Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Media's Meth Baby Mania

By Maia Szalavitz, STATS. Posted September 1, 2005.


Being labeled a 'meth baby' by the media can do more harm to children than the methamphetamine itself.
Advertisement

When crack was the scariest drug of all, "crack babies" were the culmination of the terror. Columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote of them in 1989, "A cohort of babies is now being born whose future is closed to them from day one. Theirs will be a life of certain suffering, of probable deviance, of permanent inferiority."

As it turns out, none of that was true. In fact, being labeled a "crack baby" appears to have done more harm to these children than the cocaine itself did. And with news stories popping up about "meth babies" in our latest drug panic, we seem to be about to repeat this shameful pattern.

Children born to mothers addicted to crack cocaine did have serious problems--but most of these were related to the fact that their mothers lacked prenatal care, were extremely poor and drank alcohol, smoked cigarettes and took other drugs as well as crack cocaine.

Women who do not stop using drugs or drinking during pregnancy tend to be those with long, complicated histories of victimization and mental illness (Over two thirds have survived childhood sexual abuse and/or are current victims of domestic violence, for example). It's undoubtedly a bad idea to use cocaine (or any drug, for that matter) during pregnancy--but the damage associated with prenatal cocaine exposure is less severe than that caused by alcohol and comparable to the harm done by cigarette smoking.

But being exposed to domestic violence as a baby or young child, in fact, is a far better predictor of behavior problems and low IQ than cocaine exposure in utero is. And, one study found that kids labeled "crack babies" (though they were actually not) were treated far worse than those who had not been tagged that way. When medical professionals thought they were dealing with a "crack baby," they interpreted normal behavior as abnormal and ascribed bad intentions to it.

Which brings us to the current methamphetamine panic. In a story with a headline that could have been pulled from the 1980s crack scare, "A Drug Scourge Creates its Own Form of Orphan" (7/11/05), Kate Zernike of the New York Times reported that 40% of child welfare officials say that methamphetamine has caused a rise in the number of kids taken into foster care; but the national numbers for those in fostercare (which go uncited in the Times article) have declined from 570,000 in 1999 to 523,000 in 2003--a period during which methamphetamine use was supposedly rising.

Foster care numbers often show a lag of several years in relation to drug problems because it takes time for people to become addicted, have children and then come to the attention of child welfare authorities. But during the crack epidemic, the number of kids in foster care went from 243,000 in 1982 to 400,000 in 1990 and it continued rising until 1999, despite the far earlier decline in crack use. So it's clear that if meth is causing an increase, it's nowhere near that associated with crack.

But foster care trends tend to be fed more by perceptions and theories than by the number of kids who are actually abused. Heavily reported instances of kids abused by dangerous parents (the case of Elisa Izquierdo in New York, for example) lead to increases in foster care admissions. Curiously, however, highly publicized cases of abuse in foster care usually don't lead to increased emphasis on "family preservation." Foster care trends, unsurprisingly, are also connected to poverty; but even so, some states tend to take more children from their families than others, regardless of poverty and regardless of drug use trends.

Unfortunately, foster care itself can do harm. According to Richard Wexler, Executive Director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, only 20% of kids leaving foster care do well by the standard measures of employment and education and mental health. A study by Casey Family Programs found that foster care kids have double the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder seen in Gulf War veterans.


Digg!

Maia Szalavitz is a senior fellow at the media watchdog group STATS.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
What I Have Seen...
Posted by: bambic on Sep 1, 2005 8:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am currently living in Arkansas.
A number of years ago my husband heard one of our neighbors crying (she was eight months pregnant at the time), so he went to see what the problem was. She was in labor---her boyfriend was at work. When he offered to drive her to the hospital, she refused: she had to wait for her friend to come over so she could have one more "fix"(shot of meth) before she went. The baby did not die, but has severe heart problems, mental difficulties and is facially "abnormal", shall we say.
All because she chose drugs over her child.
I used to smoke pot, but I feel that people who choose drugs over children should be sterilized.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What I Have Seen... Posted by: morticia
» RE: What I Have Seen... Posted by: cooter
» RE: What I Have Seen... Posted by: Catwoman
» I bet to differ Posted by: nadezhda
» congradulations Posted by: Michiganman
» Ouch! Posted by: aswgt@ix.netcom.com
» RE: Ouch! Posted by: nadezhda
» Your decision Posted by: Michiganman
» RE: Your decision Posted by: nadezhda
» Formerly of oz... Posted by: Michiganman
» RE: Formerly of oz... Posted by: nickptar
» RE: Formerly of oz... Posted by: bambic
Statistics can be wrong
Posted by: hhartman on Sep 1, 2005 9:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...but the national numbers for those in fostercare (which go uncited in the Times article) have declined from 570,000 in 1999 to 523,000 in 2003--a period during which methamphetamine use was supposedly rising."

