1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP

One Pregnant Woman's Death Reveals the Cost of Devaluing Women

By talltom, Jan 17, 2013 | | |
Rating:
5/5,
  1. talltom
    I don’t like war metaphor. I prefer to think about reproductive justice advocacy in terms of healing and love. But when our nonsensical policies on drugs and reproductive health claim the lives of living, breathing people, it feels like a war.

    Jamie Lynn Russell was 33 years old when she went to an emergency room in Pauls Valley, Oklahoma in such debilitating pain that she was unable to move. Because her excruciating pain prevented her from lying down for an examination, hospital staff labeled her “noncompliant,” and called the police. The police discovered that she had two pain pills that weren’t hers. Still in pain, she was released by the hospital as “fit to incarcerate,” arrested for drug possession, and taken to jail, where she died two hours later from a ruptured ectopic pregnancy.

    Two pain pills.

    Much of the initial response to the case centered around the actions of the hospital, which likely amount to malpractice. But we must avoid making the mistake that the hospital did: looking at individual actions when they are merely symptoms of deeper, deadlier problems.

    Jamie’s needless death shows us where our priorities lie, misplaced: chasing down minor drug offenders in service of a failed war on drugs is more important that human life and dignity; women’s health is not taken seriously and “noncompliance” is cause for punishment. The tragedy of her death once again disproves the myth that women never need abortions and that “modern technology and science” have eliminated maternal mortality.

    I hope that her family—and people across Oklahoma and the United States—will demand justice for Jamie so that she is not just another unnamed casualty of the many political and rhetorical wars waged on pregnant women.

    Farah Diaz-Tello,
    National Advocates for Pregnant Women
    January 14, 2013

    http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/01/11/dehumanizing-pregnant-women-leads-to-real-loss-life

Comments

  1. talltom
    Pregnant Pauls Valley Woman Dies in Jail

    A Pauls Valley Oklahoma family is forced to deal with tragedy after a 33-year-old mother dies from a medical condition while being held at the Garvin County jail.

    The victim in this case is Jamie Lynn Russell.

    Jamie also used the last name of Fisher.Her death came just hours after she went to the hospital seeking help for severe abdominal pain. “Jamie was seeking help; she was in extreme pain,” family friend Kemper Kimberlin said.

    Hospital staff reported Jamie wouldn’t cooperate, in too much pain to even lie down, so employees asked a Pauls Valley police officer to assist.

    Unfortunately, when police found two prescription pills that didn’t belong to Jamie, police took her to jail for drug possession. That’s where Jamie sat for less than two hours before being found unresponsive.

    “There is nothing my staff in the jail could’ve done differently,” Garvin County sheriff Larry Rhodes said.

    Sheriff Rhodes points out the hospital staff authorized Jamie’s release to their custody.

    “She had a medical release from the hospital stating that she was fit for incarceration,” Rhodes said.

    The state medical examiner’s office confirms Jamie died from a ruptured ectopic pregnancy, where an embryo implants outside the uterus.

    “It’s very regrettable for the family,” Rhodes said. “My heart and prayers go out to them.”

    Still, those who knew Jamie blame the hospital staff, not the sheriff, for neglecting to care for the 33-year-old pregnant mother.

    “We want to see this come to light,” Kemper said. “Something’s wrong and needs to be fixed.”

    The sheriff did call in the OSBI to investigate. A spokesperson for that agency said their investigation is basically complete. They did not find any criminal wrongdoing on the part of the jail staff.

    KFOR-TV, Oklahoma City
    January 7, 2013

    http://kfor.com/2013/01/07/pregnant-pauls-valley-mother-dies-in-jail/
  2. SpatialReason
    I was just there a few weeks ago driving back from Ardmore. Thanks Oklahoma... your moralistic approach to pain killer abuse has just killed a child and mother.

    I live where you can get life for producing hashish, you die if you have pills that aren't yours, and if you accidentally buy Pseudophed and a Coleman latern in the same shopping cart, you might see two felonies.

    This is angering me to hell and back.
  3. talltom
    From Dwindling Abortions to Drug Tests: Are Pregnant Women Second Class Citizens?

    Here we are, forty years on from Roe, and there is widespread agreement: abortion rights are as flimsy as ever, and access for 80% of America is a joke. Women are turning to DIY methods to avoid the clinic humiliations and logistical nightmares. Planned Parenthood is scrapping the word “choice” from their verbiage. Time magazine reports generational “infighting” that threatens to tear down the pro-abortion establishment.

    Yes, now is a good time to admit failure. But the failure is much bigger than simply abortion rights: we've failed to protect pregnant women's rights.

