18 Jan 2007States differ on treatment or incarceration for pregnant women who abuse alcohol Women lawmakers shaping the debate on reproductive rights, study finds
FELTON, Calif. – Undoubtedly, abusing alcohol during pregnancy can be damaging to a developing fetus. However, a new study found women lawmakers are shaping the policy debate on whether women receive treatment or go to jail for using alcohol during pregnancy.
Scientific research has well established that adverse health consequences from abusing alcohol can occur, not just at certain points in pregnancy, but throughout it.
In the article in UCLA Women’s Law Journal titled “The Meaning, Status, and Future of Reproductive Autonomy: The Case of Alcohol Use During Pregnancy,” researchers found states with few elected women officeholders tend to have tougher sanctions for pregnant women who abuse alcohol.
Researchers suggest this scenario can have harmful long-term affects on not only the would-be mother, but also the fetus these laws are trying to protect. “Not only is jail an amazingly severe reaction to alcohol abuse during pregnancy, but substance abuse treatment programs and pre-natal care are almost non-existent in these facilities,” said Sue Thomas, Ph.D., the study’s lead author and a policy researcher at PIRE.
While few question the serious consequences of alcohol abuse on fetuses, the best way of avoiding them is to provide treatment for the pregnant women rather than lock them up.” Sanctions tend to discourage pregnant women from seeking treatment that can help them and their fetuses, Dr. Thomas said.
When women know that they could face involuntary commitment or charges of child abuse or neglect, evidence suggests they avoid medical treatment altogether,” she said.
Another interesting finding of the study is that women officeholders make a real difference in policy choices. State legislatures with higher rates of women lawmakers tended to pass laws that favored substance abuse treatment over incarceration. Conversely, states with low levels of women’s representation tended to pass policies that prosecute women and require medical staff to report women who use alcohol during pregnancy to child protective services or the criminal justice system.
At the time when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s ascension turns attention to the policy difference women make, this study is evidence that women’s impact can be substantial, Dr. Thomas said. “Evidence from this research and the wider women and politics literature suggests that not only does women’s presence matter, the greater their presence across legislatures and in each individual legislature, the greater chance that positive approaches to pregnant women’s use and abuse of alcohol will be preserved and extended,” she said.
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD) describes the range of birth defects caused by alcohol consumption during pregnancy. FASDs are considered the most common non-hereditary cause of mental retardation. The severity of the effects of alcohol use during pregnancy, the fact that they are lifelong for children born with FASDs, and that the incidence is rising resulted in substantial amounts of legislative attention to the reversing the trend. State and federal governments have been legislating on FASD issues since 1980.
Since then, two predominant approaches have been most common. The first promotes information, early intervention and treatment to pregnant women who use or abuse alcohol. This approach is supported by the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, and many women’s organizations. The second approach to reducing the incidence of FASD is an attempt to restrict a pregnant women’s behavior.
Limits in the form of punishment or restrictions on independence are central. Punitive or coercive policies include civilly committing pregnant women who use or abuse alcohol, requirements to report women who use alcohol during pregnancy or are suspected of doing so to law enforcement and/or child welfare agencies, and initiating child welfare proceedings to temporarily remove children from mothers or terminate parental rights.
Dr. Thomas is Senior Policy Researcher at PIRE’s Center for the Study of Law and Enforcement Policy. Among her numerous articles and books are How Women Legislate and Women and Elective Office: Past Present and Future. PIRE, or Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, is a national nonprofit public health research institute with centers in eight U.S. cities that is supported primarily by federal and state research and program funds.
For more information or to obtain a copy of the published report, contact Michelle Blackston at (301) 755-2444 or mblackston@pire.org. UCLA Women's Law Journal
###
For more information:
PIRE Office of Policy and Communications
Michelle Blackston(301) 755-2444mblackston@pire.org
