Tennessee just became the first state that will jail women for their pregnancy outcomes

[tod evans]

Fair enough... except that I haven't once mentioned the legislation in the OP, I don't know that much about it to be honest, it could be a complete turd.

I am discussing the general principles of using the government to stop the mother from harming their unborn child.

This particular thread is about Tenn. new legislation that makes it a criminal offense for pregnant women to have "illegal drugs" in her system.

If you'd like to discuss "general principals" of how a mother may harm a fetus during gestation why not start a thread about that subject?

I'm willing to discuss current medical research concerning the effects of "illegal drugs" on a fetus as well as the history of pregnant women consuming drugs that are currently illegal and the condition of their children now in adulthood..

I'll even discuss the social and societal implications of permitting the testing for "illegal drugs" in pregnant women because these subjects align with the OP.

 

[dannno]

I am referring to how it affects unborn children, not fully grown adults.

See Matt, now you are back-peddling.

You are saying we need to put all of our trust into the medical establishment. You said that even though Ron Paul agrees there is efficacy for medical marijuana, that doesn't matter because the peer reviewed research isn't there. But it is there, and the medical establishment still ignores it. That was my whole point, it doesn't matter if there is peer reviewed research or not, it doesn't make the mean they are right because they can pay scientists to fudge up studies.. but the point is even if the studies are there, the medical establishment doesn't always follow if it is not in the interest of the establishment monetarily because just like the military industrial complex, the medical industrial complex is driven by special interests and many of us here don't wish to be apart of it, as much as possible, and certainly don't trust their judgement on the safety and efficacy of their own drugs versus, say a natural substance that has been used as a medicine for at least 5-10k years.

 

[angelatc]

See Matt, now you are back-peddling.

You are saying we need to put all of our trust into the medical establishment. You said that even though Ron Paul agrees there is efficacy for medical marijuana, that doesn't matter because the peer reviewed research isn't there. But it is there, and the medical establishment still ignores it. That was my whole point, it doesn't matter if there is peer reviewed research or not, it doesn't make the mean they are right because they can pay scientists to fudge up studies.. but the point is even if the studies are there, the medical establishment doesn't always follow if it is not in the interest of the establishment monetarily because just like the military industrial complex, the medical industrial complex is driven by special interests and many of us here don't wish to be apart of it, as much as possible, and certainly don't trust their judgement on the safety and efficacy of their own drugs versus, say a natural substance that has been used as a medicine for at least 5-10k years.

This is not about you. This is about pregnant women in TN.

 

[familydog]

dunno that prison is the best method for handling this, but if a mother harms her kid, born or unborn, it SHOULD be a crime!

I agree, but people hit their children all the time and it's perfectly legal. We just don't call it hitting.

 

[Danke]

Let's please keep this civil everyone. It's best to stick with facts, ideas and the like.

Thank you.

I have noticed you only post to be a nanny.

 

[angelatc]

Absolutely. And with a court order derived from probable cause by a neutral judge.

I think I am misunderstanding you here. Why should a judge be allowed to issue a warrant if there's no evidence that

Is there any peer reviewed research to show that drugs have zero effect on an unborn child?

Your lack of scientific thinking is showing. We would expect drugs to have an effect on the baby. Drugs are supposed to have an effect on the system by their very nature.

Futhermore, you are making the same error that the anti-GMO crowd makes. Scientist can't ever prove that a substance will never ever have any negative effects. It can prove only that a substance can / might / sometimes have any effect.

The articles I posted above both link to peer reviewed papers.

 

[angelatc]

I have noticed you only post to be a nanny.

You are a racist!

 

[dannno]

This is not about you. This is about pregnant women in TN.

No, it has nothing to do with me, this is about a logic test to test Matt's initial thesis regarding pregnant women in TN. I happened to use medical mj because Ron Paul says that it has efficacy for patients and the establishment does not. Much science supports Ron Paul's view, but the establishment still disagrees. The established policies and opinions are not necessarily the truth.

Basically, a lot of us don't trust the establishment and don't want to abide by their medical policies and opinions. We should have that medical freedom.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

You're not seriously asserting that there is no peer reviewed research demonstrating the effectiveness of marijuana as medicine, are you? Because there's quite a bit out there.

Quite a bit, indeed. Being a proponent of freedom in any case, I'm a little surprised by all of them, actually.

It would probably be quite a bit more too, if UMISS wasn't growing garbage, bilking the taxpayers out of millions in the process.

Remember, you're in crowd that doesn't think car seats and seatbelts should be mandatory. Having said that, don't you think the government should at least need to prove that the drugs are harmful to the fetus before putting women in prison for using them?

