RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

juliaoceania -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/1/2011 10:14:17 PM)

Sometimes the most productive solutions are not the most emotionally gratifying. In other words it is easier to lock 'em up and let yourself believe that this will somehow solve a problem, it doesn't solve the problem and only creates new problems.




tweakabelle -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/1/2011 10:30:26 PM)

Indeedies.

It's also important to remember that what works in one place might not work work as well in another. Local resources, cultural and ethnic sensitivities and a series of other local variables need to be factored into the design of a solution. My experience is that both clients and workers involved in service provision in a given area will have a host of sensible practical suggestions to offer.

However the first step towards a solution is nominate the goal as finding a solution that is actually going to work, not merely hide the problem or punish those entangled in the issues. And then to deal with realities not pious platitudes. Realities in areas such as this are seldom pretty, nor are they amenable to instant simplistic solutions imposed from outside.



LafayetteLady -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/1/2011 11:12:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You asked me a question and I answered it, which was not about these cases alone, but whether or not a woman should be allowed to have her labor induced. I answered that question. I prefer to leave the care of mentally ill people to their physicians, and not interject my opinion as to the course of treatment. If a doctor thinks a woman's health and welfare is endangered by a pregnancy, that doctor and that patient make the decisions about it.. I could talk about depression not always being temporary, and that being suicidal is actually something that people are hospitalized for, but I think that is far afield, and it is better just to say I trust physicians and women to make medical decision... not courts with political agendas. I also think that drug addiction is a medical problem requiring treatment and that treatment of addiction can be compromised by pregnancy.


Well, we actually agree on something. My point, however, was that it takes more than one visit and some treatment to determine whether or not the depression can be resolved. In the case of Shuai, her depression was, according to information we are provided, situational, and therefore treatable. Her suicide attempt was because her boyfriend left her. She wasn't being treated for depression, so her physician was not able to offer help.

So while you are right that the physician and the woman need to make a medical decision, if the woman doesn't seek medical help, but simply tries to kill herself (and in Shuai's case the baby), there is no medical intervention. Labor was induced, as you suggest should happen, her pregnancy was far enough along that inducing would ordinarily result in a surviving child. There is no doubt that the baby didn't survive because of the rat poison she ingested. Yes, she was suffering from depression, no doubt. But does that mean she gets a complete pass on the death of the child, which she, without any doubt at all, caused?

I'm all for seeking medical help, and when that is done, whether it is for depression or addiction, that there are provisions that protect the women. My problem is the women who don't seek help, not because they fear prosecution, but because they don't intend to stop using drugs, or in Shuai's case, her only thought was of killing herself and her baby. By your own theory, she would (and should have) contacted her doctor, who would have perhaps treated her depression or induced labor since she was past her 30th week. Then if the baby didn't survive, she wouldn't be in the predictament she is in now.

quote:

quote:

The study you refer to has NOTHING to do with the topic at hand. That is the point. Your apparent inability to focus on the subject at hand and actually understand it is frustrating.

You say you desire to learn more than you desire to be right. Lesson one: This post is about women charged with murder for causing the death of the babies through drugs or poisons. It has nothing to do with cigarettes, coffee or chocolate.

You are trying to find ways to support your argument which is weak and you are getting pissy because it isn't working.



Cigarettes are a fetotoxin... and they cause low birth weight, sids, and premature birth. They are proven to be dangerous to unborn babies, and my point, if you were paying attention, is that the real issue here is that women are being charged with this crime and it is a political statement, and it is not about the health of babies. If these groups were interested in the health of babies why not go after cigarettes and alcohol?

Now, perhaps you do not want to discuss it.... fine, I do, and I think it is on topic, and if the mods disagree they can yank my posts


You know quite well that the mods wouldn't pull it because it isn't a complete derail, so get a grip.

You are believing this is a "politial statement" because that is the concept the article is pushing. We have already agreed (amazingly) that CPS already gets involved when children are born with problems due to substance use of some kind. Anti-smoking laws are getting stricter and stricter everywhere you go. In NJ, it is now illegal to smoke in a car containing children under a certain age. There is, as you pointed out, studies all over the place about smoking while pregnant. But there still hasn't been anything, that I have ever seen, correlating smoking and in-utero death. Everything you have posted says "may cause," not "will cause." If you can find one single report that indicates that a woman smoked while pregnant, and there was every indication that smoking caused the death of her child, it fits on topic. Since we both know you can't produce such information, and the subject is women being charged with murder for behavior while pregnant that caused their children to die very shortly after birth, cigarettes are just not in the same category. Now if you would like to talk about what behavior causes birth defects, that is a whole other thread.

