Drug addicted mothers: Prosecuting to protect the unborn - Term Paper Example

?Running Head: ARGUMENT PAPER Drug addicted mothers: Prosecuting to protect the unborn Drug addicted mothers: Prosecuting to protect the unborn Introduction Drug addiction is a social problem that causes a myriad of problems for the individual, close family and friends, and for society. Drug addiction is defined by its nature as a disease, however in not managing her disease a mother willingly puts her child at risk. One of the most heinous problems concerning drug addiction is when a woman becomes pregnant. Women who are pregnant and indulging in drug addiction behaviors are risking the welfare of their fetus and exposing them to risks which can include long term care problems. In addition, a drug addicted woman is not centered on the welfare of her child and therefore must be considered an ill suited mother for that child. The costs in health care for a child who is suffering from the affects of drug addiction can be brutal to the system. However, there are also concerns with centering drug related penalties only on women when it is not a circumstance shared by both genders. In addition, there are social issues in focusing laws on women in regard to drug use and pregnancy. Still, the use of drugs when pregnant causes enough problems that criminality must be used where social services cannot serve the needs of an addicted pregnant mother. Drug addiction The National Institute on Drug Abuse defines drug addiction as “a chronic relapsing brain disease that is characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use despite harmful consequences” (Abadinsky, 2011, p. 4). Abuse is defined differently and must be distinguished from addiction. Abuse is use in a manner that is not congruent with the proper use of a drug or substance. Therefore, while a drug addict may engage in drug abuse, abusing drugs does not automatically mean that the user is an addict. Drug use is defined by “the use of psychoactive chemicals, licit or illicit, can be objectively labeled drug abuse only when the user becomes dysfunctional as a consequence, for example is unable to maintain employment, has impaired social relationships, exhibits dangerous - reckless or aggressive - behavior, and/or significantly endangers his or her health“ (Adabinsky, 2011, p. 4). Therefore, drug use can lead to abuse, which can lead to addiction. Using drugs, whether they are prescribed, over the counter, or illegal, can lead to drug abuse. Cough syrup with high levels of alcohol can be abused just as pain medication for injuries can lead to abuse. Use does not mean abuse, but you must use to abuse. In addition, abuse does not suggest an addiction, but it can certainly lead to an addiction. Therefore, in order to define how a mother interacts with drugs during her pregnancy, one must understand the various types of drug usage and their implications. There are three levels of effect where drug abuse is concerned. There is the level of negative effects that the use of drugs will have upon an individual who misuses substances and consequently experiences both social and physical ramifications. In addition, the effects on the user can be a source of problems for loved ones and those that the user interacts within society, including family, friends, and co-workers. The third level of interaction is with society. The effects of using drugs provides social problems that must be addressed through society decision. An example of a social decision about drug use is that being a drug addict qualifies a member of the American society as eligible for social security benefits, although that eligibility was rescinded in 1996 (Erkulwater, 2006, p. 138). The female addict According to Council of Europe & Co-operation Group to Combat Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking in Drugs (2000), the female drug addicts have a slightly higher education than male drug abusers but are less able to earn a living through regular work. Drug addicted women see their position in society similarly to the way in which non-drug addicted women see their gender role. Women have the capacity to see their role in society beyond that of being a drug addict, a state that men do not often share. Men will more often identify solely with their drug abuse, where women will still identify with some of their other potential roles in society, including one as mother. Pregnancy will often inspire women to try and clean up their addictions and re-enter society as contributing members through their role as mother, where fatherhood rarely has the same effect. There are some differences in the way that male addiction is approached in comparison to how female addiction is approached. The surrender that is required during recovery is relevant to the struggle for empowerment within society. Women already labor under the imposed disparity of power between male and female gender and must relinquish what power they have when facing addiction. Consequently, self-esteem issues are much more complex for women than for men and require the use of empowerment in other areas of life in addition to the surrender of control where the drug addiction behaviors are concerned. Many behaviors that are primarily female oriented, such as cutting, anorexia dieting controls, and impulsive issues due to control, are suggestive