Posted on: Wednesday, September 17, 2003
EDITORIAL
Punishing the pregnant is counterproductive
Now that we've read the excruciating details, in the Advertiser series "Children of Ice," of what youngsters suffer when their parents fall victim to crystal methamphetamine's overpowering sway, it's natural to call for laws to break this devastating cycle.
Some prosecutors advocate passing a law that would authorize Child Protective Services to force pregnant drug users into treatment as part of taking steps "in the best interest of the child." As it stands, CPS only can get involved after the child is born.
But before we sign on to such a campaign, let's consider the ramifications of aggressively going after pregnant drug users.
From a law enforcement perspective, it seems a sensible route to stop the proliferation of drug-exposed babies. But from both civil libertarian and public health perspectives, it's a slippery slope. Not only would such intervention violate privacy, but on a practical level, it could drive drug-using pregnant women underground instead of steering them toward prenatal care and treatment.
Moreover, pre-birth intervention could ultimately undermine a woman's right to a safe and legal abortion because it would elevate the legal status of a fetus to that of a child, thus turning abortion into the taking of human life.
The Bush administration has already moved in that direction, allowing "unborn children" to qualify for government health benefits.
A California woman last year was convicted of second-degree murder after her 3-month-old son died of an overdose of drugs he consumed through breast milk. Had he died in utero, she could not have been charged with such a crime in California.
That's not the case in South Carolina, where a woman was convicted of homicide by child abuse in 2001 for killing her unborn fetus by smoking crack cocaine. She was sentenced to 12 years in state prison. South Carolina treats drug addiction during pregnancy as child neglect and imprisons the mother.
Do we really want to follow in South Carolina's footsteps? Of course we want to protect drug-exposed babies so they won't go on to suffer from developmental and behavioral problems that land them in foster care and special education. But any such effort must be focused on treatment rather than punishment.
Addiction is a disease that unleashes overwhelming biochemical cravings, and should be treated as such. And that's why medical intervention would be more effective.
Granted, pregnant ice users are less likely than most to seek medical care.
Perhaps it's time to launch a fleet of Maternal Outreach Mobile ("mom") vans that can visit high-drug-use communities and offer pregnant women free basic health screenings, counseling and encouragement.
Some mothers might ultimately thank CPS for forcing them into treatment. But we'll bet that most would rebel, and that's not a good foundation for rehabilitation.
