News & Politics
Should a Mother Be Prosecuted for Taking Drugs While Pregnant?
Is there such a thing as a “crack baby”?
Ever since the term crack baby came into vogue, state courts have been hearing arguments about whether mothers can be prosecuted for creating them. The Maryland Supreme Court answered no in 2006, overturning the convictions of two cocaine-addicted mothers. If these women could be charged with child endangerment, the judges wrote, then so could any mother for so-called reckless activity, even “exercising too much or too little.”
Now, Kentucky’s Supreme Court is taking the issue on again. Last week, judges heard oral arguments in the case of Ina Cochran, who was charged in 2005 with “wanton endangerment” because her newborn tested positive for cocaine at birth. Maternal addiction is not a “victimless crime,” Assistant Attorney General James Shackelford argued before the court on Thursday. “The victims are real live human beings and they’re directly affected,” he told the judges. “We would ask the court not to strip the protection of the penal code from Baby Cochran and all the other Baby Cochrans in the Commonwealth.” He describes this kind of criminal prosecution of new mothers as a necessary “last resort.”
These cases are hotly contested because they play into the abortion wars. Cochran’s attorney originally got the case dismissed based on a 1993 Kentucky State Supreme Court case stating that a pregnant woman could not be charged with child abuse because her fetus was not a person. But the Kentucky attorney general’s office appealed the decision in light of a 2004 law, which made it possible for someone who kills a pregnant woman to be charged in two deaths—and the appellate court reinstated the indictment based on this fetal homicide act.
The ACLU and many pro-choice groups have been fighting laws that protect “unborn victims of violence” in many states. In Cochran’s case, there’s an additional argument to make against her prosecution. The charge against her is based on the assumption that any cocaine use during pregnancy causes severe damage to the child. In fact, experts have discovered that the “crack baby epidemic” that was predicted in the late 1980s has never been borne out by the facts.
Cochran gave birth to her daughter, Cheyenne, in December 2005. Cheyenne was healthy even though both mother and newborn tested positive for cocaine. In Kentucky, hospitals are required to report positive drug tests to Child Protective Services, and law enforcement agencies are notified of potential child abuse. “If a lady who is eight or nine months pregnant takes an illegal substance that they know will damage their child, I think they ought to be prosecuted,” Casey County Commonwealth’s attorney Brian Wright told a reporter at Louisville’s Courier-Journal.
Part of the problem here is that law enforcement lumps all illegal drugs together, making blanket references to babies who are born “drug addicted.” In fact, babies born with cocaine or crack cocaine in their systems are not physically “addicted” and do not suffer medical withdrawal, explains Hendree Jones, an associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences, gynecology, and obstetrics at Johns Hopkins University who researches the issue. Babies whose mothers were addicted to opiates like heroin can be born addicted and suffer withdrawal—but the two drugs have very different chemical responses and ought not be conflated.
In the scheme of things, the physical effects of cocaine exposure on a newborn are fairly minor. Barry Lester heads up the nation’s largest clinical trial of children exposed to cocaine in the womb and spends a lot of time undoing the “crack baby myth,” he says. In the ‘80s, researchers began doing animal studies on pregnant rats and mice to assess the in utero effects of cocaine. They saw all kinds of problems, from cardiac defects to physical malformations to brain damage. “But they were giving the animals huge, huge doses,” Lester says, “Nothing like the doses that humans take.”
SNL: Equal Opportunity Objectifiers
Jon Hamm spent most of the Saturday Night Live episode he hosted last night shirtless.
Confessions of a Woman Comedy Writer
Allison Silverman accepts one from New York Women in Film & Television (and tells us why it's rare).
Comments
Yes she should!
By: ronfranksjr | Sat, 03/20/2010 - 02:58
Abusing a fetus is absolutely disturbing when one considers the fact that women are free to abort it. The risk of the baby being born with life long disabilities and a drag on society. Whe one players roulette tipps with anothers health and safety one must pay! Roulette Gewinnt.
The prosecution is child abuse
By: nccpr | Tue, 01/12/2010 - 16:13
This prosecution should appall people on *all* sides of the abortion debate. The threat of such prosecutions is known to drive women away from prenatal care - and that is likely to be far more harmful to the fetus than cocaine use.