of issues of vulnerability where the actor in these behaviors uses this ability to control their fate in order to relieve the power of oppression in other areas of their lives. Drug addiction can be tied to these control issues and are much more complex because of them (Straussner, & Brown, 2002, p. 28). There is a unique social impact that occurs where women addicts are concerned. According to DeKeseredy and Perry (2006), female addicts are more often ashamed of the ways in which they are forced to make a living to support their habit then they are for the habit. Their identity becomes centered on their profession, whether that be as a prostitute, a dealer, or through some other form of humiliating and socially unacceptable form of employment. The longer a woman participates in the shameful form of commercial activity which very often means they have sold their bodies as a commodity, the more isolated and alienated they will become within the social environment. Therefore, social networks begin to tighten so that they only include addicts, creating safety network among female addicts, but not necessarily creating a safe world. Pregnancy and drug addiction Understanding the social ramifications for women is imperative to understanding the effect that pregnancy can have on the female addict. In a world where almost all social roles are no longer available, the last role that seems viable outside of the identity that has formed through addiction is that of mother. Therefore, pregnancy can provide a very strong motivator in making changes in regard to addiction. Women have an new opportunity to re-establish their identity through a socially elevated position within society. The woman has the ability to focus her attention on her pregnancy, using the changes in her body as a force from which to beat her addiction and make positive changes in her life. Motherhood is a powerful force in a woman’s life and has the ability to move mountains of obstacles that might otherwise seem insurmountable. However, the problem with this wonderful power is that the initial problems of drug addiction have often done too much damage to the fetus well before theses ’mountains’ have begin to budge. A fetus passively receives all drugs that a woman puts into her system. Therefore, even prescription drugs are listed as “presumed safe” rather than as safe for pregnant women to take because there are always possible consequences for substances that pass from the mother to the fetus (Blackburn, 2007, p. 221). Drugs such as cigarettes and alcohol, even as they are legal in their use will affect the growth of a fetus. Cigarettes can have the effect of low birth weight, increased complications in with the pregnancy such as ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage, and disruption of cell replication. Alcohol can have severe affects on the development of the brain of an infant, including Fetal Alcohol Syndrome which creates a host of problems. Therefore, the effects of illegal drugs that have far more serious effects to adult addicts will have serious complications for a fetus who is exposed to this kind of abuse. Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome occurs when a series of withdrawal symptoms are observed in neonates after birth. When fetuses are exposed to opiates such as heroin, cocaine, methadone, ethanol and barbiturates, will exhibit “hypersensitivity, respiratory distress, autonomic dysfunction, and GI disturbances” (Blackburn, 2007, p. 221). The problems can also be much more severe. Birth defects, learning disorders, developmental delays in addition to serious physical disabilities that require lifelong care can be the result of drug addiction behaviors in pregnant women (O’Reilly, 2010). Prosecuting Mothers There are several types of laws that are used to prosecute women in regard to drug use while pregnant. A positive drug test will automatically trigger neglect investigations and possibly result in the child being taken into foster care. In New York City, this policy resulted in quadrupling the number of neglect complaints within the city (Ehrenreich, 2006, p. 373). There are debates in cities across the country that suggests that evidence of drug use should automatically result in the state taking the child without having to prove the mother unfit. Another form of protection that is put into place is the ’protective incarceration’ which places a drug addicted women who is pregnant into jail for the duration of her pregnancy. The benefit of this form of protection is that the woman is ensured of having little to no access to drugs and will get proper prenatal care. In a case in Washington D.C. in 1988, a woman who had written $700 in bad checks was placed into ’protective incarceration’ because when she went before the judge, he saw that she had tested positive for cocaine use. While the prosecutor had agreed to probation, the judge saw a larger issue and acted to protect the fetus (Ehrenreich, 2006). On July 13, 1989, a landmark decision in regard to the state’s right to impose sobriety on pregnant mothers occurred. A woman was charged with delivering a controlled substance to her two children because there was medical evidence that she had smoked crack cocaine before delivering each of her children. While the children did not show any effects from the abuse of drugs by their mother, prosecutors