I get it - the knee jerk reaction is "OF COURSE drugs hurt babies." But the reality is that perhaps that isn't accurate.

As you pointed out earlier the requirements for 'proving' damage are hard to come by. There is no way that a study will be conducted (nor should it be) with controlled variables to try to discern actual risks of certain substances. It would be 'progressively' evil if ever the case were to be made in favor, let alone the study conducted.

But then people in their infinite wish for security, absent factual information, ignorantly vote to enact laws that affect others.

It's a big clusterfuck, in my opinion.

I don't advocate anyone to use drugs pregnant but the uncertainty of what it was that caused disfigurement and the uncertainty of what substances may cause disfigurement and the further realization that often substances 'legally' prescribed to a mother are probably more harmful than most anything taken outside of the 'law' leaves the rational in a rather uncomfortable position.

It's more than hypocritical, in my opinion, when drugs are being pimped to young kids, even toddlers, and when many mothers give birth under all kinds of different circumstances. From SSRIs, SSNRIs, benzodiazepines, opiates, and many more, (I've come to find out through this thread), to cocaine, methamphetamine etc., and a common combination of more than one. How do we discern what caused what? Add in other factors often unaware of until decades have past and I find myself rather unimpressed with the "humanitarian's" inclination for a law.

 

[donnay]

Thalidomide. It's okay when government sanctions poisons to unborn children.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

What's wrong with that? If a woman is using drugs while pregnant then she is obviously harming her child.

I'm sure eating junk food, fast food, and soda harms an unborn child as well. Maybe we should just imprison women when they get pregnant to make sure they eat a state-sanctioned diet and live a state-sanctioned lifestyle? And shit, with all the obese kids these days, maybe its a sign the state should raise the children too?! Ban 64oz softdrinks!!!!!

 

[Matt Collins]

I think I am misunderstanding you here. Why should a judge be allowed to issue a warrant if there's no evidence that




Your lack of scientific thinking is showing. We would expect drugs to have an effect on the baby. Drugs are supposed to have an effect on the system by their very nature.

Well we know that certain drugs have a negative effect on adults and kids, so it is reasonable to understand that they have negative effects on unborn children too.

 

[limequat]

Please cite your medical degree and showing the peer-reviewed research showing that marijuana consumed by mothers with unborn babies is harmless.

Wow, I used to run into this type of thinking in another forum. A fact cannot be disputed unless you hold a degree in the relevant science. The same tactic was employed regarding global warming. "You're not a climate scientist, so you don't know what you're talking about." Nice.

I suppose, then, the converse is true? That you ARE a medical doctor and have published the peer-reviewed studies to show that marijuana consumed by the mother is harmful to the baby?

Fact is neither study exits, as Angelatc, points out, you'd have to be a lunatic to experiment on pregnant women.

What is known is that THC is non-toxic. The only side-effects are minor. Like getting the munchies. No one has every died from a pot overdose. MJ is not addictive.
So if MJ is harmless to adults, it stand to reason that it would be harmless to fetuses as well.
Yes, we've not done the study. We've also not studied the fetal effects of women who eat dandelions. Why would we?

 

[limequat]

I used to pal around with an obstetrician.
While my white first-world pregnant friends were obsessing over how fat their butts look in maternity pants, or refusing to pump gas while pregnant, this dude was delivering babies in the ghetto.
We're talking mothers malnutritioned, missing teeth, smoking crack, etc. Babies pop out perfectly healthy every time. Why? Nature puts a preference on the baby, and will starve the mother before the baby.

 

[Nirvikalpa]

Thalidomide. It's okay when government sanctions poisons to unborn children.

Ugh, it made me sick when I researched the effects of thalidomide. Absolutely sick.

 

[Keith and stuff]

Every Democrat in the TN Senate voted for this evil crap? Is TN opposite land? What a bunch of crap. Every day I am thankful that I left TN. So, so thankful!

 

[Keith and stuff]

Thank goodness there are a few somewhat sane Republicans in the TN Senate. Sadly. there aren't many of them. Now we have this to thank. Great work TN!

 

[otherone]

I suspect this silly bill is driven purely by emotion just like your backing of it.

To HELL with Liberty (and common sense) we're talking BABIES, here, man! I smell an addendum to the NDAA in the air!

 

[otherone]

Thalidomide. It's okay when government sanctions poisons to unborn children.

ummm...HELLO...
profit to be had....
commie.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Remember, when you do drugs, that endangers the government's child. Punishment must be dealt.