    Last week, the National Advocates for Pregnant Women released a report whose title is as frightening as its contents: “Arrests of and forced interventions on pregnant women in the United States 1973-2005” published in the Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law. The report documents more than 400 cases where women have been locked up in jail or psych wards or forced to undergo medical intervention while carrying wanted pregnancies (and they've unearthed 250 more in the last 7 years, which did not make it into the report).

    Some highlights: A woman gets pregnant while on Depo Provera, miscarries, and is imprisoned for a year on murder charges; a woman is involuntarily committed because she failed to get a recommended follow-up test for gestational diabetes; a woman planning a home birth is court-ordered to undergo a cesarean and taken against her will to the hospital for forced surgery.

    These cases are largely based on legal theory that gives a woman's pregnancy more constitutional rights than herself, theory which has given rise to “fetal personhood” campaigns and “unborn victims of violence” acts. Women are being charged with “child” abuse in utero because of something they swallowed or snorted, or forced to undergo medical intervention on behalf of their fetus. Just last week, the Supreme Court of Alabama held up the conviction of a woman who gave birth prematurely based on a statute that makes it a crime to bring a child to a meth lab. In other words, she was the meth lab.

    Yes, it's sad and disturbing when pregnancy mixes with addiction, depression, selfishness, or ignorance, but so far it's not illegal—and for good reason. If we treat fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses as separate individuals, explains NAPW founder and study coauthor Lynn Paltrow, then pregnant women's rights go out the window. “We are not just talking about abortion rights, we are not just talking about reproductive rights,” says Paltrow. “We are talking about whether or not, in the guise of trying to end abortion, we are going to remove pregnant women from the community of constitutional persons.”

    While it's true that anti-abortion forces are advancing these legal theories, it turns out that medical staff—doctors, nurses, midwives, social workers—are in many cases the police informants. And poor women and women of color are disproportionately reported. NAPW calls this a "Jane Crow system of law, establishing a second class status for all pregnant women and disproportionately punishing African American and low-income women."

    Such policing of pregnant women is worst in the south, but it's happening all over the country. Even in New York City it recently came to light that more than a dozen hospitals have been drug testing new mothers without their consent and turning them over to child protective services--for marijuana.

    A far cry from bedside manner, the report details “bedside interrogations reminiscent of the days before Roe when women suspected of having illegal abortions were subjected to humiliating police questioning about intimate details of their lives while lying, and sometimes dying, in their hospital beds."

    These may be the worst cases of medical and prosecutorial overreach, but violations of women's rights happen every day in maternity wards across the country: women in labor are told they're not “allowed” to eat, walk around, or be in an upright position while they deliver. Women are told they “have to” be induced, they “can't” go a week past their due date, they “won't be permitted” to hold their baby immediately after giving birth. Hospitals have “banned” vaginal birth after cesarean, telling women they “have no choice” but to schedule surgery.

    Such common practices are a bald reversal of modern medical ethics, which hold that permission is the patient's to give, not the clinician's to take away.

    Medical practice mirrors a culture at large that routinely disrespects women's bodily intergrity. How else to explain the perniciousness of rape and the victim-blaming justifications? In media, we have no qualms digitally lipo-suctioning an inch off an actress's waist and thighs or doubling her cup size. The public feels entitled to police breastfeeding—both to demand that women do it and also that they hide it from public view.

    An early feminist health book was titled: “Woman's Body: An Owner's Manual.” Do we even hold the title anymore?

    If the anti-abortion movement's winning strategy has been "fetal separatism," abortion-rights advocates' losing strategy has been abortion separatism. With our attention turned entirely on a procedure rather than on a broader notion of bodily integrity and reproductive justice, we've had our backs turned to a reproductive police state in which pregnancy threatens to criminalize us all. We have got to think bigger.

    Jennifer Block
    Alternet
    January 22, 2013

    http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-po...ve-drug-tests-are-pregnant-women-second-class
  4. talltom
    Bogus Child Abuse Charges for Pregnant, Drug-Using Women

    Editor's note: America has a long history of treating the poor like criminals, from legislation banning the transportation of poor people across state lines to anti-vagrancy laws that could land you in jail if you didn't have a job or a home. We've come to rely on the criminal justice system to deal with the poor, even as more and more Americans fall into poverty. The following article is part of a series that looks at the diverse ways our countrycriminalizespoverty, including laws targeting the homeless, the surveillance of welfare recipients, the re-emergence of debtor prisons, and extreme policing tactics like stop-and-frisk.

    After suffering a stillbirth in South Carolina, 21-year-old Regina McKnight was arrested and charged with murdering her fetus because she used cocaine while pregnant. McKnight served eight years in prison for a loss that, as it turned out, she did not even cause. In 2008, with four years of her sentence left to serve, the South Carolina Supreme Court said the state used “outdated” research to make its case and overturned McNight’s conviction.

