The war on women is moving on up the stream at a rapid clip. The issue of women testing positive for drugs and/or/both alcohol when pregnant is the latest and greatest way to ensure that we are kept home knocked up and locked up behind the stove or behind bars, whichever.
The irony is that while the laws discussed in the below editorial and this article in Rolling Stone about this new war (move on past the rape one as we all need to) discusses how these laws are largely directed to the poor who are also the more highly prescribed people when it comes to opiates during pregnancy. Irony or is that a conflict of interest? So the Doctor gives you Percocet for the pain and in turn you become addicted, test positive and the OB/GYN calls the cops. I see this very Lion King and circle of life.
And add to that the many women are still shackled during labor and in turn during birth. Nothing says this bitch might escape during labor. Further indignities and shame is what our prison system is all about. Well mostly it is about profit the rest is a bonus!
How Not to Protect Pregnant Women
By DEBORAH TUERKHEIMER
APRIL 13, 2015
The New York Times
Opinion
CHICAGO — IN the wake of a savage attack on a pregnant woman and the removal of her fetus, Colorado lawmakers are planning to introduce a bill that would criminalize fetal homicide. If the bill passes, the state would join nearly 40 others that make fetuses a distinct class of victims. (The federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 similarly makes it a crime to kill or injure a fetus in certain circumstances.)
This would not be the first time that lawmakers exploited an extraordinary incident of violence against a pregnant woman to promote the rights of fetal victims. In 2009, Indiana, for example, passed a draconian fetal homicide law after a horrific shooting of a bank teller who was pregnant with twins.
This type of legislation, however, is not about protecting the rights and well-being of the pregnant woman. Rather the reverse: The risk is that, without statutory reform, the pregnant woman as a category of victim will remain overlooked, while the fetus gets special protection.
Opposition to the creation of fetal victimhood has focused largely on the threat to abortion rights. This is a legitimate concern, but affording victim status to a fetus has implications beyond the erosion of abortion rights. Legally severing a fetus from the pregnant woman has the effect of pitting her interests against the fetus’s.
Over time, this move has increased the state’s power to interfere in the lives of pregnant women. Hence the experience of Alicia Beltran, who, in Wisconsin in 2013, during the second trimester of her pregnancy, was arrested and forced to enter inpatient drug treatment for a past pill addiction.
Granting personhood to fetuses makes women criminally responsible, not only for the life of the fetus, but also for its well-being. This is a particularly high burden. Pregnancy in our society tends to be idealized and women counted on to provide a perfect uterine environment.
Fetal rights can be employed to justify punishing any deviation from this standard. This is not hypothetical: Pregnant women have already been prosecuted for using drugs, refusing a cesarean section, having sex against a doctor’s recommendation and attempting suicide.
Prosecutors could, in theory, use the notion of “prenatal abuse” to pursue pregnant women who consumed too little folic acid; neglected exercise; gained too much or too little weight; continued on a course of anti-depressants; or had a stressful job. Under the mantle of fetal protection, pregnancy could become subject not only to criminal sanction but to pervasive state regulation.
In reality, those who are targeted by government intervention on behalf of the unborn tend to be the vulnerable and marginalized. In recent decades, hundreds of women, disproportionately low-income and African-American, have been prosecuted or subjected to court orders over behaviors like drug use that are considered a risk to developing fetuses. Often, these women are themselves victims of violence during pregnancy.
Of course, the impulse to punish violence against pregnant women differently is widely shared and understandable. In the case of the Colorado stabbing, the victim, Michelle Wilkins, suffered an injury that was entirely entwined with her pregnancy, an injury not specified in the statutes covering assault and attempted murder that already carry lengthy prison sentences.
Granting fetuses victim status, however, does not address the core harm. When violence is done to a pregnant woman, her reproductive freedom is trampled.
A woman who is assaulted while pregnant reasonably fears the consequences for a pregnancy that she has chosen to carry to term. Abuse during pregnancy can cause miscarriage and stillbirth, as well as maternal substance use, delayed entry into prenatal care and low birth weight. The victim’s interest in her developing fetus is thus violated.
The law should provide a remedy. Reform matters because abuse of pregnant women is so common. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that more than 300,000 pregnant women a year are victims of domestic violence. Unlike headline-grabbing cases like the Colorado attack, violence against pregnant women is usually inflicted not by strangers, but by current or former partners.
Yet the criminal law largely fails to account for how the fact of pregnancy defines the harm experienced by these women. Instead, Congress and most states have passed feticide laws. (A few states simply apply tougher penalties for existing offenses if the death or injury of a pregnant victim is involved.)
Only a few jurisdictions criminalize acts that cause a pregnant woman to lose her pregnancy. In 2013, Colorado enacted a crime of “unlawful termination of pregnancy” that expressly recognizes the pregnant woman as the victim of violence. Other states should follow suit and reject the wrongheaded logic of maternal-fetal conflict behind the new Colorado proposal.
That would be a start, but not sufficient. Cases of violence against pregnant women that don’t involve loss of pregnancy still lie largely beyond the reach of the law. A separate crime of assault on a pregnant woman would establish that a woman has a stake in her pregnancy, an interest worth protecting.
Off the Rack Publishing 