How penalizing substance use in pregnancy affects treatment and research: a qualitative examination of researchers' perspectives.

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsad019
Seema K Shah, Leishla Perez-Cardona, Khrystyna Helner, Suena H Massey, Ashish Premkumar, Renee Edwards, Elizabeth S Norton, Cynthia E Rogers, Emily S Miller, Christopher D Smyser, Matthew M Davis, Lauren S Wakschlag
{"title":"How penalizing substance use in pregnancy affects treatment and research: a qualitative examination of researchers' perspectives.","authors":"Seema K Shah,&nbsp;Leishla Perez-Cardona,&nbsp;Khrystyna Helner,&nbsp;Suena H Massey,&nbsp;Ashish Premkumar,&nbsp;Renee Edwards,&nbsp;Elizabeth S Norton,&nbsp;Cynthia E Rogers,&nbsp;Emily S Miller,&nbsp;Christopher D Smyser,&nbsp;Matthew M Davis,&nbsp;Lauren S Wakschlag","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsad019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Laws regulating substance use in pregnancy are changing and may have unintended consequences on scientific efforts to address the opioid epidemic. Yet, how these laws affect care and research is poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews using purposive and snowball sampling of researchers who have engaged pregnant people experiencing substance use. We explored views on laws governing substance use in pregnancy and legal reform possibilities. Interviews were double coded. Data were examined using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We interviewed 22 researchers (response rate: 71 per cent) and identified four themes: (i) harms of punitive laws, (ii) negative legal impacts on research, (iii) proposals for legal reform, and (iv) activism over time.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Researchers view laws penalizing substance use during pregnancy as failing to treat addiction as a disease and harming pregnant people and families. Respondents routinely made scientific compromises to protect participants. While some have successfully advocated for legal reform, ongoing advocacy is needed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adverse impacts from criminalizing substance use during pregnancy extend to research on this common and stigmatized problem. Rather than penalizing substance use in pregnancy, laws should approach addiction as a medical issue and support scientific efforts to improve outcomes for affected families.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d3/ed/lsad019.PMC10332932.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad019","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Laws regulating substance use in pregnancy are changing and may have unintended consequences on scientific efforts to address the opioid epidemic. Yet, how these laws affect care and research is poorly understood.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews using purposive and snowball sampling of researchers who have engaged pregnant people experiencing substance use. We explored views on laws governing substance use in pregnancy and legal reform possibilities. Interviews were double coded. Data were examined using thematic analysis.

Results: We interviewed 22 researchers (response rate: 71 per cent) and identified four themes: (i) harms of punitive laws, (ii) negative legal impacts on research, (iii) proposals for legal reform, and (iv) activism over time.

Discussion: Researchers view laws penalizing substance use during pregnancy as failing to treat addiction as a disease and harming pregnant people and families. Respondents routinely made scientific compromises to protect participants. While some have successfully advocated for legal reform, ongoing advocacy is needed.

Conclusion: Adverse impacts from criminalizing substance use during pregnancy extend to research on this common and stigmatized problem. Rather than penalizing substance use in pregnancy, laws should approach addiction as a medical issue and support scientific efforts to improve outcomes for affected families.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
怀孕期间惩罚药物使用如何影响治疗和研究:对研究人员观点的定性检查。
导言:规范怀孕期间药物使用的法律正在发生变化,可能对解决类阿片流行病的科学努力产生意想不到的后果。然而,人们对这些法律如何影响医疗和研究却知之甚少。方法:我们采用有目的和滚雪球抽样的研究人员进行了半结构化的定性访谈,这些研究人员参与了经历药物使用的孕妇。我们探讨了有关怀孕期间药物使用的法律和法律改革的可能性。采访是双重编码的。使用专题分析对数据进行了审查。结果:我们采访了22名研究人员(回复率:71%),并确定了四个主题:(i)惩罚性法律的危害,(ii)对研究的负面法律影响,(iii)法律改革建议,以及(iv)随着时间的推移的行动主义。讨论:研究人员认为,在怀孕期间惩罚药物使用的法律未能将成瘾视为一种疾病,并伤害孕妇和家庭。受访者通常会做出科学妥协来保护参与者。虽然一些人成功地倡导了法律改革,但仍需要不断地倡导。结论:怀孕期间药物使用犯罪化的不利影响延伸到对这一常见和污名化问题的研究。法律不应该惩罚怀孕期间使用药物,而应该将成瘾视为一个医学问题,并支持科学努力,以改善受影响家庭的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
期刊最新文献
The new EU-US data protection framework's implications for healthcare. The new regulation of non-medical neurotechnologies in the European Union: overview and reflection. Implementing the human right to science in the context of health: introduction to the special issue. Biosimilar approval pathways: comparing the roles of five medicines regulators. Industry price guarantees for publicly funded medicines: learning from Project NextGen for pandemics and beyond.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1