-
You must be logged in to see or use the Shoutbox. Besides, if you haven't registered, you really should. It's quick and it will make your life a little better. Trust me. So just register and make yourself at home with like-minded individuals who share either your morbid curiousity or sense of gallows humor.
Keepalowprofile
New member
That is such bullshit.
Muriel Schwenck
Beloved Curmudgeon
a defense atty has to say that crap but how does that "victory" affect the rights of children born addicted?
the decision is based on the wording of the law. If the legislature changes the definition to include fetuses will the same lawyer claim its bad for public health?
And what about the rights of a man who watches the mother of his child take drugs. OK, maybe there aren't many of those men, but possible!
Fine don't hold them accountable but do not allow these bitches to retain custody of said child/ren and give them tax payer dollars to (not) care for them.
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
This is about abortion ... not drugs right ? Like if they call it child abuse they have to call abortion murder.
Its already illegal to murder any unborn child in Pennsylvania:
and abortion in Pennsylvania is illegal after the 24th week. So I'm thinking logically, if the mother does not get an abortion by her 24th week and she decides to put substantial amounts of toxins in her body that harm's the child she should be held criminally liable for child abuse. There is no reason not to hold a women responsible for the health of her child if she has decided, or has been place in a position, to carry a child to term. Intentionally harming a child with potentially lifelong ailments should not be legal, which according to the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court, it currently is.
Last edited:
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
I’d rather see pregnant women get treatment than jail time. Prisons are not equipped to provide substance abuse treatment and obstetric care— both of which offer better outcomes for child and mother.
Also women are more than just baby makers. Criminalizing them for bad decisions while pregnant treats women like brood mares.
Plus it’s a slippery slope: once you outlaw pregnant women ingesting harmful substances, where do you draw the line? They’re advised not to eat shellfish or tuna, not to drink any amount of alcohol, not to smoke. Some medications are bad for the fetus but necessary for mom’s health: now what? I was criticized for taking my asthma meds while pregnant because they aren’t good for the baby— I retorted that if I stop breathing that’s even worse for the baby!
Women should not be treated like simple uteruses because some of them make bad decisions. That’s like saying all guns should be confiscated because some gun owners kill people.
Also women are more than just baby makers. Criminalizing them for bad decisions while pregnant treats women like brood mares.
Plus it’s a slippery slope: once you outlaw pregnant women ingesting harmful substances, where do you draw the line? They’re advised not to eat shellfish or tuna, not to drink any amount of alcohol, not to smoke. Some medications are bad for the fetus but necessary for mom’s health: now what? I was criticized for taking my asthma meds while pregnant because they aren’t good for the baby— I retorted that if I stop breathing that’s even worse for the baby!
Women should not be treated like simple uteruses because some of them make bad decisions. That’s like saying all guns should be confiscated because some gun owners kill people.
I don't think it's merely harmful substances but illegal and deadly substances. So this law says that the mother can do whatever the hell she wants and as long as her baby is not born addicted or with birth defects because she did these things then it's okay, but she can't have an abortion because that's killing a living potentially breathing human being. Doing illegal and deadly substances while pregnant could essentially amount to the same thing but it's not illegal, but an abortion in a clinic/hospital setting is.
Just pointing out the idicy here.
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
In order for anyone to put poison in their body like that there has to be some type of disconnect ... I don't think we can reasonably expect a woman to protect her unborn children if she is not capable of caring for herself, or protecting herself. So the expectation that she does or starts just because she is pregnant is skewed.
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
Well hating on their mothers doesn't help either. I fucking hate feminists !!!
This whole conversation is obscene ... do you know how much money these assholes got paid to
sit around a table and talk about this and come to this determination.
These mothers are like serial killers ... they don't fall from the sky, the same assholes (system)
made them.
I think that if a child is born with a positive toxicology her rights should be terminated.
Why does an innocent child have to be destroyed because society places more value on the mother.
Why does an innocent child have to be destroyed because society places more value on the mother.
Muriel Schwenck
Beloved Curmudgeon
In order to force women to get treatment, it would have to be a court ordered alternative to prison. So there would have to be a law for the woman to break. And according to this decision, the current law doesn't cover pregnant junkies.
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
Why should a child have to grow thinking she was abandoned for drugs when recovery is possible.
I hate feminists:
The feminists: We can do what ever we want !
The feminists: Burn her !
Post automatically merged:
I think the law just did cover pregnant junkies !!!
Last edited:
1. An infant would not be aware that they were abandoned.
2. Children being returned to drug abusing parents has not always turned out to good. Pick a story on the DD
3. Children languishing in foster care and than discharged to homelessness is not in the best interest of society.
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
Infants grow up, secrets are bad ... some people change their lives ... its easier to do, on the outside with support than it is in prison or accumulating charges, this law addresses this, Not every kid languishes in foster care or is discharged to homelessness ... discharged to homelessness ??? ... fucking obscene. There's a sure plan to fail right there.
Fellofftheporch
Understanding things at 20% or less
Ok. So I was one of those mothers that used while pregnant with my daughter. Not something I like to admit... but its true. I was self loathing, angry and obviously selfishly stupid. All things I can admit to and know full well how shitty of a person I was.
