new TN drug law tests infants, sends moms to jail

[niyad]

CHICAGO (WOMENSENEWS)-- Tennessee prosecutors recently announced that they would temporarily delay pursuing assault charges against Mallory Loyola, the first woman arrested under a new Tennessee law designed to prosecute women for "assault . . . while pregnant" if a newborn tests positive for drugs.

Under a deal, she will remain in custody until a bed opens up for her in a Knoxville treatment facility, with her hearing postponed until February, when prosecutors will decide whether to proceed after assessing her progress in rehab, Reuters reported.
This is a step in the right direction, but it also underscores the problem. What we need are more drug treatment facility beds, not more beds in prisons. That's not only humane, it saves money.
In one particularly rigorous study, researchers found that if just 10 percent of eligible offenders were treated in community-based programs instead of going to prison, the criminal justice system would save $4.8 billion. Treating 40 percent would boost savings to an astonishing $12.9 billion.

. . .


There is also the matter of basic fairness. Unless there has been an immaculate conception, why is there not a male responsibility component for protection of the unborn child? In cases where the father is a drug abuser who may have encouraged the mother's addiction, is he not at least as culpable?


Finally, laws like this can only contribute to the skyrocketing number of poor, addicted and abused women--often mothers--populating the nation's prisons. The number of children under age 18 with a mother in prison more than doubled between 1991 and 2007. All in all, the number of women in prison increased more than sevenfold between 1980 and 2010, growing from just over 15,000 to close to 113,000. The vast majority of incarcerated women have been victims of domestic or sexual abuse.

. . .

http://womensenews.org/story/crime-policylegislation/140915/new-drug-law-tests-infants-sends-moms-jail#.VBioOFe9a1c

[williesgirl]

1. It may also result in more births at home.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

2. And more abortions.

By addicted women who don't want to face criminal charges.

Another screwed up law brought to you by RW theocrats.

[kickysnana]

4. +1 for both posts above.

[hifiguy]

5. Yep.

[badtoworse]

3. It's complicated. I fully agree that a woman using drugs while pregnant is guilty of child abuse.

I think it should be treated as a criminal matter, but I don't feel qualified to opine on whether prison is the best option. I think the mother should have a chance to get clean, but if the mother continues to abuse drugs, then the state has an obligation to protect the child and the mother should go to jail and the baby should become a ward of the state.

This should be interesting. There have been threads yesterday wherein posters where arguing that a fetus is not a child. How would they reconcile that position with laws that consider drug abuse while pregnant to be child abuse. If it's not child abuse, what is it?

ETA: There are probable cause issues involved that need to be considered. To simplify the discussion, I haven't addressed that, but it's certainly an important consideration. It's a separate discussion.

[moriah]

6. The issue with addiction is that women will NOT get the help....

... if they're criminalized for it. I'm not speaking from a position of ignorance on the subject, either. Both my little brother and sister will never live independently, as a result of their egg donor's substance abuse.

Focusing on criminal liability rather than treatment is the issue I have with these laws.