Laertius, D., Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. Hicks, R. D. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Vol. 1, 1982): at 113.Google Scholar

Amis, K., The King's English: A Guide to Modern Usage (New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 1997): at vii (discussing Fowler, H.W., author of Modern English Usage).Google Scholar

See Child Abuse and Neglect and Child Abuse Services, 1997 Wisconsin Laws 292 (A.B. 463) (enacted June 16, 1998); and Wis. Stat. §§ 48.01–.347 et seq. (1998).Google Scholar

See De Ville, K.A. and Kopelman, L.M., “Fetal Protection in Wisconsin's Revised Child Abuse Law: Right Goal, Wrong Remedy,” Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 27 (1999): 332–42, at 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

See Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield: Merriam-Webster, 1989): at 599 (defining “illiterate” as “violating approved patterns of speaking or writing”).Google Scholar

See Wisc. Stat. § 48.02.Google Scholar

De Ville, and Kopelman, supra note 4, at 334.Google Scholar

See Amis, supra note 2, at 115 (discussing “hypocritical moralistic attitudinizing”).Google Scholar

See Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).Google Scholar

See Unborn Victims of Violence Act, H.Res. 313, 106th Cong. (1999). See also H.R. 2436, 106th Cong. (1999); and S. 1673, 106th Cong. (1999).Google Scholar

See Roberts, D., Killing the Black Body (New York: Pantheon Books, 1997): at 172–76.Google Scholar

See In Re A.C., 573 A.2d 1235, 1252 (D.C. 1990).Google Scholar

See Nelson, L.J. and Marshall, M.F., Ethical and Legal Analysis of Three Coercive Policies Aimed at Substance Abuse by Pregnant Women (Princeton: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Substance Abuse Policy Research Program, Grant 030790, 1997): at 12.Google Scholar

See id. at 15.Google Scholar

See Southern Regional Project on Infant Mortality, A Step Toward Recovery—Improving Access to Substance Abuse Treatment for Pregnant and Parenting Women (Washington, D.C.: Southern Regional Project on Infant Mortality, 1993): at 5; Brown, S., ed., Institute of Medicine, Prenatal Care: Reaching Mothers, Reaching Infants (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1988): at 79; Kumpfer K.L., “Treatment Programs for Drug-Abusing Women,” Future of Children, 50 (1991): 555–56; and National Association for Prenatal Addiction Research and Education, “Criminalization of Prenatal Use: Punitive Measures Will be Counter-Productive” (1990): Statement No. 1.Google Scholar

See Oberman, M., “Sex, Drugs, Pregnancy and the Law: Rethinking the Problem of Pregnant Women Who Use Drugs,” Hastings Law Journal, 43 (1992): 505–48; Sherman, R., “Keeping Babies Free of Drugs,” National Law Journal, Oct. 16, 1989, at 1; and Robin-Vergeer, B.I., “The Problem of the Drug-Exposed Newborn: A Return to Principled Intervention,” Stanford Law Review, 42 (1990): 745–809, as cited in Roberts, supra note 11, at 159.Google Scholar

See Roberts, supra note 11, at 159.Google Scholar

National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators, “Guiding Principles for Working with Substance-Abusing Families and Drug-Exposed Children: The Child Welfare Response,” Public Welfare, Fall (1991): 37–38, at 38.Google Scholar

Expectant Mothers, Substance Abuse: Intervention and Treatment Challenges for the States: Hearings Before the House Subcomm. on National Security, International Affairs and Criminal Justice of the House Government Reform and Oversight Comm., 105th Cong. (July 23, 1998) (testimony of Mary Faith Marshall, Ph.D., Director, Program in Medical Ethics, Medical University of South Carolina); Board of Trustees Report, American Medical Association, “Legal Interventions During Pregnancy: Court-Ordered Medical Treatments and Legal Penalties for Potentially Harmful Behavior by Pregnant Women,” JAMA, 294 (1990): 2663–67; Moss K., “Legal Issues: Drug Testing of Postpartum Women and Newborns as the Basis for Civil and Criminal Proceedings,” Clearinghouse Review, 23 (1990): 1411–12; Oberman, supra note 16; General Accounting Office, Drug Exposed Infants: A Generation at Risk (Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office, GAO/HRD-90-138, June 1990): at 39; and Department of Health and Human Services, Maternal Drug Abuse and Drug Exposed Children: Understanding the Problem (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ADM 92–1949, 1992): at 13.Google Scholar

