HITTING AN EASY TARGET

The U.S. Supreme Court has dodged its best chance to end the hypocrisy of a
South Carolina's statute that sends women to prison for using drugs during
pregnancy. The high court rejected an appeal Monday from Regina McKnight, a
South Carolina woman who is serving a minimum of 12 years in prison for
using crack cocaine during a pregnancy that resulted in the stillbirth of
her daughter. McKnight, a mother of three with no prior convictions, is the
only woman ever convicted of "homicide by child abuse" under a 1997 state
law that makes it a crime to harm a fetus by taking illegal drugs or by
violence. Although more than 70 women have been charged under the
controversial law, most have either pleaded guilty to a lesser offense or
had charges dropped after they entered drug treatment programs.

The McKnight case has drawn attention worldwide. Many observers see the law
as part of the strategy of anti-abortion advocates to grant legal status to
the unborn, thereby undermining Roe v. Wade, the infamous decision that
legalized abortion. Defenders, including several South Carolina solicitors,
say the law is needed because it gives authorities a tool to force
irresponsible women into treatment programs, minimizing damage to their
babies.

We have several problems with the law, not the least of which is that it has
been enforced mainly against poor black women. We agree with the S.C.
Medical Association and other agencies charged with protecting the health of
women and infants that the law discourages drug users from seeking prenatal
care. McKnight herself didn't seek medical attention until she was more than
eight months pregnant.

Certainly, no one can object to the state trying to protect the health of an
unborn child. The problem is how to accomplish this worthy goal.
Interestingly, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001 ruled that a mandatory drug
testing program for pregnant women at a Charleston hospital was
unconstitutional. That ruling undercut a campaign by former S.C. Attorney
General Charles Condon to arrest drug-using moms.

What troubles us the most about this law is that ingestion of narcotics is
neither the most common nor the most harmful practice engaged in by pregnant
women. Studies have shown that more serious damage can occur to fetuses when
women drink alcohol or smoke tobacco during certain crucial stages of their
pregnancy. No prosecutor, so far as we know, has had the courage to arrest a
martini-guzzling, cigarette smoking society mom for endangering her unborn
child -- although such situations assuredly exist.

We would find the law less obnoxious perhaps if legislators would adequately
fund treatment programs and if money spent on prosecuting and incarcerating
drug moms would go toward educating women about risks to their baby. South
Carolina, however, ranks last nationally in expenditures for drug treatment.
The reality is that our politicians would rather spend $300,000 keeping
women like Regina McKnight behind bars than facing up to the larger issues
of fetal endangerment.

If such practices qualify as a crime against society, crack moms are not the
worst offenders. They are simply the easiest target.