This is about the lack of health of these babies caused by the mother's conduct.



LafayetteLady -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/1/2011 11:36:51 PM)

quote:

JO, of course these prosecutions are selective.

Of course, if the goal was the protection of the foetus, then tobacco and alcohol would be in the prosecutor's and the law's sights.

Of course, if right to lifers hadn't tried to back door abortion laws, none of these cases would have taken the form they have.


Talk about "amateur speculation!" What actual facts are you using to determine the prosecutions are selective? All you can really state is that this article talks only about these three women. You can in no way prove that there aren't other cases.

Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING in the article states that these prosecutions are happening as a means of protecting a fetus. That is purely an "amateur speculation" on your part. These women are being prosecuted because the prosecutors feel their actions are responsible for the death of their children.

Again, you are SPECULATING this is caused by the right to lifers because of the areas where these prosecutions are taking place. If you want to speculate, it could be that the prosecutors have seen one too many pregnant women act "irresponsibly" by choosing to use drugs that are commonly known to be dangerous walk away without any repurcussion because bleeding hearts (like you) think they should.

quote:


Very very few mothers set out to murder their babies. When they do, it's usually regarded here (in Australia) as a mental health issue. Deliberately murdering one's infants is the very antithesis of motherhood and maternity. Manufacturing artificial murder cases against women who are irresponsible during pregnancy can't be a solution to any problem.

So it's not about the health of mothers, or of the foetus - it's about policing 'good' and 'bad' behaviour, about political control.

To dress this charade up as a defence of innocents is dubious. I can see how anger at irresponsible behaviour by some mothers-to-be might cause someone to see these laws as a potential remedy. But no one is suggesting these laws will solve the problem. Imprisonment cannot possibly solve this problem.

The best interests of all concerned will be addressed by seeking solutions based in enlightened health and social policies.


Know what? It aggravates the hell out of me that you are so blinded by your pro-choice ideals that you feel the need to blame pro-lifers for these women being held accountable for their actions. There was just discussion on television tonight regarding three women who killed their children. In the last year, I have had to have read or heard at least half a dozen times about women who have killed their kids and NOT a single drug was involved. In several of the cases, depression was involved though. I have read about at least a half dozen other reports of women being charged with killing their children through abuse. To say it is "very, very rare" is an uninformed statement, at least for the US, because every report I read or heard was just local to the tri-state area where I live (New York, New Jersey and Connecticut or Pennsylvania, depending on who you ask about those last two). The size of those three states (whichever is the third) is larger than Australia as a whole and there are still 47 states that doesn't include.

And still you go on about it being resolved through "enlightened health and social policies" yet you have not ONE suggestion as to how that can be achieved. Don't bitch about a system not working when a) you have no actual alternative solution and b) you are going to spout out facts that may apply to your (tiny by comparison) country but not to the country in question.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

Ah, so some of us are engaging in "amateur speculation" regarding the facts provided, but you are presenting what? A professional opinion? You are stating "your approach" as though you have some say in the matter. You don't even live in this country! Further, your "approach" is to talk about best interests and policies but you offer not one single suggestion as to what those solutions might be. At least JO has suggestions as to what she would like to see happen.

You are nothing more than the worst type of philosopher. Sitting on your ass telling everyone what is wrong, but not willing to get up and actually find a solution. Apparently, you just like to see your words in type.


It's sad that you have chosen to descend to this level.

It's even sadder that the suggestion that people seek solutions to this issue rather than pursue retribution seems to have set you off.

You might like to ponder the connection between these two things.


Descend to what level? Telling you that you are full of shit based on your lack of knowledge or understanding of the facts presented?

No, what is sad is that you don't like being contradicted or having your own words thrown back in your face.

What's even sadder is you still can't offer a single idea as a potential solution.



