NCJ Number
139410
Journal
Journal of Crime and Justice Volume: 15 Issue: 1 Dated: (1992) Pages: 157- 172
Date Published
1992
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This article reviews the pros and cons of interventionist and noninterventionist criminal justice approaches to fetal and neonatal injury caused by maternal drug ingestion during pregnancy.
Abstract
Fetal and neonatal injury caused by maternal drug ingestion during pregnancy is rapidly becoming both a public health and criminal justice problem. There is widespread unanimity in the medical profession that using and abusing illicit drugs during pregnancy will likely result in a host of fetal and neonatal complications, some of which are irreversible. The criminal justice system, however, has yet to develop a workable strategy to deal with this issue due to the conflicting trends of thought that have emerged. Those favoring strong criminal justice intervention argue that "harm" caused by drug use during gestation should be criminally proscribed as the only viable avenue to alert the public to this issue and to both punish and treat drug- related behavior. Noninterventionists, on the other hand, prefer less use of the criminal justice system and increased use of treatment and education designed to prevent the dangerous behaviors. Since neither the interventionists or the noninterventionists have gained a significant majority in public or legal opinion, the courts have no consensus regarding criteria for the balancing of interests in such cases. Creative legislation and appellate opinion have the task of setting a new and workable legal agenda that addresses both sides of this issue with compassion, consistency, and constitutional legitimacy. 20 references and a table of 17 cases