If you gotta but can’t, sometimes it’s costly

By JOE LAMBE

The Kansas City Star

Inmate Jeff Corsiglia was placed in a small Missouri prison room with two guards, a small cup and a deadline: two hours to urinate.

If he tested clean, he would almost certainly walk free in a month. If not, he faced years in prison.

But in a time of routine urine tests for inmates, those on probation and job applicants, anxiety and bladders betray some people. Few of them have any recourse.

In Corsiglia’s case, the cup stayed dry. The Kansas City man begged to pay for another kind of drug test — saliva, hair, blood — or to be put into a room to urinate alone. Prison officials refused.

Corsiglia, 27, now realizes he is among an estimated 17 million nationwide who suffer from shy bladder syndrome, a mental condition marked by difficulty or inability to urinate in front of others.

In April 2005, corrections officials cited him for disobeying the urine order, which meant he failed a voluntary prison-based treatment program. Instead of being released after four months, as he expected, Corsiglia suddenly faced more than four years behind bars before becoming eligible for parole.

Corrections officials said they simply were following the rules — rules courts nationwide had upheld.

Occasionally, shy bladder sufferers file lawsuits. Once in a great while, one wins. Mostly, prisoners are forced to serve more time while workers get disciplined, fired or lose out on new jobs.

Missouri corrections officials said they could not comment specifically on Corsiglia’s case.

Generally, alternative tests can be provided only if an inmate has been diagnosed with shy bladder or another medical problem, they said. Corsiglia has not been officially diagnosed.

People with shy bladder seldom get a diagnosis, experts said, and they often are greeted by snickers, disbelief and disinterest.

Few people know of the condition, called paruresis, and it gets little respect from courts, administrators or employers, said professor Steven Soifer, founder of the International Paruresis Association in Baltimore.

The association has received hundreds of letters from prisoners.

“This is the worst case I’ve ever heard,” Soifer said of Corsiglia.

“People aren’t going to believe prisoners when they say they have this problem. People don’t even believe employees.”

The Missouri Department of Corrections tests about 20,000 inmates or probationers a month, mostly through urine, according to John W. Bowen, the department’s toxicology laboratory superintendent.

Alternative tests cost more than the roughly $6 spent for urine tests and sometimes reveal less.

A troubling case

Corsiglia had been drinking Aug. 28, 2002, when he found his car broken into and his stereo equipment gone.

He drove to the home of those he blamed, poured fuel on a brick wall, ignited it and watched flames flare high and burn out, he said. The fire only blistered paint, according to court records.

But people were home and could have died. His crime was first-degree arson.

“I really wasn’t trying to hurt anybody, even though it does sound bad,” Corsiglia said. “It was a stupid thing to do.”

While awaiting trial, he quit college, became despondent and used marijuana and cocaine.

His lawyer made a plea deal in late 2004. Corsiglia would spend four months in prison and receive a five-year suspended sentence. He had no prior felonies and wanted to move past this one, Corsiglia said.

Jackson County Judge Ann Mesle asked him if he wanted a straight four months of shock time or four months that included treatment, Corsiglia said.

Given his drug problem, Corsiglia chose treatment.

“I thought it would be better for me,” he said. “I haven’t used any drugs since, and I’m not planning to.”

He had been reclusive about urinating since he was a boy but didn’t worry about it, he said. After he could not urinate in the prison test, he said, he got punished with more than two weeks in what inmates call the hole — a cell with one other inmate and no access to television or use of a fan. He lost the right to sit down with his mom or other visitors without glass separating them. He was not allowed to participate in recreational activities in the yard and could only use the phone with special permission.

Sanctions are normal for those who do not provide urine, Bowen said.

Corrections officials recommended that the judge not release Corsiglia after 120 days because he refused to take the test and, therefore, failed the drug program. It was his first documented rule violation, court records said.

His lawyer sent a letter asking corrections officials to reconsider. They did not. The matter never went to Mesle for a hearing. She declined to comment for this story.

Last fall Corsiglia was called for a random urine test and, once again, could not give a sample. He got sent to the hole again, lost his contact visits and was put on limited recreation for six months, he said. If it happens again, he faces even longer discipline.

Corsiglia said he tried to get a lawyer to file a lawsuit but could not find one to take his case.

A nationwide problem

Shy bladder lawsuits are fairly recent developments in U.S. courts. Almost all lose.

Ask Joseph Kinneary, a former boat captain for New York City who lost his license and his job after not being able to provide urine for a routine test about three years ago. Alternative tests he paid for showed he was clean, but bosses fired him over the urine test.

He sued the Coast Guard and New York City. Though he lost the Coast Guard lawsuit this year, he got his license back. His lawsuit against New York City is pending.

He now works as a biology professor at New York University.

“You’re fighting a brick wall,” he said of the urine test industry.

Kinneary’s lawyer, Ambrose Wotorson, said he was handling several private industry shy bladder cases in federal courts that had not reached juries.

At least one major national company, Georgia Pacific Corp., has switched to saliva testing for employees.

Missouri corrections officials have rejected saliva testing; Jackson County Family Court officials are considering it.

Soifer said urine testing would fade if for no other reason than it was invasive and distasteful.

“Quite frankly,” he said, “people don’t like handling all that urine.”

First glance

â–  The difficulty or inability to urinate in front of others is known as shy bladder syndrome.

â–  It affects 17 million nationwide.