DCFS DROPS BALL IN OLISON CASE

If I believed in conspiracy theories, I'd certainly think someone is
conspiring against Tina Olison.

Olison, you might recall, is the former drug addict who is trying to
regain custody of "Baby T." After a protracted court battle with the
Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, Olison was
awarded custody of her 3-year-old son in March.

Kane County Judge Judith M. Brawka--who was assigned to the case only
after Olison fought to have the case heard outside of Cook
County--ruled that Baby T should be returned to Olison within 12 months.

As part of a social services plan, Olison was ordered to undergo
regular drug testing. Then on May 19, up pops a hot urine sample.

According to testing done by Family Guidance Center, a methadone
distribution center DCFS contracted with to test Olison, her urine
sample tested positive for opiates.

Confident the reading was an error, Olison's attorney immediately
asked that the sample be sent to another laboratory for retesting. It
wasn't until a month later that DCFS agreed to outside testing.

Last week, a laboratory in Philadelphia examined the same specimen and
determined Olison was drug free--just as she claimed.

No wonder Olison thinks there's a conspiracy.

As soon as the laboratory gave the erroneous results, she found
herself back in Juvenile Court, with Public Guardian Patrick Murphy
trying to persuade Judge Brawka to end Olison's unsupervised visits
with Baby T.

Instead, Brawka imposed weekly testing and required Olison to pass a
"color strip" drug test before and after visits with Baby T. Olison
also was warned that she would not be allowed to spend time with Baby
T if there were any positive result.

Talk about stress.

Olison wasn't worried about the drug testing, but each new guideline
means the single parent has even more appointments to fit into her
daily schedule and more opportunities for something to go wrong.

I suppose, though, that Olison is more fortunate than most. Her
well-publicized battle with Ald. Edward Burke (14th) and Appellate
Court Justice Anne Burke brought her media scrutiny that other women
in her predicament never get. I shudder to think what they must go
through.

Given the high-profile nature of Olison's case, it would seem unlikely
that a reputable laboratory would make such a mistake. But according
to Olison, she complained about the facility after her first
appointment.

"I knew this was going to happen," she told me. "They were too lax in
their procedures. They just weren't professional."

Apparently not.

DCFS has had a contract with Family Guidance Center since 1993, but no
longer sends Olison there for drug testing. However, it still refers
other women to the center.

How many other women have received false positive readings from the
same lab? More important, what has DCFS done to determine whether a
false positive reading might have resulted in an unfair ruling against
another mother?

There is another problem. Shouldn't at least one social worker have
been hesitant to send recovering drug addicts into a methadone clinic?

I know recovering addicts who run from people, places and things that
remind them of their dependent state. The last place they want to be
is anywhere addicts are receiving drugs, even legal ones.

But this is the kind of place DCFS would choose to send Olison,
knowing her drug test results could determine whether she is ever
really reunited with her son.

As I said, I don't believe in conspiracy theories. But I do believe
there are too many people at DCFS charged with making life-changing
decisions for our children who are both uncaring, incompetent or both.