LafayetteLady -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/1/2011 11:58:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I am for decriminalization of all drugs. Decriminalization is not legalization


Ok, let's say we do that. Has it occurred to you that if that is done, every person charged with a crime that is committed where drugs are involved would use addiction as a defense? Because decriminalization does not mean that people would suddenly be able to afford drugs or to commit crimes while under the influence of them.

How many times do people have to go back to rehab? Do you realize that studies have shown that currently the most common in patient treatment program lasts three months, but that studies have also shown that for treatment to be successful, the in patient program needs to last at least twelve months? I know you are aware of the fact that until someone actually wants to get help for an addiction, no treatment program is going to work.

So forget about pregnant women for a minute, since you would like to see all drugs decriminalized for everyone. Should all these people get a free pass against being charged with crimes as long as they have a drug problem? I'm sure that is not what you are implying. I'm sure you know the ramifications of allowing people to commit crimes without punishment because they have a drug problem (or will sure as hell use it as a viable defense in those circumstances) will be huge.

quote:


quote:

What do you do with a pregnant woman who admits to using, has no intentions of stopping, and no intentions of ending her pregnancy?


Do you think that having laws against such behavior is going to stop it? If the woman in question has no respect for her fetus, has no interest in remaining clean, do you think such a person is going to get caught before she does damage? Do you think these laws will save one child? How many children will be harmed by them? Lets just do the math, mothers trying to quit but afraid to seek help because they can be tried for murder if they ever admit they did a drug while pregnant... do they seek prenatal care? Do they hide from authorities... and if these sorts of laws went even further, maybe even state mandating any suspected drug use be reported to authorities.

Sounds like a nightmare to me.


Have I once said that I believe prosecuting these women will stop the behavior in others? We both know I haven't. I am staunchly pro-choice. I am also pro-death penalty. And I believe that people need to be held accountable for their actions.

I have not seen one study, merely speculation (and not simply from you) that women will suddenly not see their doctors. These women already don't report their drug use to their doctors, that is how these problems persist to begin with. Why? Because as mandated reporters, suspected drug use of a parent (mother or father) is reported to the proper authorities. Now realistically, a good doctor is going to talk with their patient prior to find out what is going on, but if the answers are suspicious, yep, they are reported.

I would like to see a solution, as I have repeatedly stated, where a pregnant woman can ask for and receive treatment without fear of prosecution. But I also think that if those women refuse to seek treatment and insist on remaining pregnant, they should face repurcussions for damage they cause. If the child survives, they don't get to keep the baby and if that baby doesn't survive, as a result of what they insisted on continuing to do, then yes they should be charged with murder.



LafayetteLady -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 12:11:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

FWIW I am qualified to offer a professional opinion and have experience in service provision design analysis and review. But I would hardly do that here. Does that matter anyway? Each and every one of of us has a legitimate right to a view and a voice on these issues.


So you are qualified to look at something and point out what is wrong with it. Isn't that dandy. You are quite correct, every one of us has a view and a voice on these issues. But again, if you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Voicing that the system is wrong doesn't require more than the ability to speak. Finding solutions, however, takes a bit more work.

quote:


I am trying to point out the general areas one might look at in order to find workable solutions that actually address the issue at hand. At a practical level these would include:
*sex education classes at high school level, and, when relevant, its ethnic/ cultural sensitivity
*quality and availability of fertility control services and advice (including access to abortions preferably on demand) and, when relevant, its ethnic/ cultural sensitivity
*support and treatments services and programs for those with substance abuse issues and, when relevant, its ethnic/ cultural sensitivity
*support and intervention services for pregnant women and especially teenage mothers-to-be, and, when relevant, its ethnic/ cultural sensitivity
*involving local practicioners in design of appropriate programs and, when relevant, its ethnic/ cultural sensitivity
*quality and availability of appropriate womens' health services and supports and, when relevant, its ethnic/ cultural sensitivity
*general social policy (eg housing, discrimination, employment) and, when relevant, its ethnic/ cultural sensitivity
and a lot more.

Much depends on the specifics of the local situation (eg political climate, funding available, available resources and skills, legalities etc) - hence I am unable to offer specific suggestions. Demanding that I offer specific solutions without even specifying the location concerned is just plain ridiculous.

It doesn't require a Ph.D or any other qualification to work out that if the wrong policies are being applied in the wrong areas, the problem will never be solved. So until a convincing explanation is offered showing how incarceration is going to solve this problem, I'll continue to oppose it. Of course, if the proposed policy isn't a 'solution' then we are entitled to question what it is going to achieve and why it is being proposed.

