Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Pregnant Women Jailed For Medical Marijuana Use

  1. #1

    Pregnant Women Jailed For Medical Marijuana Use

    Oklahoma Is Prosecuting Pregnant Women for Using Medical Marijuana

    NEWKIRK, OKLA. — Early in her pregnancy, Amanda Aguilar struggled with severe nausea that sometimes made it hard to eat. A doctor had previously approved a medical marijuana license for her, so she used pot to ease her morning sickness.

    Aguilar, 33, said she stopped using marijuana after her third month of pregnancy and tested negative for the drug after her healthy son was born in October 2020. But the hospital found traces of marijuana in her baby’s stool.

    Two months later, the district attorney in Aguilar’s mostly rural county near the Kansas border charged her with child neglect, a felony. She has decided to fight the charge, and recently declined to comment on the advice of her public defender.

    She is one of at least 26 women charged with felony child neglect in Oklahoma since 2019 for using marijuana during their pregnancies, an investigation by The Frontier found. The crime can carry a term of up to life in prison in Oklahoma, though previous defendants pleaded guilty and received probation. At least eight of the women had state medical marijuana licenses, which allow holders to legally purchase and use cannabis after a recommendation from a physician.
    Similar stories in Alabama
    You have the right to remain silent. Anything you post to the internet can and will be used to humiliate you.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    How are prosecutors accessing infant stool samples?

    [edit]

    Brian Hermanson, one of two prosecutors in the state who has brought charges against pregnant women, has not responded to multiple recent requests for comment. In past interviews, he has said the warnings on Oklahoma’s medical marijuana license justify his cases against mothers.“If they make bad decisions about using drugs while they're pregnant, they're probably going to make other bad decisions when raising the child,” he said last November.
    https://www.ok.gov/dac/District_Atto...son/index.html
    Last edited by tod evans; 09-13-2022 at 09:51 AM.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    How are prosecutors accessing infant stool samples?
    No doubt she had the baby in a hospital.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    No doubt she had the baby in a hospital.
    People need to home stool.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    How are prosecutors accessing infant stool samples?
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    No doubt she had the baby in a hospital.
    Are prosecutors routinely sampling hospital stool samples? If so, under what authority? Where else are they allowed to collect samples from: doctor's offices, laboratory sites like LabCorp, dental offices, the sewer line running out of your house, your diaper service, your garbage? What else are they sampling: urine samples, routine blood tests, biopsies, discarded biological waste from hip/knee replacements?
    You have the right to remain silent. Anything you post to the internet can and will be used to humiliate you.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Voluntarist View Post
    Are prosecutors routinely sampling hospital stool samples? If so, under what authority? Where else are they allowed to collect samples from: doctor's offices, laboratory sites like LabCorp, dental offices, the sewer line running out of your house, your diaper service, your garbage? What else are they sampling: urine samples, routine blood tests, biopsies, discarded biological waste from hip/knee replacements?
    Hospitals do it, and report positives, under certain circumstances. When a baby is involved, that's certainly one of those circumstances.

    God only knows the answers to the rest of your questions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  8. #7
    In utero fecal weed is really pushing it.

    The person who ordered/mandated drug testing infants without a court order must be publicly flogged!

    Then they must be sued in both their personal and professional capacity.

    After all that tar-n-feathers would be a nice touch.

    Busybody "for the children" drug warriors must be made to tremble at the mere thought of ratting out their neighbors.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In utero fecal weed is really pushing it.

    The person who ordered/mandated drug testing infants without a court order must be publicly flogged!

    Then they must be sued in both their personal and professional capacity.

    After all that tar-n-feathers would be a nice touch.

    Busybody "for the children" drug warriors must be made to tremble at the mere thought of ratting out their neighbors.
    Isn't it sweet that we have every single one of the major drawbacks of socialized medicine, while enjoying absolutely none of the very few advantages?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In utero fecal weed is really pushing it.

    The person who ordered/mandated drug testing infants without a court order must be publicly flogged!

    Then they must be sued in both their personal and professional capacity.

    After all that tar-n-feathers would be a nice touch.

    Busybody "for the children" drug warriors must be made to tremble at the mere thought of ratting out their neighbors.
    This is my thought. Apart from all other questions one can raise. Where does the right to do a drug test on a baby come from ?

