Purvi Patel Case Study

Prenatal exposure of a child to harm due to the mother’s use of an illegal drug or other substance.

In my opinion, women who are pregnant don't belong in correction of facilities. However, if the crime committed was severe, they could be incarcerated after a certain time of the pregnancy. For mothers that have children, the process of sentencing should be accommodated depending on the crime. The PSI report should be something significant for the judge to consider. The PSI report gives information of employment, criminal record,

In 2014, after seeing a significant increase in babies born with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), Tennessee began criminally charging pregnant women who use drugs (Sakuma, 2014). Supporters of the new legislation refer to it as a “velvet hammer” used to convince the pregnant drug users into going into treatment, or doing jail time. However, critics are concerned that this legislation will be just another barrier for a group of women who are already at risk, (Sakuma, 2014).

The problems at hand that the SIMARRA Act bill is proposing to address, involves child welfare issues, women’s health concerns, and a lack of protection and healthcare needs for these women and their unborn children within the criminal justice system. According to the bill, it has been propositioned to enhance the welfare and public health for incarcerated pregnant women and mothers by improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the Federal prison system, by establishing a pilot program of critical-stage, developmental nurseries in Federal prisons for children born to inmates, with risk needs assessments, and risk and recidivism reduction (H.R.5130, 2016). The bill is intended to focus and alleviate the lack thereof adequate care, stress, and hazardous health practices that incarcerated mothers are experiencing with their infant babies, while also monitoring the health of these women. Both the mothers and infants are affected in these situations because the health of the mother has substantial

In the past thirty years, the incarceration of women has risen exponentially. Poverty, lack of access to education, abuse, addiction, mental health and parenting issues all impact women’s criminality and health before, during and after they are incarcerated (Hannaher, K., 2007). By 2010 there were nearly 206,000 women currently serving time in the criminal justice system. As the years go by, the numbers are constantly increasing (Women Behind Bars, 2015). The number of pregnant women incarcerated has also been on the rise. Most incarcerated women do not receive proper prenatal care before entering the criminal justice system. Because these women are from mostly poverty neighborhoods, they are more likely to endure domestic violence, poor

Since the 1980’s, debate about how society should deal with the problem of criminalizing pregnant women who abuse drugs or alcohol has become a nationwide issue. Many states argue that the primary concern is making sure women have healthy pregnancies and healthy children. However, policies that threaten women with criminal prosecution and the potential loss of parental rights drive women away from pregnancy-related care. Constitutionally, enacting states to create these laws is unsound and places women in situations of risk. Less than a week ago a bill was sent to the governor of Tennessee after being approved by both the house and the senate, that would allow for women to be prosecuted if she takes an illegal drugs while pregnant. Although this bill is made to seem like it is promoting healthy pregnancies, many groups are urging the governor to veto it.

Care for pregnant women is even more dismal, considering their additional health needs” (p. 11). The quantitative report goes on to state that many pregnant offenders have undiagnosed or untreated conditions that can increase the pregnancy risks and contribute to poor birth outcomes. Mothers Behind Bars surveyed all 50 states regarding prenatal care and found: 43 states did not require medical examinations as a component of prenatal care; 41 states did not require prenatal nutrition counseling or the provision of appropriate nutrition; 34 states did not require screening and treatment for high-risk pregnancies; 48 states did not offer advice on activity levels and safety during pregnancy; 45 states did not make advance arrangements for deliveries with particular hospitals; and 49 states failed to report all incarcerated women’s pregnancies and their outcomes (The Rebecca Project for Human Rights and the National Women's Law Center, 2010). Researchers did not list under limitations of their findings if obstetric care was provided inside or contracted to an outside care provider. This information would have been beneficial and may have affected the state’s responses to the survey questions. Ferszt and Clarke (2012) conducted a qualitative survey of 50 wardens, a warden at a women’s correctional

363). Kennedy (1998) further suggested that Roberts failed to explain why there was a difference between prosecuting women for fetal endangerment and helping women to heave healthy pregnancies. Roberts (1991) noted the debate of this issue has overlooked a critical aspect of government prosecution of drug addicted mothers. Roberts (1991) concludes by advocating a progressive concept of privacy that places an affirmative obligation of the government to guarantee individual rights and recognizes the connection between the rights of privacy and racial