It's as clear as daylight to me that these issues are fundamentally health and social/personal issues. Hence I'll continue to suggest looking at those areas to find workable remedies.


Ok, most of your suggestions already exist in this country in most states, so those solutions are working either. As for the "location," the locations were listed in the article. Even if they weren't, the US as a whole, since the US as a whole is affected by these issues is a realistic location.

The point I keep repeating is that these cases aren't about a solution. There is nothing in the article, aside from more speculation, about the "motive" behind these prosecutions, or that there is an agenda where anyone believes it will *solve* the problem. Frankly, incarceration in any crime has shown that it does nothing more than keep the criminal involved from committing crimes while incarcerated. Doesn't mean that people should stop being prosecuted for committing crimes though, or does it in your mind?

It is clear to everyone that substance abuse is a health/social/personal issue, regardless if one is pregnant or not. Problem here is when that substance abuse results in the harm of another, there is a penalty. In the US, that is clear as day as well. Children learn from an early age that bad behavior results in consequences, it isn't a surprise.



tweakabelle -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 12:25:39 AM)

quote:

The point I keep repeating is that these cases aren't about a solution.


Yes. That's the problem I have with a purely legal approach. It's not a solution. No one pretends that it is. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a solution, that a potential solution doesn't exist. Not by any means.

And if there is a problem (and we all seem to agree that there is) then what on earth could possibly be wrong with trying to find a solution? And if there is a proposed solution, why not look at it?

It may turn out to be the case that with some incorrigible offenders, there is no alternative left but to isolate them in such a way that they cannot get access to substances injurious to their babies-to-be. But is any one going to claim that prisons are drug-free zones?

There are a lot of options available before such draconian measures need any consideration. The policy seemingly adopted in the OP cases appears to be that incarceration for murder is the first and only option. I find that reprehensible.



FatDomDaddy -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 12:53:35 AM)

yawn



Cherylmazana -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 2:51:07 AM)

After reading this thread all I can say is I am glad I live in the UK.

I didn’t realise I was pregnant at once, and I by most American standards (the Americans I have met anyway)was a heavy drinker 3-4 pints of larger a night with friends usually a lot more over weekends, but by British standards that wasn’t considered heavy drinking. Everyone I knew was drinking the same or more and most of us women got pregnant within a few years of each other.

That used to be normal for most British youngsters, we drink, we enjoy drinking and we used to drink while pregnant.

I know many women who like me continued drinking and smoking during pregnancy, in fact every single person of my age was born to parents who smoked often heavily, and I don’t know any women who were told to stop drinking (from my parents generation) and even in my generation we were encouraged to drink stout (horrible stuff) as it was good for the baby, all the iron.

I don’t know anyone whose baby was damaged by it, strangely now that I think about it I don’t even know anyone from that time who had a cot death or a baby born with problems.

Though I seem to hear all the time of babies born now with various problems and the rise of cot death, and yet women are encouraged to be healthy and stop everything that can harm the baby, women I know now who are pregnant change their whole lives to prevent harm and it still fails.

Back then babies died early in miscarriages and were allowed to die without heroic measures to save them, but no-one would have ever considered prosecuting a woman who just had a miscarriage and calling it murder. It was just accepted that something was wrong with the foetus and that it was a great shame but that maybe next time things would be ok.

Different cultures, different rules, but good grief your prisons are going to be filled with women, and the poor ones outside of prison are going to be terrified if they have a miscarriage.

Cheryl



tazzygirl -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 4:26:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

Tweaky is a very educated and knowledgeable person. I see nothing wrong with looking for multiple ways to approach the same problem, instead of a one size fits all approach using the legal system. We have not had much luck with the heavy handed legalistic approach to drug use. Decriminalization seems to be a much more productive way to handle drug addiction. We lost the war on drugs, it failed. It seems wise to consider approaches other than failed ones. I do not think one needs to be a legal expert to understand policies that do not work. The law is only one part of public policy, there is the implementation of it, also.... and lawyers are not the only people who do that work.



I do believe it was my position that women should be offered an either/or situation.



tazzygirl -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 4:32:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

It is usually a health official who calls a social worker who gets the law involved.

