Hospitals across the country reported mothers to authorities after they tested positive for medications used routinely in millions of births.

Amairani Salinas was 32 weeks pregnant with her fourth child in 2023 when doctors at a Texas hospital discovered that her baby no longer had a heartbeat. As they prepped her for an emergency cesarean section, they gave her midazolam, a benzodiazepine commonly prescribed to keep patients calm. A day later, the grieving mother was cradling her stillborn daughter when a social worker stopped by her room to deliver another devastating blow: Salinas was being reported to child welfare authorities

What happened to Salinas and Villanueva are far from isolated incidents. Across the country, hospitals are dispensing medications to patients in labor, only to report them to child welfare authorities when they or their newborns test positive for those very same substances on subsequent drug tests, an investigation by The Marshall Project and Reveal has found.

      • NatakuNox@lemmy.worldEnglish
        241·
        15 days ago

        Yup. Can’t let beds in the for profit prisons go cold. Other wise the prisons CEO might have to spend only 199 days on vacation instead of the customary 200.

    • Kraiden@kbin.earth
      121·
      16 days ago

      Honestly, it’s much of a muchness, but for the sake of accuracy: It was the fetus that was tested, not the mother

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      991·
      16 days ago

      The article mentions it… TL;DR: War on Drugs

      Hospital drug testing of pregnant women, which began in the 1980s and spread rapidly during the opioid epidemic, was intended in part to help identify babies who might experience withdrawal symptoms and need extra medical care. Federal law requires hospitals to alert child welfare agencies anytime such babies are born. But a previous investigation by The Marshall Project and Reveal found that the relatively inexpensive, pee-in-a-cup tests favored by many hospitals are highly susceptible to false positives, errors and misinterpretation — and many hospitals have failed to put in place safeguards that would protect patients from being reported over faulty test results.

      • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
        785·
        16 days ago

        was intended in part to help identify babies who might experience withdrawal symptoms

        That was the stated reason to get public buy in. The real reason was the same as the rest of the war on drugs, to keep black people incarcerated so slavery can continue per the 14th amendment.

        • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.onlineEnglish
          1020·
          16 days ago

          That’s silly. 99% of the time, a drug addict is not fit to be a parent. Depending on the drug, even breastfeeding the baby will cause it to OD. It’s perfectly reasonable to get child services involved if the mother tests positive for illicit drugs.

          Now, what’s ridiculous is getting child services involved because a patient tested positive to a drug you gave them, unless there’s other obvious signs of drug abuse.

          • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
            174·
            16 days ago

            That’s silly. 99% of the time, a drug addict is not fit to be a parent.

            Do you include functioning alcoholics in that group, or just people who use the ‘bad’ drugs?

              • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
                132·
                16 days ago

                Your 99% of addicts stat is made up war on drugs bullshit by the way, and you clearly don’t know what a functioning alcoholic is if you think they can’t be parents.

                For example some addicts are able to keep their shit together during work hours and evenings but use alcohol as a coping mechanism when their responsibilities are done. They are still addicts, but in their spare time.

                A lot of other addicts are similar, addicted to pain meds or who use weed as a coping mechanism but outside of work and care hours.

                  • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    51·
                    15 days ago

                    I have a teenager, and while some days were pretty busy, there has always been some spare time before bed.

                  • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                    121·
                    15 days ago

                    if you dont have a medical or biochemist degree (and probably even then if this is your take) i suggest you take your nonsense elsewhere because frankly its incorrect and it has caused untold problems by preventing adequate care from being administered for people’s mental health. for example one doesnt need to look any further than psychedelics and depression caused by issues in the parasympathetic nervous system. most addicts are self medicating (often poorly and ineffectually) because of assholes like yourself limiting their and our ability to treat them effectively.

        • Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.worldEnglish
          241·
          16 days ago

          Lol, yeah, that started reason doesn’t hold up well. Your basic urine drug screen (UDS) will flag benzos (midazolam in this article), natural opiates (not fentanyl and those derivatives), cocaine, barbiturates, marijuana, amphetamines, and I think that’s it. The only ones likely to cause fetal withdrawal are benzos and opiates. Works well enough for benzos, but withdrawals are pretty rare. The most common are opiates, but the most common opiates won’t show up on the UDS. So why use it?

            • Chip_Rat@lemmy.worldEnglish
              10·
              15 days ago

              Citations needed uses heavy sarcasm. Though I don’t recall the episode, I’m 100% they are highlighting the fact that there was not.