Boston Hospital Will Now Ignore Infants Born With Drugs in Their System

[jerryskids 6,799]

"Health equity," except for babies of drug addicts, who are expendable I guess.  

Quote

This is very on-brand for the Left. 

When forced to choose between the health or well-being of children or the convenience of an adult, they will always and everywhere choose the latter. 

In this case, Black live may matter, as long as they are above a certain age. 

The particular situation here relates to hiding the high incidence of child neglect by Black mothers, who apparently show up to the hospital under the influence of drugs at a disproportionate rate. 

This is a very bad thing...for The Narrative™. The infants? Who cares?

The hospital will no longer report suspected abuse or neglect to the state solely if a newborn baby tests positive for drugs after birth.

Instead, hospitals will now require written consent before conducting a drug test on the expectant mother or infant, in most cases.

Mass General Brigham said the move is to address the "racial and ethnic inequities" present in healthcare, adding that substance abuse disorder in the context of pregnancy more "disproportionately affects Black individuals."

In a normal world, it wouldn't matter if the mother were White, Black, or Green. If a mother is taking drugs while pregnant and delivering the infant while high on crack, it should be reported as child abuse. That person is not fit to be a mother, and the child is at terrible risk. 

 

But what about DEI? If we report these incidents, it will give people the impression that Black women are more likely to be drug addicts, and that is not a nice fact to have out in the world. 

The spin is that this is for the good of the infants, whose mothers may be seeking treatment and will be good mothers. Of course this is bulls**t, because a report to child services doesn't mean that a child is removed from a home; it means the situation will be investigated. 

“The goal here is balancing the safety of infants and families,” said Dr. Sarah Wakeman, senior medical director for substance use disorder at Mass General Brigham. “A positive toxicology test does not tell you anything about someone’s ability to parent. Actually, a positive buprenorphine test tells you this person is engaged in treatment.”

Legislation that would amend the state’s reporting requirement moved from one committee to another last week on Beacon Hill. It would direct the state Department of Public Health to write new regulations about drug dependence and child welfare reporting at birth, and require health officials to design plans aimed at helping parents managing an addiction.

Advocates for children appear to be on board, believe it or not, because this is after all Massachussetts. 

Some supporters of the bill say faster progress is needed. Fatal overdoses during and shortly after a pregnancy more than tripled nationwide between 2018 and 2021.

Massachusetts Child Advocate Maria Mossaides said in an email she shares the concern that mandated reporting can “exacerbate fear and stress” for parents of newborns. But Mossaides said she also worries about policies that vary from one hospital to the next.

“Massachusetts needs a comprehensive approach to address these cases,” Mossaides wrote. “Passing this legislation is crucial.”

 

Fatal overdoses tripled. So let's quit testing mothers for addictive drugs when they come in to give birth. 

Make it make sense. 

“We are committed to reducing stigma and promoting health equity, especially for those affected by substance use disorder,” said a spokeswoman for the Executive Office of Health and Human Services in an email. “Substance exposure alone does not automatically equate to abuse and neglect, and we will continue working with the advocacy community to determine what support an individual needs and how they can best access them.”

Babies are not disposable, whatever leftists say. This is about protecting adults, most of whom are addicted and at the very least need treatment, and about juking the statistics to hide an inconvenient fact. 

Whenever you hear the word "equity," assume something evil is happening. It almost always is. 

Mass General Brigham said changing its child welfare reporting guidelines is part of a larger effort to eliminate racism in the health system. Several studies have documentedhigher drug testing rates for Black newborns compared to white infants, and Black babies are more likely to be reported for alleged abuse and neglect.

Mass General Brigham's new policy takes steps to limit drug testing for newborns and require written consent for testing pregnant people and infants outside of emergency situations.

“The updated policy reflects our focus on providing safe and equitable care for all patients,” said Dr. Allison Bryant, Mass General Brigham’s associate chief health equity officer, in a statement. “The process allowed us to turn our lens to understand our own contributions to stigma and inequity and strive to fix them.”

 

Child welfare? Nobody cares. Abortion up until birth is already the law in many places, so why stop when the child gets out of the womb?

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2024/04/04/boston-hospital-will-now-ignore-infants-born-with-drugs-in-their-system-n3785882

[supermike80 1,913]

 But only if they're born on the moon

[Maximum Overkill 1,997]

This is a Liberal problem and Liberals will NEVER address their own. There's a cute little box full of narratives, anything outside of that box never happened.

[jerryskids 6,799]

2 hours ago, supermike80 said:

 But only if they're born on the moon

Sorry, didn't see it.  Where is the thread?  Nothing in the titles is leaping out at me on the first page.   

[Fireballer 2,642]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Sorry, didn't see it.  Where is the thread?  Nothing in the titles is leaping out at me on the first page.   

I did it yesterday but nothing in title lends itself to the subject matter

[supermike80 1,913]

 

[jerryskids 6,799]

Thanks, I'll copy and paste my OP into that thread and delete this one. 

[weepaws 3,194]

People are wicked.  

[squistion 2,203]

Thread title is incorrect that "Boston Hospital Will Now Ignore Infants Born With Drugs in Their System"

That makes it sound like the infants won't be treated at all. The change has to do with what is being reported to the state.

[Thornton Melon 620]

11 hours ago, squistion said:

Thread title is incorrect that "Boston Hospital Will Now Ignore Infants Born With Drugs in Their System"

That makes it sound like the infants won't be treated at all. The change has to do with what is being reported to the state.

Phew...that makes me feel better....

[jerryskids 6,799]

13 hours ago, squistion said:

Thread title is incorrect that "Boston Hospital Will Now Ignore Infants Born With Drugs in Their System"

That makes it sound like the infants won't be treated at all. The change has to do with what is being reported to the state.

Wrong

Quote

Mass General Brigham's new policy takes steps to limit drug testing for newborns and require written consent for testing pregnant people and infants outside of emergency situations.

 

[squistion 2,203]

Just now, jerryskids said:

Wrong

Right.

Limiting drug testing is not ignoring infants and not treating them at all as the thread title wrongfully suggests. 

[Alias Detective 1,402]

5 minutes ago, squistion said:

Right.

Limiting drug testing is not ignoring infants and not treating them at all as the thread title wrongfully suggests. 

This take is idiotic..  So much so I know you are pulling our leg.  I commend you. You almost had us.  

[jerryskids 6,799]

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

Right.

Limiting drug testing is not ignoring infants and not treating them at all as the thread title wrongfully suggests. 

Wrong.

Limiting drug testing has the effect of ignoring the possible drug effects for those children, so those children will go untreated.

The title doesn't say "every".  So it is accurate, you semantic dooshnozzle.  

[edjr 6,592]

Showed this to my liberal leaning lady last night. She was in shock. Sad I can't convince her how deplorable liberals are.

BUT TRUMP!

[squistion 2,203]

Just now, jerryskids said:

Wrong.

Limiting drug testing has the effect of ignoring the possible drug effects for those children, so those children will go untreated.

The title doesn't say "every".  So it is accurate, you semantic dooshnozzle. 

But not doing routine drug testing is not ignoring these infants and not treating them at all as the thread title misleadingly suggests.

[Alias Detective 1,402]

Just now, squistion said:

But not doing routine drug testing is not ignoring these infants and not treating them at all as the thread title misleadingly suggests.

Again, you are kidding.  Right?

[squistion 2,203]

3 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Again, you are kidding.  Right?

No.