Amazing how that works.



Health workers are mandated to report child abuse... if a baby is suspected to be drug addicted at birth, they are state mandated to report... at least here they are. They are in Georgia, too.... so it isn't "mysterious" at all.



Exactly. Yet it was tweak who stated...

quote:

Surely this is a matter of health and social policy. Any solutions to the issues of pregnant women who abuse various substances (including tobacco and alcohol) will be found in the domains of health and social policy, not in prison cells.


I never said it was mysterious. tweak acted like the law shouldnt be involved.... MY point is that we, as health care workers... have no choice.



Termyn8or -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 4:47:21 AM)

You know, I said something about MY kid and what I would do if a Woman aborted my kid if I wanted it nd she didn't and it caused me trouble here. But you know what, it would never ever happen. I am not producing something for the state, and they own it. So they ain't getting it. EVERYBODY get abortions and see who the fuck the government has to exploit next. You know parasites cannot feed upon themselves.

That's it, straight up. If I had a real life I would want kids. If I lived in a good country I would want kids. But I am here.

So I think pregnant Women should party hardy, but MAKE SURE THEY GET THE JOB DONE. If it has to be in the first trimester or something by law, let it be. Just don't waste time. I wlll NOT give "them" more people to exploit. Fuck all that.

T^T



tweakabelle -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 4:55:27 AM)

quote:

I never said it was mysterious. tweak acted like the law shouldnt be involved.... MY point is that we, as health care workers... have no choice.




Tazzy I'm well aware that health workers are required to report certain cases of abuse to the authorities. I wasn't saying that this practice is wrong or that health workers were wrong to do this. I'm unsure where this interpretation came from but it doesn't appear to me to be present in the words of mine you quoted.

I've been objecting to legal involvement as the first and only option, which appears to be the case in the OP. I think I've stated that enough times by now for my position to be clear. I'm also arguing that the primary area that we ought to look to to resolve issues such as this is health and social policy.

I'm not naive enough to pretend it's going to work in all cases. But I do believe that health and social policy ought to be the first port of call. And if draconian measures have to adopted, they ought to be the last option.



tazzygirl -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 6:07:18 AM)

quote:

Do you think that having laws against such behavior is going to stop it? If the woman in question has no respect for her fetus, has no interest in remaining clean, do you think such a person is going to get caught before she does damage? Do you think these laws will save one child? How many children will be harmed by them? Lets just do the math, mothers trying to quit but afraid to seek help because they can be tried for murder if they ever admit they did a drug while pregnant... do they seek prenatal care? Do they hide from authorities... and if these sorts of laws went even further, maybe even state mandating any suspected drug use be reported to authorities.


If the option is treatment or jail... and they wish to quit... why would they go into hiding?

I have to say that a woman who wants to quit will find a way to quit. I have had many ask my advice, where to go, how to get help, worried about jail. The social workers I have worked with all, without exception, were willing to go to bat for these girls, find them treatment homes and help them with their issues.

But, they have listened to people who will tell them not to say a word about their addictions because it will land them in jail.

For example...

This is what I typed in to yahoo search...

will i go to jail if i am pregnant and using drugs

The first site?

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/05/24/prosecuting-pregnant-drug-addicted-mothers/

It speaks about South Carolina's laws, and the conviction of Regina McKnight. Guess what it doesnt include.

This...

http://www.southcarolinacriminaldefenseblog.com/2008/05/regina_mcknights_case_overturn_1.html

Her conviction was overturned, and SC had to cease the "secret" drug testing of mothers.

Say I was 19 and a coke user. I wanted information because my friend told me if I told anyone, I could go to jail. That first link cinches it... even though it doesnt tell the full story.

They dont talk about the treatment centers available, both out patient and residential.

http://texas.drugrehab101.com/service_Pregnant-postpartum-women.html

Texas has three pages...

Tennessee

http://www.statedrugrehabs.com/9864_rehabs_Baby_Love_Midtown_Mental_Health_Center

PA has 264 centers... many residential.

http://www.statedrugrehabs.com/

Where there is a will, there is a way. By the time they hit a nurse in Labor and Delivery, its too late. A positive tox screen on a new born must be reported. The time they should have said something was during prenatal care. There is much that can be done for these women. Nurses ask all the time. Office nurses, ER nurses, L&D nurses (when we see them for nipple stim testing or preterm labor). We ask... we beg them to tell us. If they dont tell us, there isnt a damn thing we can do to protect them or get them help.





juliaoceania -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 9:16:12 AM)

quote:

If the option is treatment or jail... and they wish to quit... why would they go into hiding?