I work for a non-profit social services agency, and this may seem to be true. But here in Oregon, budgets are so tight that they cannot accept as many children into the foster care system. In fact, it is a general rule that any child over the age of 11 can "take care of themselves", so as a general rule, they are not entered into the fostercare system. We are constantly fighting this trend in our programs that work with Homeless and Runaway Teens, because increasingly we are having to help children who have been released from foster care at the age of 16 or 17. So when you take into effect these factors, of course there are less children in the system.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Statistics can be wrong Posted by: berrygoldwater2004
» Barney Goldshower Your the 3% Posted by: Michiganman
Becky Gawboy
Posted by: bgawboy on Sep 1, 2005 11:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a foster parent currently fostering a "meth baby". Placed with us at age 8 we welcomed into our family a child who had witnessed more acts of violence than the average maximum security prison inmate. Yes, she has physical deformities and brain damage caused by her mothers drug and probably alcohol use, but worse, she was forced to watch as her father beat her mother. If she attempted to flee, her father dragged her back by the hair and forced her to watch. Her future is bleak because healing from that many years of trauma may not be possible.
Foster care numbers have dropped dramatically, but not because there are fewer children needing care, rather because less money in Social Service budgets means fewer interventions. Children are allowed to suffer unspeakable abuse and neglect and unless there is a courageous police officer, judge and social worker nothing is done. Later people are shocked when these forgotten children enter the corrections system as children or young adults.
Meth is a particularly nasty drug, because it is cheap and accesible and becuase it actually changes the brains of long time users. Normal people who become chronic meth users are never normal again, even after they sober up.
Meth addicts simply cannot parent. When they are high amazing things happen, lots of work gets done, but when they are coming down from a high they often sleep round the clock. Unfortunately children need their needs met regularly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Becky Gawboy Posted by: Nazgul
» RE: Becky Gawboy Posted by: skinithooligan
I survived
Posted by: Michiganman on Sep 1, 2005 5:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was dropped on my head as a baby. I was forced to watch violent programs on television like the three stooges. I didn't have foster parents but my grandfather wore foster grants.
Come on people give these kids a chance! your feeding into the meth baby myth. Yes these kids have it tough but you are writing them OFF! Check back with me in twenty years and I'll bet many of them have adjusted....Jeez

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I survived Posted by: berrygoldwater2004
» Speaking from experience? Posted by: Michiganman
Thank you J. Edgar Hoover
Posted by: aswgt@ix.netcom.com on Sep 1, 2005 7:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Drug War is based on 'stories.' A lot of really bizarre ones are true, and a lot of plausable ones are simply "Reefer Madness."

"Pot Addiction" -- "Meth shooting pregnant women refusing medical treatment until their candy man came" -- "Mother Hale and the crack babies." Some true. Some less so. The Drug Wars have always been typified by bad science and bad faith on the part of the Drug Warriors.

A small point about crystal meth. Until the mid 80s this was drug that the marketplace had been rejecting for 30 years.

Remember the "Speed Kills" slogan. Meth is Speed. After the initial oubreak of oral use, druggies of the '60s, 70s, and 80s mostly steered clear of it.

But in the 80s, it started to come back as counterfeit cocaine sold in strip clubs by biker gangs, and as a home-brewed high for people whose neigborhoods would not support a more traditional drug trade.

It was easy to cook from 100% domestic store-bought products. No imports. No gardening. And, it was cheap, compared to the the crack and crystal cocaine it was substituted for. The the high was very, very long lasting. Self-injection was rarely neccessary. Smoking and snorting $50.00 worth of it could keep a two people stoned out of their minds for 48 hours.

What's more, the evening news started telling us all about these desireable characteristics.

Coinidentally, lavish funding became available to community groups who would make "Tina" a top priority. The HIV/AIDs fighters got involved.

Until the past two or three years Meth has never been a very profitable drug to sell, but for the past ten, it's a very rewarding one to prosecute. The dealer-users are not very well armed, organized or politically connected like heroin and cocaine suppliers. At trial often use public defenders, for a 10% reduction in sentance they usually take a plea bargain. It's easy to rack up felony convictions -- and the rewards thereof -- without the hard work of doing real police work.

No question. Of all drugs, Meth is probably the greatest menace to public health and safety to come along yet. But the market for it was largely created by the publicity generated by the war against it.

And that was really neccessary was to quietyly take control the pseudphedrine cough syrup.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» AGREE 10000% Posted by: Michiganman
» RE: Thank you J. Edgar Hoover Posted by: whereisthe logic
Child abuse
Posted by: jeiaaca on Sep 1, 2005 10:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm an American currently volunteering at a government center for abused children in the Philippines. Since I've started, I've seen at least 200 different kids with various child abuse cases, and from what I've seen, what drugs are involved isn't that important. What the parents are capable of doing to their kid once, they will keep doing, again and again, until someone takes the kid away. There's a million excuses, and in my mind, "I was drunk (or high) and out of control." goes next to "If my wife would give me more sex I would't have to molest my daughter." Making the drugs the focus is just giving the child abusers an excuse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From Bambic...my bad
Posted by: bambic on Sep 3, 2005 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I stated "I used to smoke pot" I did not go into my reasons for quitting...my house was raided when our over-zealous police force was looking for a meth lab---it was actually the house across the street. But they did find my weed pipe and I am on probation for three years, piss tested randomly and am in treatment for PTSD from being held at gunpoint in my own home. I still have nightmares and panic-attacks when I see a police car.
I have no problem with marijuana at all---it's meth that destroys life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's get at the root of the problem
Posted by: Olympiada on Sep 7, 2005 8:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article does not sit quite right with me, probably because this issue does not sit quite right with me, probably because it's evil.

And before you jump down my throat, just bear with me.

I learned about crack babies in junior college.

I learned about meth addicts in recovery.

I learned about foster care, well never mind that.

There has got to be a way to get at the root of this problem.

That is all I have to say.

There has to be a way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not meth
Posted by: whereisthe logic on Sep 7, 2005 8:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
cold pills do not make meth, they are just a stimulant with a lot of toxic by-products, that means there are no "meth" babies. But it is hard to get excited about a bunch of addicts hopped up on Sudafed...much less get funding for this "drug war"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Smoke and Mirrors Posted by: sixpack
Foster Care Youth Arise (blog)
Posted by: A concerned advocate on Sep 24, 2006 2:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.fostercareyouth.blogspot.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]