• Zak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    According to this LA Times article, they weren’t testing everyone; they tested this woman because she skipped her prenatal visits. She did that because she lived with people who were at high risk from COVID-19. It also says she provided a urine sample voluntarily, but wasn’t told it was for drug testing.

    It does seem reasonable to me that if a hospital had good reason to believe a woman was using opioids while pregnant, they would get child protective services involved. It does not seem to me that missing some appointments with as good an explanation as she gave here should be grounds to perform a drug test without the patient’s consent. Child protective services also shouldn’t be relying on a test with such poor specificity.

    • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      The problem is a shitty adjudication process with legal stakes that demand a more formal, judicial process. They blindside the accused without informed opportunity to competently defend themselves, review evidence, contest claims. The accused needs to understand the consequences at play & know when they’ll need a competent advocate or lawyer before it’s too late.

    • PotatoLibre@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sure, I believe society muat tke care of risky cases, probably tgis woman got really unlucky.