See Wisc. Stat. §§ 48.01–.347 et seq. (1998); and S.D. Codified Laws §§ 34–20A-63 to −70 (Michie 1998).Google Scholar

See Whitner v. State, 492 S.E.2d 777, 779–80 (S.C. 1997), cert. denied (1998).Google Scholar

Walters, S., “‘Coke Mom’ Bill Passed in Assembly,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Nov. 20, 1997, at 1–2, as cited in Paltrow, L.M., “Pregnant Drug Users, Fetal Persons, and the Threat to Roe v. Wade,” Albany Law Review, 62 (1999): 999–1055, at 1046.Google Scholar

Whitner, 492 S.E.2d 777.Google Scholar

See Chasnoff, I.J., “Cocaine Use in Pregnancy,” N. Engl. J. Med., 313 (1985): 666–69.Google Scholar

See Richardson, G.A. Conroy, M.L., and Day, N.L., “Prenatal Cocaine Exposure: Effects on the Development of School Age Children,” Neurotoxicology & Teratology, 18 (1996): 627–34; Neuspiel, D.R., “Cocaine and the Fetus: Mythology of Severe Risk,” Neurotoxicology & Teratology, 15 (1993): 305–06; Neuspiel, D.R., “Maternal Cocaine Use and Infant Behavior,” Neurotoxicology & Teratology, 13 (1991): 229–33; and Neuspiel, D.R., “Behavior in Cocaine-Exposed Infants and Children: Association Versus Causality,” Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 36 (1994): 101–07.Google Scholar

Whitner, 492 S.E.2d at 779. One could argue that a judge receiving medical care from a physician who selectively ignores twelve years of scientific literature could legitimately complain of practicing below the standard of care.Google Scholar

Expectant Mothers, Substance Abuse: Intervention and Treatment Challenges for the States: Hearings Before the House Subcomm. on National Security, International Affairs and Criminal Justice of the House Government Reform and Oversight Comm., 105th Cong. (July 23, 1998) (testimony of William J. Domina, Senior Assistant Corporation Counsel, Waukesha County, Wisconsin).Google Scholar

Glantz, M.D., “The Etiology of Drug Abuse: Mapping the Truths,” in Glantz, M.D. and Hartel, C.R., eds., Drug Abuse: Origins and Interventions (Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1999): 3–46, at 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Leschner, A.L., “Forward,” in Glantz, and Hartel, , id. xiii–xx, at xvii–xviii.Google Scholar

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Annual Household Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use (Sept. 1999); and Associated Press, “Typical Drug User Not Poor, Jobless,” Post and Courier, Sept. 9, 1999, at 1A, 8A.Google Scholar

See Ford, W.E., Remarks at ADPA Women's Issues Conference, “Managed Care and Substance Abuse Services,” Charleston, S.C. (Oct. 20, 1999).Google Scholar

See Paltrow, supra note 22. In 1992, it was estimated that only 10 to 12 percent of women substance abusers received the treatment they needed.Google Scholar

Nelson and Marshall, supra note 13, at 177.Google Scholar

See Amis, supra note 2. Berks are careless, coarse, crass, gross and of what anybody would agree is a lower social class than one's own. They speak in a slipshod way with dropped Hs, intruded glottal stops and many mistakes in grammar. Left to them, the English language would die of impurity, like late Latin. Wankers are prissy, fussy, priggish, prim and of what they would probably misrepresent as a higher social class than one's own. They speak in an over-precise way with much pedantic insistence on letters not generally sounded, especially Hs. Left to them, the English language would die of purity, like medieval Latin. Id. at 23.Google Scholar