Criminal charges are now being brought against women in Alabama for “chemical endangerment of a child” which has been utilized to penalize mothers who use drugs during their pregnancy and has a mandatory sentence of 10 years to life (if the baby dies).
Originally enacted to protect children from meth labs, the law prohibits a “responsible person” from “exposing a child to an environment in which he or she…knowingly, recklessly or intentionally causes or permits a child to be exposed to, to ingest or inhale, or to have contact with a controlled substance, chemical substance or drug paraphernalia.”
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/04/26/drug-addiction-personhood-and-the-war-on-women/
Source: Time.com – April 26, 2012



“The statute under which Metz was charged provides that “[a]ny person who is responsible for a child’s welfare who, through his or her actions or failure to take action, intentionally contributes to the neglect of the child “is guilty of a Class D felony if death is a consequence of the neglect. Wis. Stat. § 948.21(1)(d). Thus, whether leaving the methadone accessible to Benjamin is framed as an affirmative act or as a failure to take protective action, the statute expressly contemplates that neglect can take either form.”
After more than 50 years of evidence showing that methadone maintenance (MM) treatment works, the courts—both civil and criminal—are making decisions only a doctor should make, telling patients to stop taking their legally prescribed methadone. These decisions are coming down particularly hard on women, who in some cases are being told by Child Protective Services (CPS) that they have to get off methadone if they want custody of their newborn child.