We have women being tried for something they did while pregnant. Other pregnant women who maybe trying to quit and may want to seek rehab might think "If I do that will be like admitting I did drugs, and that means if something happens to this baby I will be tried for murder". If I were such a woman I would just continue to try to stop on my own.



quote:

I have to say that a woman who wants to quit will find a way to quit. I have had many ask my advice, where to go, how to get help, worried about jail. The social workers I have worked with all, without exception, were willing to go to bat for these girls, find them treatment homes and help them with their issues.

But, they have listened to people who will tell them not to say a word about their addictions because it will land them in jail.


And when the government starts putting these women in jail, it confirms that perception. In fact they will just quit asking you as a healthcare worker, because if the fetus gets rights you will become court mandated to report. healthcare workers are mandated to report not only crimes against children, but they are mandated to report suspected domestic violence.


It is very weird to me that a certain way of doing things doesn't work, so people continue on that same path.

Now, I know LL doesn't want to deal with the fact that two of the most dangerous substances harm babies all of the time and are legal (tobacco and alcohol) but the fact remains that we are not locking women up for doing these things while pregnant. That is a shitload of hypocrisy. The fraction of women you want to hang up on a flagpole and use as a pinata is very small... I know this thread is not about FAS or tobacco, but the amount of damaged children brought into the world because of these two drugs is very large. Your outrage seems selective to me. I have seen kids of smokers struggle with asthma their entire life... my sister struggles with asthma as an adult child of smokers.... the things that you say cocaine does is because it constricts the vascular system of the infant and it creates a small placenta because it is a stimulant. The same is true for nicotine.... You complained about the rat poison baby, yet nicotine is a plant poison. 1000s of babies are born to smoking mothers every year. It is a knowable preventable risk for babies.

Tazzy, are you prepared to lock up women who smoke? Why do they get a free pass on their addiction? Legal does not equal okay. I think that is my larger point is that addiction is a disease, and should not be criminalized As long as a woman is carrying her fetus her diseases and welfare take preeminence over that of the infant. To give some women a free pass because they are addicted to a legal substance over women who take an illegal one is the ultimate in hypocrisy. This is why I am for decriminalization and rehabilitation. And I am not really interested in hearing about a small aberrant number of women who do not give a fuck and are probably deeply psychotic and in need of institutionalization. We have also let down the mentally ill of our society because we do not want to pay to treat them, either.

We have run out of jail space in my state. They are letting people go. We have decriminalized pot, here, and the rest of the country realizes we can't afford the war on drugs. The women you want to lock up are casualties of the war of drugs and the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill. Their babies are the wounded and dying. The war failed.


The political agenda behind this is so clear.... the Right Wing never attack cigarettes or alcohol, it is all about the War on Drugs and giving the preborn rights.....



juliaoceania -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 9:41:22 AM)

One last thing, reporting a baby with drugs in its system for removal from the mother's care by the state is far different than collecting evidence of a crime. If we criminalize this behavior every baby with a positive tox screen could lead to the prosecution of their mothers for attempted murder... this is the path we are traveling.

Get ready for a wave of sickly damaged infants being born in crackhouses[8|]



tazzygirl -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 11:33:41 AM)

quote:

Now, I know LL doesn't want to deal with the fact that two of the most dangerous substances harm babies all of the time and are legal (tobacco and alcohol) but the fact remains that we are not locking women up for doing these things while pregnant.


We arent locking women up for alcohol? You are sure of that?

quote:

Tazzy, are you prepared to lock up women who smoke? Why do they get a free pass on their addiction?


Do me a favor. Show me where I ever said they get a free pass. Show me just one post.

quote:

I think that is my larger point is that addiction is a disease, and should not be criminalized As long as a woman is carrying her fetus her diseases and welfare take preeminence over that of the infant.


Addiction is a disease.

Child abuse is a crime.