invented a way to charge her for the crime. His argument was that after the child was born, the transferring of fluids via the umbilical cord was still occurring, thus she was delivering drugs into the system of her just born children. The woman was sentenced to one year of residential care in a treatment facility and fourteen years of probation, presumably to cover the formative years of the lives of her children (Ehrenreich, 2006). The Medical University of South Carolina, in cooperation with law enforcement, put together a program in order to prosecute women who were actively using drugs during their pregnancies. Women who tested positive for crack cocaine use when they gave birth were arrested immediately after giving birth. An amnesty program was put in place in conjunction with the potential arrest that provided for the woman to have an opportunity to enter treatment, but refusal or failure to do so would result in immediate arrest. As well, if a test for drugs came back positive during the treatment period, there was no second chance. Some women were arrested post giving birth, letting them wait out their time in a jail cell until they were close to delivering (Ehrenreich, 2006). There are some problems with the methods that were used in South Carolina. Children were born under bad circumstances as sometimes the mothers were still in handcuffs during their labor and during the birth. There are horror stories of being told to dress within hours of giving birth and taken to jail without proper preparation for the fluids that would continue to flow after giving birth. As well, children who were born to these mothers were not allowed to have that initial bonding time with their mothers as the mothers were taken to jail, thus children who had little to no effect from the drug use of their mothers were still not allowed initial bonding that is important to newborns. There were 44 women arrested under this collaborative effort and all but one of the women were African American (Ehrenreich, 2006). This suggests that there are serious social problems in the way that such laws have been administered. However, it does not suggest that they should not be in place in order to protect the children who are affected by mothers who are using drugs. Because there are no social programs that specifically address the problem of pregnant, drug addicted mothers, law must step in to provide some sort of a solution. Although the collaboration in South Carolina was extreme, the type of effort was a sound idea. Law enforcement with the cooperation of medical personnel have the greatest opportunity in addressing the issue of women who are using drugs during their pregnancy. While not all children born to drug addicted mothers have obvious ill effects from that use, the future of a child with a mother who is using drugs does not bode well. Therefore, since rehabilitation facilities will have little to do with the problems of an addicted mother, the law must step in and take charge of the situation. Long term care Women who are addicted to drugs are less likely to have health insurance to cover the costs of giving birth. In addition, the length of time that care is needed for children who are suffering the effects of withdrawal will be longer than that of a healthy child. The costs to society for children who will need long term care for disabilities that will never allow them to lead independent lives is devastating to the health care system. According to O’Reilly (2010), children of drug addicted mothers are more far more likely to lose their children into the foster care program than non-drug addicted mothers. Children with special needs in the foster care program will wait to be placed an average of 27 months, with more severe special needs lingering for a much longer time in state institutions. In state systems where direct adoptions are possible, children are placed more quickly, however the severity of the problems often mean that children are left in places that are burdened by too many children in need and not enough resources. In addition, in the foster care system, the state is responsible for the medical bills of a child in foster care, creating a steep financial burden on the state (Brodzinsky & Brodzinsky, 1998) The alternative arguments One of the primary problems with prosecuting pregnant women for addiction is that it is a sexist approach to a problem that is the result of a mutual decision that led to procreation. Women are not the only participant in the creation of life, however, they are the only ones who are prosecuted for the socially disruptive behavior of drug addiction behaviors during pregnancy. In addition, the vulnerability of drug addicted women provides for sexual vulnerability that puts into question the consent issue where intercourse is concerned. Therefore, there is some social concerns in prosecuting women who may have been victims from the beginning of the process of pregnancy and are continuing to be victimize by the nature of addiction. The victimization continues through the prosecution process, the male counterparts long forgotten and without any responsibility for the condition of the child. In punishing women who are pregnant, a discrepancy occurs in social order. According to Solinger (1998), “It is important to recognize at the outset that the prosecutions are based in