South Carolina Reverts to its Earlier, Medieval Approach to Drugs and Pregnancy

From AP [and that handy Google cache] via Art Caplan:

AIKEN - A 24-year-old Bath woman pleaded guilty in Aiken County Court recently to using cocaine while pregnant. That is not unusual, but her sentence was: She has to go on birth control. Julie Ann Horton became the first woman in Aiken County ordered to take birth control as part of a plea deal, a stipulation she agreed to so she could avoid jail time. She might not be the last.
Solicitor Barbara Morgan said her office is planning to offer plea deals to drug-addicted women that include birth control requirements, a decision that is being criticized as infringing on a woman's reproductive rights.
"That's like playing God when all you are is a judge," said Charleston attorney Susan Dunn, who has represented women charged with using drugs while pregnant.
However, Ms. Morgan said the new effort is about getting help for a woman's drug problem that has already resulted in her giving birth to a baby who tested positive for those illegal narcotics. It's not about sterilization, she said; the birth control is temporary and as of now, a voluntary part of plea deals.
An expectant mother who is using drugs cannot make the appropriate decisions for the health of her unborn child, she argued.
"Given a choice between drugs and a baby, the drugs always trump," Ms. Morgan said.
In South Carolina, women who deliver drug-positive babies are charged with unlawful conduct by a legal custodian, a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
Ms. Morgan said her office has prosecuted women who have had multiple babies test positive for drugs when they're born, and she predicts many women would agree to go on birth control if offered it as part of a plea deal.

Labels: drug addiction, mary faith marshall, pregnancy, south carolina

posted Feb 24, 2007 | link | jump to the comments (17)

comments

I believe that this is a good solution to this horrible situation.Eventhough I do believe this may help, I do have some concerns. I do not believe in legal abortion so I want to know how far will the courts go. I think that the birth control is a good plea deal. It is not killing a baby but hindering the birth of a child. I would be apposed to if the courts used abortion as a plea deal. I can't believe we can hand over a baby to a drug addicted mother and do nothing. I think that this would help and secure the safety of the children. Also, This is a choice not forced upon. Of course the courts know that the mother will take the deal but it seems the child is in their best interest.

- by Melissa on Feb 25, 2007 at 3:34 AM | link

I like the idea of birth control for addictive mothers as a plea bargain. It's the child of the addicted mother that suffers for his/her mother's irresponsibility. I think we are obligated to protect unborn children from such neglect. Inerfering with the chance of that mother becoming pregnant again is a good preventative step and since these mother's will most often choose drugs over the child, pregnancy should be prevented as a safeguard to harming the unborn child. This is a choice if accepted as part of a plea bargain but maybe there should be court orders as well. Mothers that can not give up while pregnant and keep having addicted babies with many health problems should be "forced" to keep from getting pregnant again.

- by Lisa (Gearhart) Campbell, RN on Feb 25, 2007 at 6:01 PM | link

I think that forcing women to go on birth control to avoid jail time is a good idea. It is a way to ensure that innocent children will not have to suffer the consequences of their irresponsible parent. It does not infringe on reproductive rights because as mentioned, it is not sterilization. Obviously, these women are not prepared to care for a child and if they were they would not be using drugs while pregnant. This is simply a good way to ensure that unwanted and unplanned pregnancies are prevented. They should also receive intensive drug rehab and prove to be clean and responsbible before being allowed to be off of the birth control.

- by Ashley M on Feb 26, 2007 at 3:11 PM | link

It seems that women's libbers can make phrases such as "infringing on a woman's reproductive rights" fit any situtation they choose. When abortion is the issue, they use such phrases to mean that it's the woman's CHOICE to decide whether or not to have an abortion. When J. Horton CHOSE to use birth control in a plea bargain to avoid jail time for using cocaine during her pregnancy, suddenly her CHOICE was deemed coerced. Frankly, I think she should have to take birth control AND do jail time. It appears to me that she weighed her options and she decided birth control would be better than a possible 10 years in prison. She could have said no to the birth control if she wanted to, so how is this infringing on her reproductive rights? She is not being sterilized; the birth control is a temporoary means of (hopefully)preventing another pregnancy until she can be drug-free. This may be the most responsible choice she has made in a long time. I think all states should adopt this approach to stopping drug users from becoming pregnant. In the long run, we could decrease the number of babies born addicted to drugs and decrease the number of unwanted "crack babies" in orphanages.

- by Karen Mikita on Feb 26, 2007 at 4:01 PM | link

I also agree with the judges decision to make these mothers that do drugs and have babies go on the pill.I am also against abortion and don't think that this is wrong or playing God.Like the judge said these moms think more about drugs then their babies its sad but I've meet alot of women who have lost their children to drugs and alchol after being given many chances to change and give up the drugs.

- by Lisa Taylor on Feb 26, 2007 at 4:40 PM | link

I think that having women take birth control is a very good idea. Birth control is not a permanent fix, it can be reversed whenever the woman wants. Having babies who are testing positive for drugs are a felony in South Carolina. I feel more states should have this law. It is not fair to the child who did not ask for that. I don't think the judge is playing God, they are not ordering sterilization.