A child can be abused as a result of an addiction.

quote:

To give some women a free pass because they are addicted to a legal substance over women who take an illegal one is the ultimate in hypocrisy. This is why I am for decriminalization and rehabilitation


I couldnt agree more. Lets lock them all up. If a woman cleans a litter box, lets lock her up too, she could have given her baby toxoplasmosis. Or should we wait to see if the baby really caught it? I smoke. Before I discovered I was pregnant, I smoked a pack a day. There were no patches, no pills when I was pregnant. The smell alone made me sick. But I had to have my two cigarettes a day. Could not let go of them. And, yep, my son had low birth weight and height at 7 lbs 13 ounces and 22 inches long. And, recall, when I had my son, hospitals still allowed smoking in patient's rooms.

The patch, pills and gum are now widely and readily available, and considered safe for pregnant women, so, yeah, I would consider any child who was born with a low birth weight as a result of mom smoking a huge issue.

What is considered low birth weight?

2500 g, or 5.51155655 pounds. I can recall only a handful of newborns out of 9 years being that small... and some of them were twins. I would have no problem havig mothers of babies with a low birth weight tested for nicotine.

quote:

And I am not really interested in hearing about a small aberrant number of women who do not give a fuck and are probably deeply psychotic and in need of institutionalization. We have also let down the mentally ill of our society because we do not want to pay to treat them, either.


Frankly my dear, to use your own detestable language here... I dont give a fuck what you care to hear about or not hear about. You cram your bleeding heart liberal bullshit down MY throat then have the fucking gall to tell me what you DO or DONT want to hear about? Dont want to hear about it, block me.

quote:

We have run out of jail space in my state. They are letting people go. We have decriminalized pot, here, and the rest of the country realizes we can't afford the war on drugs. The women you want to lock up are casualties of the war of drugs and the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill. Their babies are the wounded and dying. The war failed.


Again, you fail to realize.

These women werent arrested for doing drugs. They were arrested for the effects their drug use had on the fetuses they were carrying.

quote:

The political agenda behind this is so clear.... the Right Wing never attack cigarettes or alcohol, it is all about the War on Drugs and giving the preborn rights.....


I am so fucking tired of hearing you babble about how pregnant women are not arrested for alcohol.

http://www.nyclu.org/node/428 ....... arrested

http://blog.bioethics.net/2005/07/delivering-while-intoxicated/

And, it seems, other countries are starting to arrest drunk pregnant women too...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/256062




tweakabelle -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 2:33:14 PM)

Tazzy, I was struck by your description of your frustration and sense of helplessness when dealing with some drug-taking mothers-to-be. I have seen similar accounts so often. Such reports are common where marginalised groups fail to utilise existing services, often to the exasperation of staff who are doing their level best to help them. Most of the kind of frontline services relevant to these issues operating here are based on a community medicine model. I'm not sure how this would translate to the States because of the differing health service structures and funding.

This model locates services in the middle of the relevant community, and offers services tailored to the specific needs of that community - so each application tends to be unique. A lot of outreach is offered, and centres tend to work closely with community organisations and other social structures to access its target population. Centres can be tailored to suit any ethnicity, target group or specific health issue as needs be. Centres tend to employ a mix of specific health and social/community workers. Usually there's a strong focus on health eduction. Centres tend to be far more proactive than traditional health services.

From what I have seen and read, this model promises to be the best response to this kind of issue. The model was adopted here first as a response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. It's operation is widely regarded as successful. There seems to be a large degree of overlap between the problems substance abusing mothers-to-be and some high-risk AIDS populations experience (eg drug taking, social marginalisation, chaotic lifestyles, distrust of institutions, communication problems, persistent high risk behaviours, homelessness, perceptions of immoral sexual behaviour, etc). So that experience could be instructive here.

Tazzy if you feel it would be useful I can get you a lot more info on the operation of this model of health service delivery here.



domiguy -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 2:39:42 PM)

I can't wait to start placing all of these murderers behind bars where they belong.

You work out, don't eat right, drink, do drugs or don't stop working during your pregnancy and lose your child because of it..You are a murderer and need to spend the rest of your life behind bars.



tazzygirl -> RE: pregnant women who lose babies face murder charges (7/2/2011 4:28:08 PM)

What is the difference between obtaining alcohol or drugs by umbilical cord vs breast milk vs bottle?



Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625