part on a woman’s pregnancy and not on her illegal drug use alone” (p. 134). Punishments for pregnant women are typically more harsh than those on men and women who do not have the complication of pregnancy. Being pregnant increases a woman’s chance of being prosecuted and her only real recourse for preventing prosecution is to abort the child. According to Solinger (1998), most rehabilitation centers will not take women who are pregnant and even if she is able to discontinue her drug use, drug use from early in the pregnancy may result in prosecution. Gray (2001), 67% of all drug rehabilitation centers will not take pregnant women with 84% refusing to take crack addicted pregnant women (129). The choice to have the child is penalized, no matter what the end outcome of the mother’s efforts to end her drug addiction problem which is nearly impossible to accomplish through rehabilitation aid. Additionally, these laws that allow for the prosecution of drug addicted women who have babies is proportionally prejudiced against African American women. According to Adkins and Skeggs (2005), African American women are seven times more likely to be prosecuted and incarcerated for drug addiction during pregnancy than are Caucasian women. The problems that this brings forward are complex and multiple, creating social issues. The first level of concern is that it target only women, an aspect that is biologically determined, but still presents a gender related prejudice. The second problem is that it targets more African American women than Caucasian women, suggesting that legislatures are trying to encourage African American women to abort their children. The third problem that the laws project is that children who are possibly ill or malformed should not be brought into the world. Adkins and Skaggs (2005) propose that the law is “a protection of society against degenerate black fetuses who will be burdensome black infants” (p. 137). From a sociological point of view, the problems that arise from the effect on society of sending the message that being female, African American, and drug addicted means that you are subject to legal recourse in protecting society against the fetus, is an issue that provides a complicated assessment of the laws concerning drug addiction and pregnancy. However, that social issues are present does not mean that the laws against drug abuse while pregnant should be changed. However, it does mean that the relevant social issues should be as harshly addressed for Caucasian women, for the fathers of these children, and in providing protections that do not include the encouragement of abortion. Conclusion While there is a discriminatory factor in prosecuting women who are addicted to drugs while they are pregnant, a social solution to the problem is not available for the problem. Without prosecution, children are left in homes where drug addiction will continue to be a problem and where frightening realities can be at the center of the child’s experience due to criminal behaviors of their parents in regard to their addiction. Additionally, children of mothers who exhibit drug addiction behaviors during pregnancy are likely to have physical problems that are associated with her drug use. These problems result in medical problems that cost the public a great deal of money, a situation that was preventable through responsible behavior during pregnancy. As well, the pain of children who are born addicted or who have disabilities because of addicted mothers could also have been prevented. Prosecution of women who continue to use drugs during pregnancy is the only social means with which to attempt to prevent other from using drugs during pregnancy. References Abadinsky, H. (2011). Drug use and abuse: A comprehensive introduction. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Adkins, L., & Skeggs, B. (2005). Feminism after Bourdieu. Boston: Blackwell Publishing. Blackburn, S. T. (2007). Maternal, fetal, & neonatal physiology: A clinical perspective. St. Louis, Mo: Saunders Elsevier. Brodzinsky, D., & Brodzinsky, A. B. (1998). Children's adjustment to adoption: Developmental and clinical issues. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications. Council of Europe & Co-operation Group to Combat Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking in Drugs (Pompidou Group). (2000). Pregnancy and drug misuse: Update 2000 ; proceedings. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Pub. DeKeseredy, W. S., & Perry, B. (2006). Advancing critical criminology: Theory and application. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Ehrenreich, N. (2008). The reproductive rights reader. New York: New York University Press. Erkulwater, J. L. (2006). Disability rights and the American social safety net. Ithaca, N.Y. [u.a.: Cornell University Press. Gray, J. P. (2001). Why our drug laws have failed and what we can do about it: A judicial indictment of the War on Drugs. Philadelphia, Pa: Temple Univ. Press. O'Reilly, A. (2010). Encyclopedia of motherhood. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications. Solinger, R. (1998). Abortion wars: A half century of struggle, 1950 - 2000. Berkeley, Calif.: Univ. of California Press. Straussner, S. L. A., & Brown, S. (2002). The handbook of addiction treatment for women. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Read More