Tuesday, February 18, 2025

GET OUR FREE E-NEWSLETTER

“You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you did not know.”

— William Wilberforce

Search

Hospitals Give Pain Control Drugs to Women During Childbirth, Then Report Them for Illicit Drug Use

Hospitals Give Pain Control Drugs to Women During Childbirth, Then Report Them for Illicit Drug Use

Fentanyl and other drugs administered by health care professionals during childbirth can show up in toxicology reports done on the mother or baby. Not only can this presence be shocking to mothers who do not realize the drugs have the ability to cross the placenta to reach their babies, but many women are being reported to child welfare authorities because of it.1

The drugs often given to women in labor and birth include morphine or fentanyl found in epidurals or other pain relief medications, anxiety medications, and two different blood pressure medications given during C-sections. These medications are routinely prescribed to millions of birthing women per year.It is estimated that roughly 83 percent of women receive at least one type of medication during birth.2

Ninety-one Percent of Women Given Epidurals Test Positive for Fentanyl

The risks of giving medications to birthing women and then testing them for illicit drug use has been well documented,3 but many hospitals have not put policies in place to protect mothers who experience it. One 2022 study by researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston found that 91 percent of women given fentanyl-containing epidurals tested positive for the drug after giving birth. Other studies have found that mothers can quickly pass the medications onto their babies.1

Health Care Providers Required to Report Suspected Substance Abuse

Mandatory state reporting laws require hospitals to alert child welfare agencies anytime babies are born who seem to be affected by substance abuse. In some cases, doctors and social workers failed to review patient medical records to determine if the cause could have been medically induced. In other cases, providers suspected the medication that was prescribed to be the reason for the positive test but reported the patients anyway.

Doctors who report these cases of positive tests for pain control drugs are protected from liability for reports made “in good faith,” even when they turn out to be wrong. But often, the damage has already been done with cases being opened against innocent mothers and in the worse of scenarios, babies and other children are removed from the home of mothers after  false accusations of illicit drug use.

At many hospitals, it is the responsibility of social workers to contact child welfare agencies. While some hospitals require social workers to automatically file a report for any positive test, others first perform an assessment to determine whether the baby may be at risk by remaining in the care of the parents.

Unreliable Testing Methods and Outcomes Commonly Used

Meconium tests are widely considered the gold standard for newborn drug testing, but this route of testing can uncover illicit substances from months prior. These widely used tests cannot tell a provider whether the drug presence is from a prescribed medication or a substance a mother used earlier in pregnancy, nor do they tell quantity or frequency of use of the substance. In addition, an investigation done by The Marshall Project and Reveal found that the typical urine-in-a-cup tests favored by many hospitals and often given to mothers are highly susceptible to false positives and misinterpretation.1

While most hospitals don’t have policies in place to protect women in these circumstances, others have instituted policies to do just that. Last year, Mass General Brigham in Boston instituted a policy that directed providers to test their patients only with their consent and only when medically necessary.

“Our patients are being harmed,” stated Davida Schiff, MD of Mass General Brigham. “The hospitals are at fault. The clinicians are at fault. Our policies are at fault.”1


If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

One Response

  1. In many states, CPS services must make a determination to leave the children with their parents or remove the children within 24-48 hours otherwise they will not be able to ‘protect the children’ by removing them from parents after that time period has elapsed. Because of the legalities and evidentiary proof requirements, the easiest way to take a child is to claim imminent harm for immediate removal. As this requires far less skill, effort, and paperwork, this is the primary tool CPS workers use; immediate removal. Evidence be damned. Comprehensive data gathering, not important. The CPS workers use their psychic abilities and elevated powers of psychological inference to know more than anyone else. They get paid more by using this method. And they’re lazy, so immediate removal allows them to get off work early or not have to put in overtime. If the department is underfunded or under staffed this is more likely to happen. If the department is well funded, agents compete for more removals and create problems where none existed before. When dealing with CPS, parents face a lose lose situation regardless.

    Obviously there is a substantial body of rogue medical staff whom use these systems to discriminate against parents they do not agree with or call CPS for revenge. Pay no attention to the disgraceful imbalance of liability protection, while the parents and childrens inalienable constitutional rights are violated by the very presence of liability protection rules for hospitals, and the overly broad scope and reach of the CPS organizations themselves. The more children they take, the more they earn. It’s quite similar to cash for kids and the prison pipeline problem. State funded independent child care, half way houses, and rehoming services is big business with a lot of money and investment interests to match. If they don’t find children to take, the government CPS workers eventually lose their jobs.

    Remember your rights; You are not required to take a drug test if you show up to a hospital voluntarily. Clarify what’s happening with any procedure before consenting. Read all the paperwork before signing. Research the hospitals and staff ahead of time. Be prepared with family and friends on site. Have a pre existing plan and speak to the hospitals ahead of time; your primary goal is to birth the child, then take the child home asap, preferably the same day or day after. Refuse visits with the follow up staff or if you have to go through those, have an advocate whom will speak for you. For people worried about this specific issue, you could always get a drug test independently prior to being admitted to the hospital for active labor. For CPS, they are government agents and you are not required to speak to them. Nor is being a patient equivalent to being incarcerated. There are many stories of parents whom stand up and walk out without going through traditional discharge. You’re the boss, you make the rules, the hospital is there to service you.

    The hospital gives you drugs. Then uses state services to take your child away, because you were forced to consume the drugs they gave you. This is incompetent practice. Hospitals have different procedures and rules. In some situations you have a dedicated team so these miscommunication can not happen. In other situations, you’re passed to whom ever is available. Know where you are at in order to navigate the process ahead of time. You can refuse pain meds or go with midwives if your only access is a hospital whom operates this way. Then for the rest of your life; stay as far away from government persons and hospitals as possible. Our children now in the teen years, have only gone to the hospital a half dozen times their entire lives, usually for broken bones. We refused all vaccines, the children are fine, healthier and smarter than their peers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search in Archive