    While prosecutors had claimed McKnight’s cocaine use caused her stillbirth, the Court said McKnight’s attorneys failed to secure testimony from experts who would have explained how “recent studies show[ed] that cocaine is no more harmful to a fetus than nicotine use, poor nutrition, lack of prenatal care, or other conditions commonly associated with the urban poor.”

    McKnight’s case is not unusual. A recent study examining the outcome of pro-life policies since Roe v. Wade through 2005 identified more than 400 pregnant women who were arrested, incarcerated or forced into health “treatment” they did not want or need. As the data make clear, drug war stigma and racism were central to such prosecutions: 84 percent of these cases alleged that the woman, “in addition to continuing her pregnancy, had used an illegal drug,” particularly cocaine. Fifty-two percent of the women targeted are black.

    Legal Rights for Fetuses

    The cases do not necessarily include the death of a fetus, as in McKnight’s case. A woman who uses drugs can be punished for the assumption that she has harmed her fetus, even if her drug use is the only evidence against her. In states where feticide or “personhood” measures define an egg, embryo or fetus as a child, "child abuse" can occur in the womb.

    In South Dakota, a 12-weeks pregnant, homeless, 28-year-old Native American woman, Martina Greywind, was charged with “reckless endangerment” for using inhalants during her pregnancy. After two weeks in jail, she was able to obtain a release for a medical appointment where she received an abortion. Her case was dismissed, with the state noting that her pregnancy’s termination made her charges “no longer ripe for litigation,” while the prosecutor told media it was “no longer worth the time or expense to prosecute her.”

    Lynn Paltrow of the National Advocates for Pregnant Woman, lead author of the pro-life policies study, says that cases targeting women who become pregnant, go to term, and use an illicit drug or alcohol are part of the larger effort to create separate legal rights for fertilized eggs and embryos.

    One such precedent was established last month in the Alabama Supreme Court, which ruled that “the crime of chemical endangerment” -- exposing a child to a controlled substance or the environment in which it was produced -- applies to a fetus in a womb. The concurring opinion defined a fetus as a child, noting that the state has the responsibility to “protect life.” In these cases, the pro-life rhetoric works with equally flawed drug war stigma to criminalize women for crimes against an “unborn child.”

    While the Alabama ruling rests firmly on the belief that a fetus is a child, it also stems from the notion that exposing infants to methamphetamine is so damaging it should be labeled a crime. Studies have repeatedly found that the developmental effects of prenatal exposure to methamphetamine are not clear. According to the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology’s special information sheet about meth exposure in-utero, "the effects of maternal methamphetamine use cannot be separated from other factors," and there "is no syndrome or disorder that can specifically be identified for babies who were exposed in utero to methamphetamine."

    Child Services

    On February 7, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that a positive drug test does not prove parental neglect and that the state’s child protection services do not have jurisdiction over pregnant women. “The court’s decision protects the rights of all pregnant women and in so doing actually protects maternal, fetal, and child health,” Lynn Paltrow said.

    While the Alabama ruling interpreted a criminal statute, the New Jersey law interpreted a civil statute. The former provides for a criminal case and prosecution, while the latter turns the matter over to child protective services, which is not always as benign as it sounds.

    “Facing jail or the loss of custody of child are both devastating consequences, both likely to deter a mother from getting care,” Paltrow said. “But one does send you to jail, potentially for life, and the other puts you in the civil child welfare system.”

    Lawrence S. Lustberg, an attorney who worked on the case, told AlterNet, “Nobody is endorsing the use of drugs while one is pregnant, but the problem with regulating it and allowing for state interference or state scrutiny of women who are pregnant leads to two problems.” The first is that threatening a woman with the removal of her children due to behavior while pregnant “is going to disincentivize women from doing the right thing, from getting care," Lustberg said. “Women who are drug-addicted, alcoholics, or have other problems while pregnant should be encouraged to seek help, and if you threaten to take their children away they will be discouraged from seeking help, and that’s damaging to women and children.”

    Another issue, Lustberg said, is that punishing pregnant women for crimes against a fetus encourages much broader oversight of children and mothers' lives. “The research shows that drug use...while potentially harmful, is no more harmful than a number of other things that are legal. Not just alcohol, but working too hard, not getting enough exercise, getting too much exercise, not eating the right things, sleep — all kinds of things that correlate with problems upon childbirth," he said. “Once you start allowing the state to intrude into that whole decision-making process, there is no end to it, and you would be subjecting pregnant women to a level of oversight by the government that you would not be subjecting any other people in our entire society to, and that is very troubling indeed.”

    History of Racism

    “The prosecutors typically charge the least popular most politically vulnerable women in town -- usually drug-using, African-American women," said Lynn Paltrow. She adds that prosecutors “try to get a court to decide that the word 'child' in the child-abuse statute applies to eggs, embryos, and fetuses” by suggesting that the law would only be used “against drug-using women,” and then setting the precedent for “unequal system of law for all pregnant women.”

