Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
The Gaffer's Philosophy:
Part 127: Babies at Risk:
November 1, 2004:
While I am dealing with the issues of rights, I cannot overlook the rights of infants. Too often we overlook the fact that infants are humans. They are not possessions. They are not baby-doll playthings for lonesome women. They are not prizes, nor are they liabilities. They are humans, responsibilities, and assets. We should so treat them.
I have written about this in previous essays on child welfare in this series. Now I am taking another look from a different angle concerning the rights of kids. This resulted from a rather curious e-mail I received recently. After reading the e-mail, I am convinced it is a put on. The person who wrote it is not the ignorant ghetto person they are pretending to be. It is more than probably from a middle class highschool brat. Perhaps he is trying to get me to do his homework assignment. I notice the carefully misspelled words and the cutesy Hollywood notions of poor people's speech mannerisms. It happens that I have known some poor people in my time. I can only say, that portrayal is crap.
So what? The e-mail did reveal some basic facts about a serious social problem. So, I answered it as though it were legitimate. I also thought about the issues involved. Here is the e-mail.
Dear Sir,
I am writing this with a question, Do hosptials do blood test
on new born babies? The reason I am asking this is I just found
out my step daughter is on CRACK., and during the time she carried
the Lil Angles ( twins) she was on the drug. Someone asked her
if the hosp. did a test she stated "No thank God" She
still has the bad habbit. She even sells her food stamps for it.
The babies may not be my blood, but they are my deceases husbands.
I have NO grands of my own blood and it just kills me not having
any to LOVE and hold. So many babies live with this and I want
to know what I should do about this information I found out last
night? It is not fair she want even bring them to see her only
Lil brother.
It has been seven years since the passing of my husband it seams
like yesterday. My son heard the conversation between us about
this , and it up-sets him also. He is just like his father. A
loveing, caring person. Even a eleven he is aware of the bad drugs
, and he feels the same as I do. Children should not have to suffer
for their parents mistakes. I have cried, and cried about this.
I am a good person and I help everyone that I can, but I am lost
at what to do. I need proof before I accuse someone. How can I
get it.
Please ,please help me.
God Bless you and your family
Debby
I replied as follows:
Dear Debby:
I regret that it took several days for me to respond to you. I have been behind due to the press of other events in my life. Also, the questions you posed lie outside the area of my personal knowledge. In fact, I found it necessary to consult an expert. The expert I finally consulted was Mrs. Gaffer who is a registered nurse in Michigan. Until she retired some years ago she did work in a local hospital and understood their procedures.
One thing you must understand is my answers must necessarily be specific to the medical practices in Michigan as controlled by the laws of Michigan. I would suspect the laws of other progressive states would be similar to those of Michigan. These things will be overseen by the state board of health or department of health in your state. They are the ones you must consult to find the specifics for your state. I do not have time to do that research for you. You will find their phone numbers listed in your phone book under your state's listings.
By law, hospitals in Michigan do blood tests on all infants born in the hospital. However, they do not routinely test for drug addiction in the infant. What they test for are genetic defects and deficiencies such as thyroid deficiency. In short, they test for those things that are dangerous to the child and treatable if detected early.
The only reasons a hospital would test for drug addiction would be if the mother were an obvious addict or if the infant showed symptoms of withdrawal. In this case the child would be at grave risk. Quick actions would be necessary to save the life of the infant. The hospital would intervene to administer the drug of addiction in order to prevent death from withdrawal. They would then gradually reduce the dosage over time to wean the child off of the drug. That is a very tough procedure for everyone involved and they would not undertake it unless absolutely necessary.
In your case, you indicate that some time has passed since the children were born. If this is true, you have good cause for hope. I am given to understand that the symptoms of withdrawal would show up almost immediately and the hospital personnel would notice that. If your twins were born in a hospital and were released, there is a good chance they are not addicted. Only you will know that.
As to your other question, what you can do about it, I can only suggest that you seek out and consult one of the child welfare agencies where you live. These are social workers who are dedicated to the care and protection of infants. If there is a possible case for official intervention, they will know how to investigate the situation and how to do what is necessary to protect the children.
Good luck:
Willie Gaffer:
Now, what comes up here obviously is the issues of drugs in our culture. That is a serious problem which I have not directly addressed. I will have to do that in a future essay. For now, I want to consider the impact of drugs on the innocent victims, namely the children of addicts. here are the questions.
How far can we go to protect kids?
Where does intervention become invasion of privacy?
Do the rights of the mother (woman's rights) supercede the rights
of the infant?
How soon should we take kids out of homes where they are at risk?
I would be inclined to go quite a bit further than the current laws allow us. Let us consider the facts. First, when the mother is an addict, I will insist that intervention in the hospital to save the kid is the correct procedure. That is the way it is done in Michigan hospitals and I believe it is correct.
Okay, then what about after the child is releases. Let us first face the fact that most drug addicts never recover. This means the kid will continue to be at risk even if he is not addicted. A drug addict is a very dangerous person. They are careless in the extreme about themselves and the people around them. In addition, they are in a dilemma because they must have their fix and they usually do not have enough money to pay for it. They will at least ignore the needs of the child to pay for their fix. In a desperate situation like that, addicts have been known to sell their children or even allow them to be sodomized. In the best case, the kid will most likely become a drug addict himself.
In this case, I believe we must become more proactive for the kid than we currently are. We should not hesitate to take the child out of that environment. We must insist that the addict take the cure and prove they are cured for a reasonable amount of time before they can get their kid back. After that, they should be on a very short lease with regular visits from the authorities. They should have to undergo regular tests to make sure they are still clean. The invasion of privacy argument is crap when it comes to protecting a kid from a known addict. This situation is ethically identical to protecting children frm pedophiles. The privacy issue does not wash. Regression occurs much too often for any other posture.
This is the reality. Our children are too often victims. We
must become more proactive in protecting and nurturing them. We
should take them out of dangerous environments and keep them out.
We must do that whatever it costs. The alternative, what we are
seeing now, it too grim to continue. We don't need more sociopathic
kids. We don't need more psychopaths. We don't need more addicts.
We do need more really happy bright kids. If we have to build
special homes for them with trained caregivers, so be it.
Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
|
|
|
|