When my 8lb 10oz daughter was born she automatically went through withdrawls. Her breathing was rapid and labored. She wouldn't eat and kept throwing up. I wasn't allowed to hold her and had to just sit and watch. CPS came in and took both my kids. They held an intervention where I had to admit to every family member and close family friend that I used and did so while pregnant. I agreed to go to treatment which they allowed me to take my baby girl but I had to leave my son with my parents.
Away I went for 6 months. And what do I do when I get back? Get high. Both kids, gone. Family abandoned me. All I had was my "friends" who got me high and myself. CPS offered me one last chance. Go back to treatment by yourself and you might see your kids again. In the end it took me a total of 3 years and some months to get my kids back. But it wasn't until I was forced to be alone, fighting myself and for my kids to see the light so to speak.
My point to all this is.... there is a level of detachment to use while pregnant. At the same time there is also the justification that an addict uses to make it all ok in their head. I never intentionally set out to hurt my baby and I didn't think about it until I saw it before my eyes... and still further down the road I used again. Really its up to the mother if she is willing to put forth the effort. I learned you can't force a person to want to be a better person. You can't really force an addict to be clean. From what I've seen it only lasts til they think the coast is clear... off probation, CPS or whatever. It took me over 3 years to get myself back on track. And of the 36 women I was in 10 months of inpatient treatment with... only 5 of us still have our kids.
When my 8lb 10oz daughter was born she automatically went through withdrawls. Her breathing was rapid and labored. She wouldn't eat and kept throwing up. I wasn't allowed to hold her and had to just sit and watch. CPS came in and took both my kids. They held an intervention where I had to admit to every family member and close family friend that I used and did so while pregnant. I agreed to go to treatment which they allowed me to take my baby girl but I had to leave my son with my parents.
Away I went for 6 months. And what do I do when I get back? Get high. Both kids, gone. Family abandoned me. All I had was my "friends" who got me high and myself. CPS offered me one last chance. Go back to treatment by yourself and you might see your kids again. In the end it took me a total of 3 years and some months to get my kids back. But it wasn't until I was forced to be alone, fighting myself and for my kids to see the light so to speak.
My point to all this is.... there is a level of detachment to use while pregnant. At the same time there is also the justification that an addict uses to make it all ok in their head. I never intentionally set out to hurt my baby and I didn't think about it until I saw it before my eyes... and still further down the road I used again. Really its up to the mother if she is willing to put forth the effort. I learned you can't force a person to want to be a better person. You can't really force an addict to be clean. From what I've seen it only lasts til they think the coast is clear... off probation, CPS or whatever. It took me over 3 years to get myself back on track. And of the 36 women I was in 10 months of inpatient treatment with... only 5 of us still have our kids.
Ramona the brave
Trusted Member
Lol, I'm not sure what feminists you've been talking to, but that's not what feminism is about. Just sayin'.
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
Don't be so hard on yourself.
PERIOD .... even if you're not pregnant. There is a level of detachment.
I don't think you can justify instinct. If a dog has a sore tail ... he chews it off.
From my own experience I see a gap in support here. In order for recovery to work the plan needs to include more than obligations to the courts and CPS or court mandated therapy. There needs to be other opportunities for success via education and jobs.
Recovery is one day at time, but long term comprehensive plan is what works best. Court supports ... therapeutic supports ... vocational supports for jobs and education.
Pandorama
Well-Known Member
It's just legally impossible. You cannot force woman to do anything to protect unborn children nor can you prosecute them for behaviour before the child is born.
Even in the case of a glue sniffer who disabled two previous babies taken immediately into care, the third pregnancy CPS tried to get the court to involuntarily admit her to an instition in order to stop her huffing and disabling this child.
It was granted. She was admitted. She appealed and was released. The baby was born disabled.
It's horrific but a precedent can't be set because of the ramifications.
You can't enforce control over a woman's pregnancy.
Even in the case of a glue sniffer who disabled two previous babies taken immediately into care, the third pregnancy CPS tried to get the court to involuntarily admit her to an instition in order to stop her huffing and disabling this child.
It was granted. She was admitted. She appealed and was released. The baby was born disabled.
It's horrific but a precedent can't be set because of the ramifications.
You can't enforce control over a woman's pregnancy.
Amen.
Muriel Schwenck
Beloved Curmudgeon
We can feel better about ourselves talking about what ought to be done, but the addict has to be willing to change, and most of the stories we see here are not about those who are trying to overcome their problems, either for themselves or their children.
More government funding, grants, therapies, counseling, vocational training won't make a difference to most of the abusers we read about on DD.
Ramona the brave
Trusted Member
I think the moral of this story is maybe we should be passing out IUDs like candy canes so that junkies (and future child abusers for that matter) don't get pregnant in the first place.
Slippery slope, glad the court avoided the trap
lithiumgirl
Pretty Nice Troll
But if a comprehensive plan existed, one that works, perhaps people would seek out supports sooner. A plan to stop criminalising these women looks like a step in the right direction from here.
VLGRDSPLY
Trusted Member
@Fellofftheporch thank you for sharing... and congrats on getting your shit together and getting your kids back!
Share this page
Latest posts
-
-
WV Mom Charged In Death Of Teen Found 'Emaciated To A Skeletal State'- Latest: thatsmallgrl
-
