CONTRA COSTA DRUG-SCREENING TESTS UPHELD

In a setback for disability-rights advocates, a federal appellate
court yesterday upheld Contra Costa County's past practice of using
personality tests to screen welfare applicants for drug and alcohol
addictions.

The Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals, in a 3-to-0 decision, ruled that the
tests were not discriminatory -- although they falsely identified a
disproportionate number of recovered or recovering drug and alcohol
addicts as substance abusers -- because they did not result in a
denial of welfare benefits.

Attorneys on both sides of the suit agreed that the ruling would make
it more difficult for the disabled to sue under the Americans With
Disabilities Act.

Although the case concerned former drug and alcohol addicts, county
officials feared a ruling banning the tests would have led to suits
from other disabled groups disproportionately affected by county
eligibility requirements. For example, Deputy County Counsel Bernard
Knapp said, disabled applicants for county jobs could have sued over
the requirement they fill out written employment applications at
county offices.

``We would have been looking at a great deal of litigation,'' he said.
David J. Berger, the attorney representing the welfare recipients, was
disappointed with the decision but uncertain if he would appeal to the
U.S. Supreme Court.

``We believe the ADA requires equality of process as well as equality
of results,'' he said. Contra Costa County began using the
psychological tests in 1992 to determine whether welfare applicants
had a drug or alcohol dependency.

The true-false tests, known as the Substance Abuse Subtle Screening
Inventory, asked questions about drugs and alcohol, and personal
beliefs on issues including religion, pornography and ethics. Those
found to be addicted were required to enter a six-month treatment
program or surrender their welfare benefits.

The county altered the requirement after a group of welfare recipients
sued in 1995, adding an interview for those who tested as
``dependent'' to weed out recovered or recovering addicts.

Last August, U.S. District Judge Maxine Chesney prohibited the tests
because they failed to distinguish between current and past substance
abuse. Under the ADA, former addicts are protected from arbitrary
discrimination. The ruling will have no immediate effect on the county
or its welfare recipients.

The county has no plans to reinstate the tests, which still face
different challenges from welfare and civil rights advocates,
including the American Civil Liberties Union, Deputy County Counsel
Bernard Knapp said.

Contra Costa officials appealed the decision, Knapp said, more to
protect county government from a flurry of ADA suits than to save the
personality test. A joint study in 1995 by the county and the
plaintiffs found that 44 percent of those found to be addicted were,
in fact, not.

1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A11

Checked-by: "Rich O'Grady"