Re: Of Interest And Importance To Obstetricians ... -- REPLY
From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Sat Mar 24 16:17:01 2001
could it be the tobacco lobby is more powerful than the crack lobby?
art
At Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Harrison Sheld wrote:
>
>It would be nice to know how many mothers forced into rehab are recidivistic.
>Just because users are forced into rehab doesn't mean they will kick the habit.
>It is apparent that it is a whole life style that must go into rehab not just
>the victims of it.
>
>Concern for fetal welfare is top priority for obstetricians, a point which is
>not arguable. But are there other substances of abuse that adversely effect
>fetal outcome which a more widespread detrimental effect than illicit drugs? For
>example, alcohol and tobacco. So after forcing drug users into rehabilitation
>for the sake of fetal welfare, do we then go after users of alcohol and tobacco,
>and admit them to required rehab for the sake of their fetuses? How about the
>poorly compliant insulin-dependent diabetics risking their fetal welfare by
>inappropriate compliance with standard medical advice, should they be required
>to go into rehab? You can see where I am going with this. How long will it be
>before we build obstetrical gulags for the welfare of the "unborn children?"
>
>My point is: there is little comfort to be gained by focusing on the victim
>("Let's get 'em all into rehab" per the Attorney General of South Carolina)
>while at the same time scant efforts are being even suggested to deal with the
>larger problem, i.e., the life-styles that encourage and lead to these unhealthy
>behaviors.
>
>Paul Prior MD wrote:
><snip>
>
>> We, as obstetricians, have -2- patients, and the program which was
>> being debated was designed to force mothers into drug rehab to protect
>> the unborn child. One may argue the relative merits of autonomy vs.
>> benevolence here, but I personally applauded the program.
>
><snip>
--
art fougner, md
A series of 1000 cases begins with but a single anecdote.
|
|
