The study aimed to explore staff and patient views on the use of sniffer dogs and police involvement in detecting illicit drug use among in-patients in a medium-secure psychiatric unit. A 15-item questionnaire was administered to 53 in-patients and 140 staff members, with a 63% response rate. Overall, there were fewer differences than expected, though staff viewed the impact of illicit drugs more negatively than patients. Patients were more critical of the use of sniffer dogs and police involvement. The study found that staff and patients had differing views on issues such as consent, confidentiality, and the impact of drug use on the therapeutic environment. The use of sniffer dogs in secure psychiatric units is increasing, particularly in high-security hospitals. While their reliability is considered high, little is known about their specificity, sensitivity, and predictive validity. The use of sniffer dogs and police involvement is controversial, as it may affect the therapeutic alliance. However, it may also have benefits, such as helping patients accept responsibility for their actions. An incident at Arnold Lodge, a medium-secure unit, highlighted the potential for false positives in dog sniffs. Five patients were charged with drug possession after a dog sniff, despite negative urine tests. The charges were later dropped after forensic tests and hair analysis proved negative. This incident raised concerns about the accuracy of sniffer dogs and the need for confirmatory tests. The study also examined the impact of illicit drug use on the therapeutic environment, patient-staff relationships, and the risk of violence. It found that illicit drug use can negatively affect the therapeutic environment, patient adherence to treatment, and the overall safety of the unit. The use of sniffer dogs and police involvement is a contentious issue, as it may conflict with patient confidentiality and dignity. The study concluded that there is a need for clear guidance on the use of sniffer dogs and police involvement in psychiatric settings. There is a balance to be struck between the need to maintain a drug-free environment and the patient's right to confidentiality and dignity. The study also highlighted the need for more research on the sensitivity and specificity of sniffer dogs in detecting illicit drug use.The study aimed to explore staff and patient views on the use of sniffer dogs and police involvement in detecting illicit drug use among in-patients in a medium-secure psychiatric unit. A 15-item questionnaire was administered to 53 in-patients and 140 staff members, with a 63% response rate. Overall, there were fewer differences than expected, though staff viewed the impact of illicit drugs more negatively than patients. Patients were more critical of the use of sniffer dogs and police involvement. The study found that staff and patients had differing views on issues such as consent, confidentiality, and the impact of drug use on the therapeutic environment. The use of sniffer dogs in secure psychiatric units is increasing, particularly in high-security hospitals. While their reliability is considered high, little is known about their specificity, sensitivity, and predictive validity. The use of sniffer dogs and police involvement is controversial, as it may affect the therapeutic alliance. However, it may also have benefits, such as helping patients accept responsibility for their actions. An incident at Arnold Lodge, a medium-secure unit, highlighted the potential for false positives in dog sniffs. Five patients were charged with drug possession after a dog sniff, despite negative urine tests. The charges were later dropped after forensic tests and hair analysis proved negative. This incident raised concerns about the accuracy of sniffer dogs and the need for confirmatory tests. The study also examined the impact of illicit drug use on the therapeutic environment, patient-staff relationships, and the risk of violence. It found that illicit drug use can negatively affect the therapeutic environment, patient adherence to treatment, and the overall safety of the unit. The use of sniffer dogs and police involvement is a contentious issue, as it may conflict with patient confidentiality and dignity. The study concluded that there is a need for clear guidance on the use of sniffer dogs and police involvement in psychiatric settings. There is a balance to be struck between the need to maintain a drug-free environment and the patient's right to confidentiality and dignity. The study also highlighted the need for more research on the sensitivity and specificity of sniffer dogs in detecting illicit drug use.