NYC children's services agency to settle with parent allegedly targeted for marijuana, race
gothamist.com
The judgement in a lawsuit brought by a parent is the first of its kind since marijuana was legalized

Archived page

    “Even after a judge required ACS to reunite Ms. Rivers with her baby, ACS continued to subject Ms. Rivers to needless court proceedings and a litany of conditions that interfered with her parenting of TW for months, while the unlawful removal of her baby was ratified by senior ACS leadership,” the complaint reads. “This was not because ACS was trying to protect TW; this was because Ms. Rivers is Black.”

  • Astroturfed@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6822·
    1 year ago

    Child was born with measurable levels of THC in its system. So all of you outraged folks are ok with women who smoke cigarettes, drink and cheef up while pregnant right? Smoking weed when you have a kid, whatever fine. Even if it’s illegal. This kid is damaged because the mother couldn’t quit smoking weed when pregnant. That’s not something you should be defending.

        • hypelightfly@kbin.social
          182·
          1 year ago

          Feel like providing a source that NYC is doing that? Because it appears to not be true as far as I can see.

          • Astroturfed@lemmy.worldEnglish
            632·
            1 year ago

            Let’s use some common sense real quick here. You think CPS cases are public information someone can just look up? No, right? Why is this in the news? Because it’s a civil suit.

            Impairment as a result of the inadequate guardianship of the unborn child would get a CPS case started and then under observation, if not have the child removed. This particular case has a news article because of the civil case. If a child is born with a defect due to the mothers substance abuse, how would that normally make the news? The mother isn’t running to the papers about it. The CPS workers see it all too often and would lose their jobs if they did. Anyway, I’m going to block you now. You clearly want to argue about something that’s common knowledge because you want to prove some bullshit point. I’m not interested in interacting with you further.

            • teydam@lemmy.worldEnglish
              62·
              1 year ago

              Even children born with opiods in their system can have corrections taken. Its not ideal, and disorders are real, but I think shaming people for “this isn’t something you should be defending” is coming off in a bad way.

            • flucksy_bango@lemmy.worldEnglish
              12·
              1 year ago

              Lmao, dumbass loser can’t find sources. Why do you idiots even bother? Do you like being wrong?

    • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
      204·
      1 year ago

      There is a recommended maximum amount of alcohol to be consumed whole pregnant. It isn’t zero. I’m sure the same should be true for almost any other substance, but as far as I’m aware the guidelines for Marijuana don’t exist, though they may. I don’t really know. The article does not state how much she used or if it was above or below any recommendations, or that the child had any birth defects related to Marijuana use. In fact, it seems to imply that there wasn’t any complications besides legal ones.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
          54·
          1 year ago

          Again, alcohol consumption has been shown to be safe below a certain level. Yes, “drug” use can be bad if abused, but that goes for all drugs, not just what people typically call drugs which are substances we’ve decided to regulate for usually no good reason. Caffeine can have negative side effects, but no one is taking people’s children away because they drank too much coffee.

          • smollittlefrog@lemdro.idEnglish
            4·
            1 year ago

            According to the CDC, you’re wrong.

            There is no known safe amount of alcohol use during pregnancy or while trying to get pregnant. There is also no safe time for alcohol use during pregnancy. All types of alcohol are equally harmful, including all wines and beer.

            The reason caffeine is not as much of a problem is because according to the CDC it has little to no effect on a baby. The worst effect linked to very high caffeine consumption is poor sleep, which is unsurprising.

            Caffeine […] does not adversely affect the infant when the mother consumes low to moderate amounts (about 300 milligrams or less per day, which is about 2 to 3 cups of coffee). Irritability, poor sleeping patterns, fussiness, and jitteriness have been reported in infants of mothers with very high intakes of caffeine, about 10 cups of coffee or more per day.

            Also according to LactMed, which is referred to by the CDC:

            Studies in mothers taking 5 cups of coffee daily found no stimulation in breastfed infants 3 weeks of age and older.

            We conclude: Alcohol does not have a safe level of consumption and is always bad for your child. Caffeine on the other hand is usually completely harmless and in the worst case only causes the normal effects of caffeine, not long term damage. They are not comparable.

            Now, is marijuana consumption more similar to alcohol, as in it causes long term damage to the child, or is it more similar to caffeine, as in it only has small and temporary effects on the child?