The question about whether pregnant women are liable for subjecting their unborn children to risk has yet to be properly addressed. One state South Carolina has been on the forefront of this issue. The Supreme Court in South Carolina in 1997 in the case Whitner vs. South Carolina decided that pregnant women who exposed their viable fetuses may be persecuted under the state child abuse laws. This action was specifically targeting women who use illegal drugs during pregnancy. Since this decision, other states like Arizona and Florida are following suit. In South Carolina, the Medical University of South Carolina Hospital routinely tested the urine of pregnant women for

The next case involved a mother who had failed to show up for a drug test. She was

Prosecutors said the midwife in Utah had reassured the parents that she could deliver premature twins safely at a birth center in 2012, but when one baby was born purple and unable to breath she tried to treat him with outdated techniques instead of going to the hospital right away. A Cedar City midwife convicted of manslaughter in connection with the 2012 death of a premature infant was sentenced to probation and 180 days in the Iron County Jail Tuesday. More than 30 friends, supporters, family members and past clients sobbed quietly and gasped as the clerk read the guilty verdict. Prosecutors argued she began the delivery of the first child, who was approximately two months early, at her birth center without the proper skills or equipment

The rationality of those who support the punishment of addicted mothers focus on the idea that maternal conduct could lead to potential detrimental effects upon the fetus and that prosecution of such behavior would serve as both retribution for the fetus and as a deterrent. Whereas those who advocate for the pregnant women view this rational as not only impermissible but also unconstitutional as in current legal standing the fetus has no rights that usurp those of the pregnant woman (Stone-Manista, 2009, pp.823-856). Advocates also suggests that the breadth of forces that lead to drug use in pregnant women have a prevalent cultural and social foundation that the proponents for deterrence and retribution ignore in favor of strict scrutiny. This conflict between women’s rights and fetal rights has caused a paradigm in the prosecution of pregnant drug users as the interpretation of criminal sanctions argues over the definition of ‘child’ as encompassing fetuses in the definition would then lay the foundation for punishment for a woman’s conduct during pregnancy (Stone-Magnets, 2009, pp.823-856). Though currently it is unconstitutional and legally impermissible to prosecute women with state child abuse statutes in regards to drug use during pregnancy; advocates of fetal rights continue to follow

In the article, “Woman Accused of Coat-Hanger Abortion Pleads Guilty to Felony” Liam Stack talks about how a Tennessee woman was jailed for trying to use a coat hanger to abort her baby. The Tennessee woman plead guilty on Monday to aborting her 24-week-old child by using a coat hanger. Anna Yocca went to get medical care after trying to abort her baby, but was soon arrested and tried for attempted murder. She was arrested in September of 2015 and just had her trial in January 2017. With the agreement that was reached in court, she was credited for the time she had already served in jail. Since Yocca’s case was making headlines, it set a shockwave through many abortion rights advocated and supporters. Also, with Trump being our president

This is case that faces Mary Barnett. The issue in this case is that On January 23, the litigant, Mary Barnett, left Chicago to visit her life partner in San Francisco having left her six-month-old little girl, Alison, unattended in the apartment. Mary Barnett returned home a week later to find that her child had died of dehydration. She called the police and at first, to let them know that she had left her kid with a baby sitter. She later expressed that she had left the child and she didn 't mean to return, and that she knew Alison would die in a day or two. She has been accused of wrongdoing of second-degree murder; purposeful homicide without intention. In the event that she is sentenced, she could face up to eighteen years in prison. This piece of writing tries to give the verdict of the case after critically examining both prosecution and defendant side.

Chobani is a greatly successful company based in New York, where their Founder Hamdi Ulukaya moved to when he came to the states from Turkey (Chobani History 2016). Chobani is a company known for having the best Greek yogurt in the United States. Chobani prides themselves on having a high quality yogurt that is incomparable with any other brand of yogurt out on the market. This dedication the quality is what sets Chobani above everybody else is directly causing their positive business growth. By the end of 2015 Chobani’s revenue was at “$1.5 billion where their competitors were at $250 million” (Giammona 2015). What differentiates Chobani between its competitors is its dedication to the quality and the fact that the Chobani Greek yogurt is healthier than that of Dannon and in any other competitors brings as they use all natural ingredients on where others may have antibiotics and other unhealthy byproducts in their yogurt which can be poorer for health of the consumer. With Chobani’s small staff of 2000 employees and their solo headquarters and different type of product manufacturing, Chobani makes a huge difference in less mechanical and robotic form of creating the yogurt that those of the competitor’s process to creating quality within the product. Companies such as Coca-Cola or Pepsi Co would want to buy a Chobani there has been no offers them product differentiation such as the purchases the Coca-Cola has made with Vitaminwater (Martin, Sorkin