SUPREME COURT TO HEAR APPEAL ON MATERNAL DRUG TESTS

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday that it
would decide whether a hospital may perform drug tests on pregnant
women and new mothers without a warrant under a policy that has
resulted in arrests and jail.

The high court agreed to hear an appeal by 10 women in their lawsuit
alleging that a Charleston, South Carolina, hospital had violated
their constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches.

According to the lawsuit, the women, who were seeking obstetrical
care, ended up being arrested and jailed after testing positive for
cocaine use under the hospital's policy. The policy later was
abandoned after the litigation began.

The policy was adopted by the Medical University of South Carolina in
1989 in consultation with the city, the police and the chief
prosecuting attorney. Under the policy, the medical staff performed
urine drug tests on maternity patients with symptoms indicating drug
abuse.

The policy at first resulted in the arrest of any patient who tested
positive for cocaine. It was changed in 1990 to give the patients the
choice of receiving treatment or being arrested and prosecuted under
state law. The hospital ended the policy in 1994.

In their lawsuit, the attorneys for the 10 women said the tests for
evidence of cocaine use constituted a search without a court warrant,
in violation of the women's constitutional rights.

``Our clients went to the hospital to get medical help, instead they
got jail,'' Lynn Paltrow of the Women's Law Project said.

``Rather than provide them treatment for the disease of drug
addiction, the hospital staff collaborated with the police to search
pregnant women and new mothers and send them to jail, bound in chains
and shackles,'' she said.

After a trial in 1996, a federal jury rejected the claims by the
women. A U.S. appeals court upheld the decision.

The appeals court ruled that the policy fell within the legal doctrine
allowing an exception in cases in which government officials conduct
searches for ``special needs.''

While the city said the policy was intended to encourage those who
test positive to obtain drug counseling, lawyers for the women said it
was designed and carried out to gather evidence to prosecute them.

They said in the Supreme Court appeal that the search policy had not
been effective in improving fetal health, and that the ''special
needs'' exception had never been applied previously to searches to
gather criminal evidence.

The city defended the searches, saying the hospital's interest in
protecting the health of maternity patients and their children
outweighed the ``minimal intrusion'' on the patients' privacy rights.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case and then issue a
decision during its upcoming term that begins in October.