TY - JOUR
T1 - How penalizing substance use in pregnancy affects treatment and research
T2 - a qualitative examination of researchers' perspectives
AU - Shah, Seema K.
AU - Perez-Cardona, Leishla
AU - Helner, Khrystyna
AU - Massey, Suena H.
AU - Premkumar, Ashish
AU - Edwards, Renee
AU - Norton, Elizabeth S.
AU - Rogers, Cynthia E.
AU - Miller, Emily S.
AU - Smyser, Christopher D.
AU - Davis, Matthew M.
AU - Wakschlag, Lauren S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Author(s).
PY - 2023/7/1
Y1 - 2023/7/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - biomedical research
KW - health law
KW - human subjects research
KW - regulation of research
KW - research ethics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85165970991&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/jlb/lsad019
DO - 10.1093/jlb/lsad019
M3 - Article
C2 - 37435609
AN - SCOPUS:85165970991
SN - 2053-9711
VL - 10
JO - Journal of Law and the Biosciences
JF - Journal of Law and the Biosciences
IS - 2
M1 - lsad019
ER -