Bill to criminalize pregnant drinkers and drug users moves in NC House

A new bill that would shorten the time frame for the termination of parental rights and criminalize pregnant women and parents for using alcohol or other controlled substances moved ahead in the state House this week.

Sponsored by committee chairwoman Rep. Sarah Stevens, R-Surry, Senate Bill 625 would rewrite the legal definition of child neglect to add the use of alcohol or illegal substances by the mother while pregnant with a child. It would also define as “neglect” parental substance abuse that leaves them “unable to care for and provide a safe and appropriate home” for a child after birth.

Stevens says such a law is needed because children need more protection from negligent or abusive parents. But social services advocates warn it could adversely affect children. Meanwhile, state health officials took the unusual step of speaking against the measure in committee.

The bill, which passed the House Judiciary 2 committee Wednesday, could lead to children being removed from mothers or other parents with addiction, although the bill stipulates that it shouldn’t be the sole reason for removal if the parent is meeting expectations in a substance abuse treatment program. The bill hasn’t been scheduled for its next committee hearing.

The measure would set a one-year limit from the time a child is removed from a home until the child has found a permanent placement, either their original home or an adoptive home. Stevens said the intent is to get children out of the system and into a permanent home more quickly.

Other parts of the bill would shorten the time required to terminate parental rights from one year to nine months, give people the right to sue the state Department of Health and Human Services if they feel they’ve been harmed by a policy that didn’t go through the state’s official administrative rulemaking process, and suspend a medical evaluation program for suspected abuse cases, currently operated jointly with the UNC School of Medicine.

Stevens said the evaluation program, known as Regional Abuse and Medical Specialists, or RAMS, should be put on hold until it goes through the rulemaking process.

“There have been some violations already of the RAMS program that we consider inappropriate,” Stevens told the committee. "I have a report of a RAMS medical specialist going out and overriding what the doctor said. The doctor said it was an accident, and the expert said, 'No, we're going to remove this [child] from the home.'"

DHHS staff said the agency had not been informed of the complaint.

Democrats on the committee described the bill as “punitive” and "draconian."

“We're shortening the period of time of ripping away biological kids from their natural parents from 12 months to nine months?” Rep. Marcia Morey, D-Durham, asked during a committee meeting Wednesday.

Morey, a retired judge, said court backlogs can delay a case for months, and the wait time to get into a substance abuse or mental health treatment program can easily exceed six months, “because we're not funding appropriate mental health substance abuse services.”

“If this clock starts running from the date of the order, and that mother or that parent can't even get into services within eight months, there's no possibility of her meeting requirements,” Morey said.

Stevens responded: “If you don't want to be a parent, you don't have an absolute right to continue to hold onto that child. You need to act consistent with your parental rights and responsibilities.”

Rep. Laura Budd, D-Mecklenburg, said it criminalizes addiction, which she said is a disease.

“We don't criminalize cancer,” she said. “We don't criminalize other diseases. This is the only one that tends to rise to the surface as something we need to punish people for having.”

She also noted that the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology “has said that this is a very bad idea,” because pregnant women will avoid prenatal care if they are afraid they won’t pass a drug test.

“That's a problem not just for the mother, who's now not going to have support services on the healthcare level,” Budd said. “It's a problem for the child, because now we're setting everyone up for failure. We are creating a class of children for whom the system is going to be their home because we have set the mothers up for failure.”

Rep. David Willis, R-Union, owns a child care business. He asked the committee to support the bill, saying the top priority should be the welfare of the child, not the mother.

“We've got parents who willfully want out of that relationship, do not want the responsibility. Why are we continuing to make it harder for them?” Willis asked.

“Interfering with access to prenatal care by creating fear harms babies directly,” Budd responded. “A lack of prenatal care harms babies.”

Senior NCDHHS staff voiced support for the RAMS program and warned that creating the right to sue the agency would violate sovereign immunity.

Deputy NCDHHS Secretary Susan Osborne said she's concerned about making substance abuse during pregnancy a reason for removal of a child. She worries it’ll result in fewer women receiving prenatal care. “This will significantly impact rural areas where services are not available,” Osborne said.

NCDHHS General Counsel Julie Cronin said shortening the time frame for termination of parental rights could jeopardize federal funding for the agency. “Making reasonable efforts for reunification between parent and child is a federal standard and federal requirement,” Cronin said. “Shortening the termination of parental rights time frame for when a child is removed from the home from 12 months down to nine months will affect reasonable efforts due to court delays and lack of court time.”

Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the NC Values Coalition, spoke in support of the bill.

"We believe statutory language requiring the court to consider in utero exposure to drugs and alcohol is very reasonable," Fitzgerald told the committee on Wednesday. "Every child in this state deserves to be raised in a home with parents who can provide a loving and stable environment."

The bill did not get a second hearing before lawmakers adjourned for the summer Thursday, but it is eligible for consideration when they reconvene later this year.