By: Bryan Sicard
As alcohol continues to be an all-too-present crutch for millions of Americans, it will remain being a near-daily subjectfor judges to wade through in family court hearings. When considering the role alcohol often plays in the irretrievable breakdown of relationships, non-addicted parties will naturally want to make sure their (former) partner is making strides towards sobriety, especially when children are involved. In an effort to regulate parties’ sobriety in a consistent and reasonably convenient medium, many family courts across the country have turned to Soberlink to get a clear picture of parties’ compliance with judges’ orders.
Soberlink works as a portable breathalyzer, which the court can order a person to use every so many hours to ensure theirsobriety. Soberlink is noted for its innovative technology that has made it a favorite with family courts. It is typically used for issues relating to parenting time, which might only require testing immediately before and during a party’s time with their children. But, it can also be used by criminal courts to require daily testing to ensure compliance with the terms of their probation. These technological features include automatically sending one’s test results to selected contacts: typically their child’s other parent and other “concerned parties.” Thisadvanced reporting can make Soberlink ideal for courts to quickly see when a user is passing, missing, or failing their tests: and if any particular pattern has emerged clueing judges into the user’s out-of-court behavior. Courts enforce compliance by notifying users that missed tests will be treated as failed, positive results when judging their commitment to staying sober.
Most impressively, Soberlink uses facial recognition technology to ensure that the party responsible for submitting samples is in no way tampering to avoid failing a test. According to Soberlink, the addition of facial recognition technology “gives the monitoring party the ability to know who is testing in real-time in a non-invasive and convenient way.” Soberlink is also designed to allow for grace periods (or“windows”) for compliance with court orders, offeringflexibility in case someone is driving or doing something that makes complying at strict times undesirable, but still requiresthey be completed within a certain window before parenting time. Automated text messages are also sent every fifteen minutes during these windows which not only remind users, but further removes any ability to claim forgetfulness before the court. It can also reduce the need for a complier to physically report to probation, and also help reduce the need for courts to rely on random drug and alcohol testing, which though constitutional, are sometimes scrutinized in Massachusetts courts.
But Soberlink still has drawbacks for users at its mercy: for both legal and economic considerations. Circumstances in which one’s results can be admitted into evidence in civil and criminal matters varies greatly from state to state. For example, many users are likely unaware their state, such as New York, can prevent them from arguing the unreliability of the results once that model of breathalyzer is approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Soberlink is generally good at keeping its users engaged and well-informed in regard to their test schedules and results. But, it could also just as easily notify users if there is a major decision handed down in their state or federal court regarding the admissibility of breathalyzer results,which would be especially impactful if the user is representedpro se.
However, perhaps the biggest issue with Soberlink is the heavy cost that comes with it. A person using Soberlink can expect to pay anywhere from $300 to $750 just for the device. They then will have to pay from $130 to $300 a month for the services that come with it. Although quality technology does not come cheap, judges should keep these numbers in mind when ordering a party to use Soberlink or a similar device. This is especially important given those struggling with alcohol abuse are often times less financially stable from the costs of their addiction or their inability to hold long-term work. As family court judges often emphasize parties’ spending their money on their children instead of overlitigation and high-priced attorneys, any creative but reasonable alternative to these high costs of ensuring sobriety should be taken into consideration.
As our technology improves, it makes our legal tools more efficient, and Soberlink is no exception. However, it’s very important for courts to consider not just the positives ofSoberlink and portable breathalyzers, but the negatives too. Especially when we want to encourage parent-child relationships to be as healthy and normal as possible, our courts should support at-home breathalyzers in lieu of outright denying one’s parenting time, but must remember this often comes atstaggering costs to users. Striking a balance between wanting to implement the best and latest technology while factoring economic impacts on parties and their children’s future is crucial. Just how exactly our judges will approach this give-and-take relationship will be fascinating for court observers towatch in years to come.
Student Bio: Bryan Sicard is a third-year law student at Suffolk University Law School. He is a staff writer for the Journal of High Technology Law and recently completed a legal internship at the Norfolk Probate and Family Court in Canton, Massachusetts.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are the views of the author alone and do not represent the views of JHTL or Suffolk University Law School.