And after the birth, while the mother is in jail, where is the infant likely to go? America's chaotic system of foster care - even though a landmark study from the University of Florida found that the actual physical development of infants born with cocaine in their systems was worse for those placed in foster care than for those left with birth mothers able to care for them. In other words, the separation from the mothers is more toxic than the cocaine.
If Kentucky authorities really cared about the mothers or the children, they'd be taking all the time, money and effort wasted on these idiotic prosecutions and spending it to expand drug treatment.
Richard Wexler
Executive Director
National Coalition for Child Protection Reform
www.nccpr.info
Clever Doggie
By: Ricky119 | Mon, 01/11/2010 - 06:37
A butcher is working, and really busy. He notices a dog in his shop and shoos him away. Later, he notices the dog is back again. He walks over to the dog, and notices the dog has a note in his mouth. The butcher takes the note, and it reads, "Can I have 12 sausages and a leg of lamb, please."
The butcher looks, and lo and behold, in the dog's mouth, there is a ten dollar bill. So the butcher takes the money, puts the sausages and lamb in a bag, and places it in the dog's mouth. The butcher is very impressed, and since it's closing time, he decides to close up shop and follow the dog.
So, off he goes. The dog is walking down the street and comes to a crossing. The dog puts down the bag, jumps up and presses the crossing button.
Then he waits patiently, bag in mouth, for the lights to change. They do, and he walks across the road, with the butcher following. The dog then comes to a bus stop, and starts looking at the timetable.
______________________________________________________________________
breast augmentation los angeles
cosmetic surgery atlanta
cosmetic surgery tulsa
man boobs
Nose job los angeles
actually right to abortion makes this more interesting.
By: patron002 | Sun, 01/03/2010 - 21:35
Abusing a fetus is particularly disturbing when you consider the fact that women are free to abort the fetus. This woman does not have her hands tied, she could have ended the fetus, and no baby would have resulted, this woman decided to get pregnant, deliberately not get an abortion, and deliberately poison something she intended to carry to term, which then became human, so by letting the fetus become a baby she did abuse/torture/attempted to murder the baby. Now this becomes interesting because:
A. This would clearly increase the number of abortions, because crackheads and other substance abusers such alcoholics (fetal alcohol syndrome is proven)would need to get abortion or face the possibilities of severe criminal charges.
B. Abortion would actually become more legitimate as legal, because it would be a way to prevent child abuse. So strong pro lifers should actually be against this, and pro choicers should be for it.
C. The same elephant is still in the room, obviously a fetus should have some rights, and obviously women should have some rights. Animals have rights, so obviously fetuses should have at a minimum the same rights as animals. yet, obviously females have rights in this as well. Both sides refuse to admit this, worth make both sides a complete and total joke.
Vim is right. Fetuses dont
By: musa | Sun, 01/03/2010 - 00:30
Vim is right. Fetuses dont have legal rights and so women should have the freedom to live their lives. If that means poisoning fetuses, then....
Pro-Choice
By: Kry | Tue, 12/29/2009 - 14:46
I have to disagree with you vim. I am pro-choice as well and see this issue as something separate from the abortion issue. There is a matter of intent. This woman, who knew she did drugs, could have had an abortion. Instead, she went ahead and carried a child for 9 months while doing cocaine that could have resulted in long-term effects on her child. This is willful neglect. She knowingly endangered a child that she planned to have.
I would fight tooth and nail for her right to have an abortion but I can not stand behind her making decision that can negatively impact the life of another person when she choses to carry to term.
You correlated this to being overweight. I am overweight and have a 16 month old daughter. Because I intended (and desperately wanted) to carry her to term, which we all know will result in a human being with rights, I followed the diet laid out by my midwife. I would have hated to do something that would have resulted in her poor health. It's the same as not feeding my toddler a diet of McDonald's and Coke.
Intent is really the base here. If you intend to carry a fetus to full-term, you know that it will result in a person capable of being neglected. Therefore, neglect in the womb counts.
Fetuses are not babies
By: vim876 | Mon, 12/21/2009 - 16:10
Legally, fetuses are not babies. I am pro-choice for just this reason. Without legal protection of women's bodily autonomy, child-bearing is too easily turned into a way to enslave women. Disgusting.
I'm overweight. When I have kids, will they imprison me and force me to go on a legally regimented diet, too? Will they take my kid away? This is insane.