            According to the CDC, marijuana consumption is assumed to cause long term damage to the child.

            Some research shows that using marijuana while you are pregnant can cause […] abnormal neurological development.

            [S]tudies suggest that marijuana use by persons during pregnancy could be linked to problems with attention, memory, problem-solving skills, and behavior in their children later in life.

            It seems like marijuana is not just part of some “substances we’ve decided to regulate for usually no good reason”, but actually a harmful substance with reason to be regulated.

              • smollittlefrog@lemdro.idEnglish
                32·
                1 year ago

                An opinion piece, published 15 years ago? Let’s look at current recommendations by renown organisations:

                HHS (USA: Department of Health & Human Services)

                It is not safe for women to drink any type or amount of alcohol during pregnancy.

                DHAC (Australia: Department of Health and Aged Care)

                No safe level of alcohol consumption during pregnancy or while breastfeeding has been identified.

                Even a small amount of alcohol can harm a baby’s development and may have lifelong effects.

                DHV (Germany: Deutscher Hebammenverband)

                Im Gegensatz zum Koffein gibt es bei Alkohol keine Menge, die für das ungeborene Kind unbedenklich ist. Es wird sogar empfohlen, bereits bei der Planung einer Schwangerschaft auf Alkohol zu verzichten. Selbst in geringen Mengen kann Alkohol zu Fehlbildungen, Wachstumsstörungen und einer Schädigung des Gewebes inklusive der Nervenzellen führen.

                Translation using DeepL:

                Unlike caffeine, there is no amount of alcohol that is safe for the unborn child. It is even recommended to avoid alcohol already when planning a pregnancy. Even in small amounts, alcohol can lead to malformations, growth disorders and damage to the tissue including the nerve cells.

                RCOG (UK: Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists)

                Although the risk of harm to the baby is low with small amounts of alcohol before becoming aware of the pregnancy, there is no ‘safe’ level of alcohol to drink when you are pregnant.

                There is no proven safe amount of alcohol a woman can drink during pregnancy.

                nidirect (Northern Ireland)

                Women are therefore strongly advised to not drink alcohol at all at any stage during pregnancy because there may be an increased risk of miscarriage. The current advice is to avoid alcohol completely.

                CDC (USA: Center for Disease Control and Prevention

                There is no known safe amount of alcohol use during pregnancy

                • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Sound medical advice for pregnant women is always a good idea.

                  Following sound medical advice is usually a good idea, too, at least since leeches went out of fashion.

                  It’s not the law, though.

      • RobertOwnageJunior@lemmy.worldEnglish
        34·
        1 year ago

        If you don’t have the fucking self control to stop smoking, drinking or taking any potentially harmful substances during pregnancy, you shouldn’t have kids. There shouldn’t even be a debate here.

        • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          5·
          1 year ago

          I’m always happy when we can find agreement in a conversation like this, and I certainly agree that there shouldn’t even be a debate — about enforcing your morality on every woman who may have smoked tobacco, imbibed alcohol, or taken any potentially harmful substance during pregnancy, by having the government seize her child/children. Enforced uniformly, most American children would be wards of the state.

          • RobertOwnageJunior@lemmy.worldEnglish
            34·
            1 year ago

            I am not trying to say take away every child from their mother because they smoked one blunt, I am saying don’t smoke a blunt. Stop being an irresponsible dumb fuck. That shit is never GOOD for your child, and if that’s not your priority, maybe you should think on your own morality.

            • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
              3·
              1 year ago

              I am not trying to say take away every child from their mother because they smoked one blunt, I am saying don’t smoke a blunt.

              Sound medical advice.

    • possibly a cat@lemmy.mlEnglish
      75·
      1 year ago

      By that logic we should be removing children from religious parents, since it has a higher individual and social cost.

    • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      1816·
      1 year ago

      Oh, piffle. This kid was damaged by being taken from his mother. That’s not something you should be defending.

    • kttnpunk@lemmy.worldEnglish
      33·
      1 year ago

      THC? so what. We all have microplastics in us and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. I bet the air quality in NYC is hurting that baby vastly more than a little pot smoke.

      • uranibaba@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        You are saying to ignore one problem because of another problem, which is stupid. The first problem still need to be fixed as well.