    First rule of being a doctor is to try and do no harm. What good does this do for the baby ? Especially when there's no sign of abuse ?
    "I am a bird"

  12. #10
    I don't live in Oklahoma

    Or Alabama

    Jer. 11:18-20. "The Kingdom of God has come upon you." -- Matthew 12:28

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    The person who ordered/mandated drug testing infants without a court order must be publicly flogged!
    With Roe gone, there's no longer a federally-protected right of privacy with respect to what transpires between you and your medical providers - that's left to the state you reside in to protect. So, depending upon the state you live in, a court order may not be necessary to get access to your medical information. Even with Roe, though, you often heard the phrase "where the state has a compelling interest" used to allow the state to step in (like during the third trimester or when the fetus was viable). And many states define the welfare of a "child in the womb" to be a compelling interest to the state.

    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Isn't it sweet that we have every single one of the major drawbacks of socialized medicine, while enjoying absolutely none of the very few advantages?
    One of the "features" of Obamacare was its mandate for improvements in the way laboratory test results are exchanged and transmitted to electronic health records (EHRs) - ostensibly to ensure a medical professional providing care to a patient would have access to all of that patient's medical history. The drawback to that is that without a guarantee of medical privacy, that federal database could probably be legally accessed by law enforcement. With Democrats in charge, I could even see it being utilized on background checks for firearms to validate whether the applicant was telling the truth on the "have you ever used illegal drugs" question.
    You have the right to remain silent. Anything you post to the internet can and will be used to humiliate you.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Voluntarist View Post
    With Roe gone, there's no longer a federally-protected right of privacy with respect to what transpires between you and your medical providers - that's left to the state you reside in to protect.
    I'll not be seeking protection from any government hence the public flogging and tar-n-feathering comments.

    Quote Originally Posted by Voluntarist View Post
    So, depending upon the state you live in, a court order may not be necessary to get access to your medical information. Even with Roe, though, you often heard the phrase "where the state has a compelling interest" used to allow the state to step in (like during the third trimester or when the fetus was viable). And many states define the welfare of a "child in the womb" to be a compelling interest to the state.
    And it may be. Court orders are required to gather evidence. The 'hospital system' providing evidence without a court order or the patients permission is grounds for punishment of all involved.

    Quote Originally Posted by Voluntarist View Post
    One of the "features" of Obamacare was its mandate for improvements in the way laboratory test results are exchanged and transmitted to electronic health records (EHRs) - ostensibly to ensure a medical professional providing care to a patient would have access to all of that patient's medical history. The drawback to that is that without a guarantee of medical privacy, that federal database could probably be legally accessed by law enforcement. With Democrats in charge, I could even see it being utilized on background checks for firearms to validate whether the applicant was telling the truth on the "have you ever used illegal drugs" question.
    And here's where 'They must be made to tremble' comes in. This is not some computer program testing in-utero feces, it's not some arbitrary data-mining bot choosing to persi......er prosecute the citizen, these are the people who must be ferreted out physically punished and publically humiliated. They are not 'heroes' they are scum on par with child molesters and baby rapers.

  15. #13
    Jailed for exposing unborn child to drugs (but she wasn't pregnant)

    Etowah County officials are facing what appears to be the first lawsuit in the state alleging false imprisonment because a woman who was jailed for exposing her unborn child to drugs wasn’t pregnant – although it isn’t the first time such dystopian injustice has played out in Alabama.

    Stacey Freeman, who is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, was under investigation by a family services agency for substance abuse when her daughter incorrectly told social workers that Freeman was pregnant, according to her Nov. 7 complaint. Freeman said she offered to take a pregnancy test, but it wasn’t administered.

    Sheriff’s investigator Brandi Fuller later issued a “patently false” warrant saying Freeman tested positive for amphetamines, according to the complaint. She was arrested for “chemical endangerment” days later, the complaint said, by sheriff’s deputies who stopped to assist her with a flat tire.
    You have the right to remain silent. Anything you post to the internet can and will be used to humiliate you.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In utero fecal weed is really pushing it.

    The person who ordered/mandated drug testing infants without a court order must be publicly flogged!

    Then they must be sued in both their personal and professional capacity.

    After all that tar-n-feathers would be a nice touch.

    Busybody "for the children" drug warriors must be made to tremble at the mere thought of ratting out their neighbors.

    As should anyone else tempted to stick their nose into some one else’s business without extremely good reason. Busybody do-gooders are a blight on the lives of decent people everywhere.
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul



Similar Threads

  1. Attn. Pregnant women
    By tod evans in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-14-2019, 12:50 PM
  2. Medical Kidnapping: 2 Day Old Infant Seized at Hospital From Mother Using Medical Marijuana
    By Created4 in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-02-2016, 07:01 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-31-2013, 09:42 AM
  4. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 11-02-2011, 05:54 PM
  5. Pregnant Women and H1N1 vax
    By pinkmandy in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-18-2009, 12:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •