Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:32 PM Mar 2016

U.S. bill targets babies born dependent on opioids

Source: Yahoo! News / Reuters

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - A bill that aims to protect babies born to mothers who used heroin or other opioids during pregnancy was introduced on Wednesday in the House as part of the government’s response to a Reuters investigation.

The bipartisan measure would require federal and state governments to do a better job of monitoring the health and safety of babies born drug-dependent. Last week – and also in response to the Reuters investigation – a similar bill moved to the Senate floor and the U.S. Health and Human Services Department pledged reforms.

“We must do everything we can to safeguard the most vulnerable among us,” Representative Lou Barletta, a Pennsylvania Republican, said in a statement on Wednesday. Barletta is the bill's prime sponsor.

Reuters found that 110 U.S. children who were exposed to opioids while in the womb later died preventable deaths at home – and that thousands more each year do not receive social supports required by a 2003 law. The news agency also found that no more than nine states comply with this law, which calls on hospitals to alert social workers whenever a baby is born dependent on drugs.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/u-bill-targets-babies-born-dependent-opioids-183918456.html

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Warpy

(111,237 posts)
1. Alerting social workers does more harm than good
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:35 PM
Mar 2016

because instead of offering support, they just snatch the kids.

The women are just as vulnerable as the kids--more so in this punitive atmosphere. Cruelty against both is institutionalized.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
2. In a lot of cases that may be the best solution.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:13 PM
Mar 2016

I dont think somebody addicted to heroin should be raising a kid.

Warpy

(111,237 posts)
3. "Has used" and "severely addicted" can't be conflated
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:26 PM
Mar 2016

They're different. What needs to be observed is the mother's commitment to her child. Support at home should be given to those mothers who want to raise their children.

It's just too easy to blame women in this punitive climate.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
4. If the baby comes out dependent, Im assuming they are addicted in most cases.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:30 PM
Mar 2016

And if they are not, then let the social workers investigate.

I dont think social workers are perfect, but ignoring the situation is not in anybodys best interest.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
6. Dont care
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:33 PM
Mar 2016

Ill let a social worker learn it and investigate for me.

If somebody is using heroin while pregnant, I think that alone is enough reason for an investigation.

LeftyMom

(49,212 posts)
9. "Dependent on opioids" can also mean methadone, buprenorphine, naltrexone, etc.
Thu Mar 24, 2016, 02:45 AM
Mar 2016

Conflating the only effective treatments with active drug use can scare women away from care at just the time when it's most important that they receive it.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
7. While I am sure that what you are saying is true - my
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:52 PM
Mar 2016

great grandchildren were truly endangered by their mother. Her children needed protection and she has been to treatment many times with little or not change.

Her oldest son found some of her pills laying on the floor - she was out of it and did not realize he needed help. He was in the hospital for weeks and almost died. To make a long story about him short they took him away from her and gave him to my daughter who is his grandmother.

Her next child she sold to someone in California. To this day we have no idea where that child is. And her last child so far has health problems from the opiates and has been adopted by another family. Fortunately for my great grandchildren it is an open adoption and the children get to see each other and learn that they are a family.

My family takes the responsibility of making sure that our two get to visit their mother and her family at least once a month but unfortunately they often do not show up for the visit.

Taking children out of a home is not always a mistake. And our area up here has a very good support system for mothers and the children but they are not left where they are in danger. Ours are now 8 and 12 - they are getting the help they need and they are once again going to school regularly. They have a stable home life.

Their mother lives with her drug using boyfriend and for the moment seems to be doing better but even she wants her kids to stay where they are safe.

 

MindPilot

(12,693 posts)
10. If only there was as much concern for kids dependent on lead-infused water.
Thu Mar 24, 2016, 10:52 AM
Mar 2016

IMHO, If the word "black" preceded the word "babies" it would be a much more accurate description of the real motivation behind this bill.

csziggy

(34,135 posts)
11. Wouldn't it be better to provide pre-natal care and drug rehabilitation to the mothers?
Thu Mar 24, 2016, 11:31 AM
Mar 2016

If every pregnant woman had pre-natal care - for free when needed - no questions asked, and treatment for drug use without the automatic criminal consequences, I suspect the number of babies born addicted would plummet.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. bill targets babies ...