- by Vanessa Nolf on Feb 26, 2007 at 6:39 PM | link

I feel this is a good punishment for such a horrible sitiation. I do not agree with her having a "drug problem" as an excuse. There are tons of women that smoke but are able to fight the addiction while being pregnant and choose NOT to smoke durning pregnancy. I feel it all comes down to will power and the power of ones mind. Even if you were to throw her into jail for 10yrs she could get out after 10yrs and just do it all over again. If it were up to me she would have her tubes tied so that she would never be able to make such a horrible mistake again.

- by Scot Guidash on Feb 26, 2007 at 7:07 PM | link

What a fabulous idea! If the woman can not be responsible for her own drug crazed behavior, she shouldn't be allowed to pro-create and bring a drug addicted baby into the world. Who would care for the baby? Why the hard working tax payers. A foster parent would help the child through withdrawal and then the child would probably be handed back to the mother or father to be raised in who knows what kind of environment.

- by Joyce on Feb 26, 2007 at 8:38 PM | link

Wow. Unanimous approval here so far. What are the odds?
South Carolina has some seriously bad history in its pursuit of women who use drugs and who are also pregnant or potentially pregnant. Requiring any sort of medication or medical treatment as a condition of a legal agreement is going to be fraught with all kinds of issues, most of them having to do with free and informed consent and the ability to have the right to control what should happen to one's own body. Taking drugs does not, in its entirety, eliminate the right of people to control their own bodies. Clearly there are questions of potential coercion that would have to be addressed here and, given the history in South Carolina, I'd be skeptical at best that they're being addressed well.

- by Chris on Feb 27, 2007 at 3:48 AM | link

I don't see a problem with having birth control as part of the plea agreement - my question is how is it going to be enforced? Will the woman be compelled to have exams, or is she receiving a type of birth control that lasts for a specified length of time? Is South Carolina picking up the tab? Is jail time required if the woman goes off birth control? There are many questions surrounding this issue.

- by rbilan on Feb 27, 2007 at 12:04 PM | link

I think that if these drug addicts choose birth control they are making the right decision for everyone around them. In the end it is the children who suffer from their mothers' bad decisions and I am glad to see that someone else sees it. Maybe I'm being too harsh, but I think these women should go on birth control AND serve some time in jail. Afterall, they know that using drugs is illegal, but they are also putting a baby's life at risk, so to me, there is more than one illegal action.

- by A.Patton on Feb 27, 2007 at 3:50 PM | link

I dont think the judge is playing God by making the woman go on birth control, the concern here is protecting the person from having a baby who would having to ensure all kinds of complications that comes with cocaine use. As I just learned, cocaine use by a pregnant mother causes hypertension and decreased uterine blood flow, which in turn can cause cerebral infarcts, renal defects, cardiac anomalies, low birth weight, and these babies would have a high risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). If the mother does not want to stop using the drug, at lest the baby would be protected. I dont know what kind of birth control, Im assuming something like Depo and not a pill because the person could neglect to take it, especially when they are under the influence. But my fear is, what kind of message it that sending to the addicts? Would they say its alright to use cocaine as long as they are not reproducing? And there are a lot of other people who endanger their unborn children in many other ways; how about them? But I dont stand that the world is not perfect, you just have to do what you can. Another thing, what if the woman is Catholic? That could be interesting!

- by Althea on Feb 27, 2007 at 10:16 PM | link

I think this is a good start to dealing with women using drugs while pregnant. Although it seems like the women are getting off pretty easy. The birth control is a good idea but I think they still need to face some prison time as well.

- by Samantha on Mar 3, 2007 at 12:29 AM | link

So are they planning to drug test every baby in S.C., or will they target poor and minority women and let middle and upper class white women go free?
While commenters assume the mother is "drug crazed" or otherwise unfit, it's not even clear from this article what the woman did to draw the drug test, or if this is common, and I highly doubt (because of the cost-benefit ratio, for starters) that it is universal.
It's probably best not to use narcotics while pregnant, but a ten-year sentence for exposing a fetus to a minimal risk smacks of overkill.

- by Adam on Mar 9, 2007 at 6:45 PM | link

So much for the punishment fitting the crime! I would worry that the mother got off too easy more than I would focus on civil liberties. If this line of thought is extrapolated upon, then a pregnant woman could be forced to be on birth control after engaging in any at risk behavior - smoking, riding a motorcycle without a helmet, unprotected sex - if it could be proven that it affected the baby. How is birth control a punishment? And, who is paying for it?

- by Holly James on Mar 19, 2007 at 11:41 PM | link

This is a very difficult problem. Do we sterilize the mother or put them on birth control so they don't have addicted children? Does the mother keep the child? Should the mother be convicted of reckless endangerment or child abuse? It seems this is a suitable way to stop addicted mothers from having addicted children but when does the birth control stop? After the mother is drug free for several years, forever? All I can say is something needs to be done. Our health care system has enough problems reducing its funds let alone caring for an addicted child. Worse it was not the child's choice.

- by V K Rhoads on Mar 21, 2007 at 6:46 PM | link

I think that it is a good plan to be set in place. It would be a very successful plea bargain and if they are willing to harm the life of and unborn child then they should be made to take birth control to prevent children. Although, how will it be ensured that each woman is taking birth control? Will there be routine testing or will they rely on the shot in which the woman would have to make an office visit every 3 months?

- by coleman on Mar 25, 2007 at 10:12 PM | link