    The majority of these kinds of cases involve black women, and cocaine is the mostly commonly cited drug used to justify an arrest for fetal harm. The crack era of the ‘90s portrayed black women as enemies in the war on drugs. Media coverage of the crack cocaine “epidemic” churned out images of the “crack whore” whose reckless pleasure-seeking unknowingly or even intentionally harmed her unborn child. The media sensationalized the “crack baby,” providing an emotionally charged icon of victimization, while pregnant, black drug users were scapegoated for a policy failure to prevent crack cocaine use.

    Researchers following children who were exposed to cocaine before they were born have found that the long-term effects are relatively minor. The infants exposed to crack cocaine in the ‘90s are now growing up, and most of them are leading normal, healthy lives.

    One study found that cocaine exposure slows fetal growth, but the difference went away as cocaine-exposed children grew up.

    Research measuring brain function has found that cocaine-exposed children may have a harder time with tasks requiring attention management, as well as deviant behavior. Still, as Harolyn M. Belcher, a neurodevelopmental pediatrician who is director of research at the Kennedy Krieger Institute’s Family Center in Baltimore, told the New York Times in 2009, these conclusions are “subtle and hard to generalize.”

    “Just because it is statistically significant doesn’t mean that it is a huge public health impact,” Belcher told the Times. In 1997 for example, a study found that clinicians could not distinguish “crack-addicted babies” from babies born to comparable mothers who did not use cocaine.

    Most women using crack cocaine while pregnant were also using other substances, and most of the children in these studies are poor, and are subject to a variety of other risk factors that affect cognitive development and behavior, like inadequate healthcare and schools, unstable family situations, and exposure to lead. In 2001, a comprehensive study concluded: “[T]here is no convincing evidence that prenatal cocaine exposure is associated with any developmental toxicity difference in severity, scope, or kind from the [consequences] of many other risk factors.”

    “Society’s expectations of the children,” Deborah A. Frank, a Boston pediatrician, told the Times, “and reaction to the mothers are completely guided not by the toxicity, but by the social meaning” of the drug.

    Barriers to Treatment

    Even seeking treatment for substance addiction does not safeguard a pregnant woman from persecution. Wisconsinite Rachael Lowe, 20, learned this the hard way, when her attempt to seek treatment for her Oxycontin addiction landed her in a psychiatric ward more than an hour away from her husband and 2-year-old son. While she was held against her will in the psychiatric ward, she did not receive prenatal care, but was prescribed several medications, including Xanax. Lowe’s fetus received legal representation, but Lowe did not receive legal counsel until 12 days after she was taken into custody.

    At a later hearing, a doctor testified that Lowe’s addiction posed no significant risk to the health of the fetus, and the court said Lowe would be released from what the study called her “hospital-based incarceration.” But the state was still allowed access to her womb, as Lowe was under surveillance and supervision for the remainder of the pregnancy, required to provide urine samples and cooperate with law enforcement and health professionals. As a result of the intervention, Lowe lost her jobs, and her husband had to take a leave of absence from his job.

    For pregnant addicts, withdrawing from drugs like narcotic painkillers and heroin can be a greater danger to both the woman and the fetus. Nonetheless, prosecutors and judges who demand full abstinence have criminalized pregnant women who are taking methadone to curb their drug cravings. The legal system’s failure to recognize the complexity of a pregnant woman’s health decisions can have the effect of scaring women out of treatment -- causing danger to both them and their fetus.

    Prenatal exposure to opiates like heroin and oxycodone is not associated with birth defects or impeded growth and development, but it is associated with withdrawal symptoms in newborns that trained professionals can manage and eliminate.

    In pregnant women, withdrawal symptoms can cause uterine contractions, miscarriage or early labor that may be more damaging to the child.

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services advises:
    If you’re pregnant and using drugs such as heroin or abusing opioid prescription painkillers, it’s important that you get help for yourself and your unborn baby. Methadone maintenance treatment can help you stop using those drugs. It is safe for the baby, keeps you free of withdrawal, and gives you a chance to take care of yourself.

    Drug-Using Women Not the Only Ones at Risk

    Stil, this is not just about pregnant women who use drugs. A 1997 ruling in South Carolina made the state the first to issue a ruling defining fetuses as legally protected children. The court found that child endangerment can apply to a fetus, “allowing for other possible applications of the law,” said Lynn Paltrow, of National Advocates for Pregnant Woman. She gives as examples pregnant women who attempt suicide or opt out of cesarian surgery. “All of these cases, whether civil or criminal, are ultimately about whether the court is using judicial authority -- surveillance, control -- to punish pregnant women.”

    Alternet
    February 11, 2013 |

    Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/hard-times-...rges-pregnant-drug-using-women-hard-times-usa
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!