Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36510665›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2022

Development and Implementation of State and Federal Child Welfare Laws Related to Drug Use in Pregnancy.

Alexander D McCOURT, Sarah A White, Sachini Bandara, Theo Schall, Daisy J Goodman, Esita Patel, Emma E McGINTY

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alexander D McCOURTJohns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3524-3454
Sarah A WhiteJohns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.
Sachini BandaraJohns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.
Theo SchallJohns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.
Daisy J GoodmanDartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Hanover, New Hampshire, United States.
Esita PatelJohns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.
Emma E McGINTYDivision of Health Policy and Economics, Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, United States.
Johns Hopkins University · USCornell University · USDartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice · US

Funding

AHRQ HHS T32 HS000029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Policy Points Over the past several decades, states have adopted policies intended to address prenatal drug use. Many of these policies have utilized existing child welfare mechanisms despite potential adverse effects. Recent federal policy changes were intended to facilitate care for substance-exposed infants and their families, but state uptake has been incomplete. Using legal mapping and qualitative interviews, we examine the development of state child welfare laws related to substance use in pregnancy from 1974 to 2019, with a particular focus on laws adopted between 2009 and 2019. Our findings reveal policies that may disincentivize treatment-seeking and widespread implementation challenges, suggesting a need for new treatment-oriented policies and refined state and federal guidance. CONTEXT: Amid increasing drug use among pregnant individuals, legislators have pursued policies intended to reduce substance use during pregnancy. Many states have utilized child welfare mechanisms despite evidence that these policies might disincentivize treatment-seeking. Recent federal changes were intended to facilitate care for substance-exposed infants and their families, but implementation of these changes at the state level has been slowed and complicated by existing state policies. We seek to provide a timeline of state child welfare laws related to prenatal drug use and describe stakeholder perceptions of implementation.

methodsWe catalogued child welfare laws related to prenatal drug use, including laws that defined child abuse and neglect and established child welfare reporting standards, for all 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC), from 1974 to 2019. In the 19 states that changed relevant laws between 2009 and 2019, qualitative interviews were conducted with stakeholders to capture state-level perspectives on policy implementation.

findingsTwenty-four states and DC have passed laws classifying prenatal drug use as child abuse or neglect. Thirty-seven states and DC mandate reporting of suspected prenatal drug use to the state. Qualitative findings suggested variation in implementation within and across states between 2009 and 2019 and revealed that implementation of changes to federal law during that decade, intended to encourage states to provide comprehensive social services and linkages to evidence-based care to drug-exposed infants and their families, has been complicated by existing policies and a lack of guidance for practitioners.

conclusionsMany states have enacted laws that may disincentivize treatment-seeking among pregnant people who use drugs and lead to family separation. To craft effective state laws and support their implementation, state policymakers and practitioners could benefit from a treatment-oriented approach to prenatal substance use and additional state and federal guidance.

Indexed as

Child WelfareSubstance-Related DisordersFemaleHumansPregnancyUnited Stateschild welfarelaws and statutesneonatal abstinence syndromeneonatal opioid withdrawal syndromepregnancyprenatal careSubstance use

Identifiers

PMID36510665
PMCPMC9836249
OpenAlexW4311281759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.