The official rights of a foetus continue to be an unending legal and philosophical conversation. Yet newer discussion has emerged on the convictions of mothers for their spontaneous loss of pregnancy.
In October 2021, the state of Oklahoma convicted Brittney Poolaw of first-degree manslaughter after the miscarriage of her 15 to 17-week-old foetus and sentenced her to four years in prison. After admitting to methamphetamine and marijuana use during pregnancy, trace quantities of these substances were found in the foetus’ brain and liver on post-mortem. 1 However, the report also cited evidence of ‘congenital abnormality … placental abruption and chorioamnionitis’, all deemed by the medical examiner as ‘conditions contributing’ to miscarriage.2,3
As 12–24% of recognised pregnancies result in miscarriage, 4 there is no consistent, investigatory process to consider these as homicides. Currently, a growing adversarial relationship between pregnant women and their foetuses is challenging women's rights. Between 2006 and 2020, the National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW) identified 1254 cases where women but for their pregnancy, would not have been subject to legal charges. 5 Expanding awareness of prenatal harms questions the expectation for pregnant women to conform to new, scientific discoveries. Can a woman be wrong ‘for drinking coffee or exercising too little, each of which could pose some risk to a fetus’?. 6
There is legal contention on the shifting grounds convicting Poolaw. By ruling miscarriage as manslaughter, the intentional abortion of a foetus could constitute a murder. However, at the time, Oklahoma permitted abortion up to 22 weeks of gestation. Poolaw's 17-week-old foetus was not viable, and a termination of pregnancy would be legal. Furthermore, criminalising substance abuse whilst pregnant may conversely not protect the health of mother and child as fear of punishment creates a healthcare barrier. 7 In Oklahoma and 24 other states, healthcare providers must report suspected prenatal drug use to police. 3 Yet pregnancy could catalyse a change in mindset, producing a window of opportunity for cessation of recreational drug use that should be harnessed. Some argue incarceration for addiction is the wrong approach for a classified disease, considering the successful approach of Portugal to prioritise the ‘psychosocial vulnerability of high-risk users’ by decriminalising drug use in 2000. 8
Roe v Wade 1973 used to shape a legal framework in the US, meaning states could not outlaw abortion before the point of foetal viability. States could restrict abortion before that point but not inflict ‘undue burden’ on women seeking abortions (Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992). In May 2022, Oklahoma signed the Heartbeat Act – Senate Bill 1503, one of the most restrictive bans across the US. It sidestepped Roe v Wade by using civilian enforcement rather than state officials to criminalise abortion if cardiac activity can be detected. 9 Now the legal basis of Roe v Wade has been overturned by the current Mississippi case in the Supreme Court and loopholes are no longer needed to impede abortion access. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act 2004 recognises foetuses as a legal victim so women can be prosecuted for feticide, chemical endangerment and murder. 5 Cases such as Poolaw's – guilty of misdemeanour manslaughter by drug possession and consumption, could become a recurring scenario.
Conflicting scientific opinion compromises understanding of the effects of foetal exposure to drug use. NAPW strongly states that ‘none of the criminalised drugs are teratogens’ or have not shown to be ‘effective at causing pregnancy loss’. 10 Studies reveal negative effects of cocaine, alcohol and opiates on birthweight, neurodevelopment and the understanding of neonatal abstinence syndrome.11–14 Yet cannabis and methamphetamine are two drugs particularly lacking research. 15 Furthermore, correlation with adverse outcomes does not infer causation. One study found ‘the effects of poverty, poor diet, and tobacco use … to be as harmful or more harmful than the drug use itself’. 16 So, whilst exposing the necessitation for further appraisal, current science does not appear to categorically link Poolaw's miscarriage to her substance use.
There may be culpability in knowingly poisoning a foetus but the definition and evidence of ‘knowingly’ and ‘poisoning’ is elusive. For Poolaw, this ambiguity encourages NAPW to challenge the justification of her charges. The constitutional right to legal abortion in the USA was never wholly accessible due to federal policies and state restrictions, yet now that overarching right is gone, law-making authority is delegated to individual states. Only some of these are predicted to protect access to abortions and women's bodily autonomy. Alongside the discourse defining a foetus’ legal independence and differing attitudes towards substance use, the resulting dynamic legal and socioeconomic infrastructures will need careful consideration and clarification for the future of women's rights.
Footnotes
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iD: Nikolas P Lemos https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9566-8331
References
- 1.Gilbert A. After miscarriage, woman is convicted of manslaughter. The ‘fetus was not viable,’ advocates say. 2021.
- 2.Goldberg M. Opinion | When a Miscarriage Is Manslaughter. The New York Times. 2021 2021-10-19.
- 3.Tsai J. Why We Can’t Look Away From Brittney Poolaw’s Case. 2021.
- 4.Carter D, Misri S, Tomfohr L. Psychologic aspects of early pregnancy loss. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2007; 50: 154–165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Paltrow L, Flavin J. Arrests of and forced interventions on pregnant women in the United States, 1973–2005: implications for women's legal status and public health. J Health Polit Policy Law 2012; 38(2): 299–343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Andre C, Velasquez M. Forcing Pregnant Women to do as They're Told: Maternal vs. Fetal Rights 2021; 1, https://www.scu.edu/mcae/publications/iie/v1n2/pregnant.html.
- 7.Stone R. Pregnant women and substance use: fear, stigma, and barriers to care. Health Justice 2015; 3: 2. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Rêgo X, Oliveira MJ, Lameira Cet al. et al. 20 years of Portuguese drug policy – developments, challenges and the quest for human rights. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2021; 16: 59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Fuller T. Oklahoma bans abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy. The New York Times. 2022 2022-05-04.
- 10.NAPW. Pregnancy and Drug and Alcohol Use – New York | National Advocates for Pregnant Women 2021, https://www.nationaladvocatesforpregnantwomen.org/issues/pregnancy-and-drug-and-alcohol-use/.
- 11.Gouin K, Murphy K, Shah PS. Effects of cocaine use during pregnancy on low birthweight and preterm birth: systematic review and metaanalyses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 204: 340. e1–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Patrick SW, Schumacher RE, Benneyworth BDet al. et al. Neonatal abstinence syndrome and associated health care expenditures: United States, 2000–2009. Jama 2012; 307: 1934–1940. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Nutt D, Hayes A, Fonville L, et al. Alcohol and the brain. Nutrients 2021; 13(11): 3938. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Hayatbakhsh MR, Flenady VJ, Gibbons KS, et al. Birth outcomes associated with cannabis use before and during pregnancy. Pediatr Res 2012; 71: 215–219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Keegan J, Parva M, Finnegan Met al. et al. Addiction in pregnancy. J Addict Dis 2010; 29: 175–191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Schempf AH. Illicit drug use and neonatal outcomes: a critical review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2007; 62: 749–757. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]