr. Crewe stressed in his message, which was checked over by a military lawyer.

"While this may take time and be seen as less of a message to the remainder of the military, it avoids the negative repercussions of releasing members without due process," he said.

Not following the entire administrative review process wouldn’t be fair to individual soldiers, Cmdr. Crewe wrote.

"It will also make us extremely vulnerable to a challenge under the grievance process or before the courts."

That vulnerability stems from "a long-standing pattern of rehabilitation in the military for soft drugs and indeed some hard drugs at times," said defence lawyer David Bright, who regularly handles military cases.

"You can’t just throw somebody out," said Mr. Bright.

"You have to give them a chance to rehabilitate themselves. You have to accommodate them. And to simply turn around and say, ‘We’re throwing you out without due process,’ just isn’t appropriate."

He’s sure the military would lose a challenge if they threw someone out without first going through an administrative review.

"There’s no question about it in my mind," Mr. Bright said.

Losing such a challenge could force the military to hand over drug testing to a third party, the Dartmouth lawyer said. "Or if they screw it up so badly, the human rights tribunal might rule that it’s wrong — they can’t do it," Mr. Bright said. "There are all sorts of potential problems."

The military used to reserve "safety-sensitive drug testing" for people in certain jobs, such as pilots and military cops, said Lt.-Cmdr. Pierre Babinsky, a spokesman for the military’s justice system.

But in November 2005 it was made mandatory for all military personnel heading to dangerous spots like Afghanistan, where Canada is engaged in combat operations.

"We feel we’re well within our rights to protect our people and conduct these drug screenings," Lt.-Cmdr. Babinsky said.

The task force of about 2,500 soldiers heading to Afghanistan next month — 1,160 of which are based in Atlantic Canada — is the first rotation to undergo mandatory drug tests, according to military documents.

In most cases, soldiers who fail a drug test for the first time are allowed to stay in the service on counselling and probation, said Mel Hunt, a British Columbia defence lawyer who specializes in military cases.

"If you started tossing people simply on the basis of one drug test and no other evidence to indicate use, then of course that’s going to be challenged," said the retired colonel.

Mr. Hunt does not believe the military will ever get rid of the mandatory drug testing.

"But I think they were concerned about possibly a legal challenge on abusing it," he said ....
 
Back
Top