Because you’re not going to learn about it in the news
As a student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I am extremely involved in politics, specifically women’s healthcare. I try to be current on policy and laws passed through our congress, and educate my fellow peers on anything interesting. Recently I learned about the “Cocaine Mom” Law and my brain has been rattled about it ever since. I’m assuming not many women know about this law, so I am going to break it down for you to the best of my ability.
Let me start by disclosing that I am not a political scholar and I am not giving you medical advice, this is just based on research I have done.
The Wisconsin “Cocaine Mom” Law, more formally the 1997 Wisconsin Act 292, is an act that gives courts the right to make judgments and legal decisions about an expectant mother if she is suspected of previous substance abuse. (Wis Stat 48.133) It gives courts jurisdiction over fetuses and their mothers, the rights of taking an expectant mother into custody and the ability to report unborn child abuse. It is a law that goes against the overturned Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade as well as Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which highlights the U.S. right to privacy. However, the law is still a part of Wisconsin’s statutory law, and it is still enforced. (Wis. Stat. § 48.01)
One example of the enforcement of this law is the case of Alicia Beltran (Beltran v. Strachota, 2013). At a prenatal appointment, she told her doctor that she previously had a Percocet dependence and used Suboxone to treat it but had since been off of it and was no longer dependent. Her healthcare provider told her to start taking it again and she refused, leading to her substance abuse being reported. She was arrested and taken to a child-in-need-of-protective-services (CHIPS) proceeding. She was then forcibly taken to a treatment center, having never tested positive for controlled substances. She did not receive prenatal care and was prevented from going to her OB/GYN appointments outside of her facility. Her baby was born healthy, with no thanks to the law or her medical team, which she didn’t have access to (Frank et al, 2001).
This is just one example of the “Cocaine Mom” Law controlling pregnant people who have no intention of using substances and have every intention of caring for their unborn child. This law disproportionately targets marginalized communities. Low-income women are less likely to seek out care out of fear of punishment and scrutiny (Stone, 2015).
This law does not advocate for the health of the mother, nor the right to privacy, and ignores the negative health outcomes. Wisconsin is one of the few states where a pregnant person who could be committed would not have their right to counsel, while their fetus does (Wis. Stat. §§ 48.347, 48.355(4)(c)). Wisconsin, South Dakota, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Minnesota are the only five states that consider prenatal substance use grounds for civil commitment. Wisconsin is the only state that may involuntarily place a mother in a treatment facility, residential facility or a friend’s or relative’s home for up to one year under the law (Hayes, 2020)
Now I do recognize that substance abuse while pregnant is against health guidance and I do understand that fetuses should not be subjected to addiction while in utero, but the fact of the matter is this: Wisconsin does not have a law in place that bans prenatal drug use. The only state that bans prenatal drug use is Tennessee. (Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-107 (2015)) The “Cocaine Mom” Law is harmful to women’s rights and women’s health. It is unconstitutional, unjust and diminishes the personhood of a pregnant person. We need to protect our expecting mothers by giving them healthcare and resources that benefit public health while following basic human rights, not by tearing them away.
If you want to learn more about this law you should watch the documentary “Personhood” by filmmaker Jo Ardinger and visit the University of Wisconsin’s Collaborative for Reproductive Equity (CORE) website, for an even more comprehensive explanation of the legislation, its history and how it is affecting women across the state.