9. Newsbrief: US Drug War Hurts Women, Says New Report http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/379/report2.shtml In a report released Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and two other groups charged that US drug policy is bringing severe, disproportionate harm to women -- many of them mothers -- who are being sent to prison in ever increasing numbers on drug charges even though they typically play only minor roles in drug trafficking groups. The report, "Caught in the Net" was released at the end of a two-day national conference on the subject in New York City. That conference brought criminal justice officials, sentencing reform activists, and others together to consider reforms that would reduce the harmful impact of the drug war on women. "Drug convictions have caused the number of women behind bars to explode, leaving in the rubble displaced children and overburdened families," the report said, and the hard numbers back it up. Since 1980, the number of women in prison has increased eight-fold to 101,000 last year. Roughly one-third of women prisoners are drug offenders, compared to about one-fifth of male prisoners. "Many of the drug conspiracy and accomplice laws were created to go after the kingpins," said the ACLU women's rights project director, Lenora Lapidus, a lead author of the report. "But women who may simply be a girlfriend or wife are getting caught in the web as well, and sent to prison for very long times when all they may have done is answer the telephone." When it comes to drug war injustice, it's not just a man's world, the report found. Among its findings: * Many women who are convicted of drug crimes were only peripherally involved, and some were convicted solely because they failed to turn in their partners. Sentencing laws fail to acknowledge factors that may keep women from going to police, such as economic dependence or fear of abuse. * Black and Hispanic women are imprisoned on drug charges at far higher rates than white women even though they have similar illegal drug use rates. The report suggests prosecutorial discretion, police tactics, and practices such as the selective testing of poor, minority women for drug use while pregnant play a role. * Most women in prison leave children behind. The consequences can be shattering for both mothers, who may lose parental custody, and children, thousands of whom are placed in foster homes. The traditional view that women and mothers should be treated more gently gets turned on its head when it comes to drug-using or drug-selling women, said Florida State University criminologist Bruce Bullington. "It's not just an issue of drugs, but of embedded moral values," he said. "We demonize these women, and it comes back to haunt us in a variety of ways," he told the Associated Press.
I might visit Amsterdam at some point, but if this was about me being able to smoke pot, I would have moved to Amsterdam or Alaska when the opportunities presented themselves. I had such opportunities as recently as 1999, but Texas is my home and I really don't want to leave. Besides, if I started smoking now, I might forget that the rest of the world suffers under prohibition or I might just not give enough of a **** to do anything about it.
Of course they would be. Women are 51% of the world and there would still be at least three white males alive on the ISS. However, this is a serious article with hard data that points to a serious consequence of our misguided "war" on drugs. Do you have anything of substance to say about it?
hmmm....surprised the article doesnt say anything about how wonderful mothers on drugs are for their kids.
I am in favor of legalization. Having said that, this ranks about last on my list of concerns. Call me crazy, but I don't think criminals are the best people to be raising children. As for the wives and girlfriends getting busted, here's a bizzare idea, DON'T DATE DRUG DEALERS! Also, I hate the ACLU. There are a million things they could focus their time and resources on, but every time I read about them they are doing something stupid, pointless, or fighting to protect some scumbag. The ACLU is one of the crappiest charity organizations I have ever seen.
Obviously, "mothers on drugs" are not good for their kids, but I would argue that, depending on the drug, a mother in jail would be far, far worse. In addition, the funds we now dedicate to incarcertaing those women and supporting their children in the foster care system would be much more effectively used if spent on rehabilitating the problem users. I could also make a very strong argument that a woman who smokes pot would be better suited to raising children than a heavy drinker. Besides, as the article points out, most of these women are peripherally involved at best and sometimes get sent up the river for as little as answering a phone call or merely being at home when the bust happens. Just more idiotic consequences of prohibition.
As the article points out, in most cases the women are peripherally involved at most. I wouldn't call them criminals. What if the dealer is the father of your kids? What if you married him before he started dealing? What if he didn't even tell you he does or deals drugs? There are too many what ifs for your statement to stand. Sometimes there just isn't a lot of choice in the matter. Sometimes the man is the only source of income and the woman has noplace else to go. What is she to do, live on the street with her kids? Whatever. In this case, the ACLU is pointing out one of the serious harms of prohibition. They are not "fighting to protect some scumbag" in this case, they are trying to keep kids in their homes with their parents where possible. They are advocating for an end to the drug war, which would ensure that these women would have the ability to raise their children rather than seeing them taken away as they are put in jail.
andy if you move to amsterdam be sure to look me up. About legalizing drugs, imo opinion it is the same as when alcohol was illigal, the mafia was the one who had most profit of it. Look at holland, Soft drugs is legal here, and we do not have alot of problems with drugsdealers, or junkies. the biggest problem for holland ralated to the legalizing of drugs is all those anoying tourists that come to holland to get high
The article says many, not most. There is a difference. One that can be big or small depending on the relative definition of "many" in this study.
Whether it is "most" or "many," these women cannot be accurately painted as "criminals" and certainly do not deserve to be in jail, lose their kids, etc.
They are being convicted of crimes and sent to prison. You and I must have very different definitions of the word criminal. So what. My mother was married to an alchoholic that was abusive to her on occasion. She married him before he started drinking. She kicked his ass to the curb and raised 2 kids by herself. At the time, my father was the only source of income. You do what you need to do. If my mom did not want to get a job and be a single parent, she could have stayed with him and accepted the consequences of that, but she made a choice. These women have the same choice. You are right, in this case they are not fighting to protect some scumbag, they are doing something stupid (one of the three things they are always doing). They are arguing to ignore the laws that are on the books. What they need to do is lobby congress to repeal drug laws because the laws are stupid, not because mothers are breaking the law and being seperated from their children. Unfortunately, there are far too many anti-prohibitionists that are potheads trying to legalize their drug of choice. I am sad that they are the face of my position, because they are not going to be the ones that get the law changed.
first...the article does not say MOST it says 'many' but does not specify a number. who knows what the number is and it probably just throws that in there for effect. of the people that i have known that have been arrested for drugs NONE of them were arrested for being peripherally involved and i know no one who was peripherally involved with drugs that has been arrested. second...it doesnt matter if you make the point that a mother on weed is better than a mother on alcohol. you do kind of bias the point you made by qualifying a mother who is a HEAVY drinker and only say a mother who smokes weed. if u want to compare apples to apples anyone who is a heavy drug/alcohol user will more than likely be a poor parent. plus we aren't trying to say if one is better cuz that is not the issue. bringing this up would only serve to distract from the main issue which is mothers being arrested for drugs. finally...maybe you have information on this but one of the points the article makes is that black and hispanic women are arrested more than white women. i was curious if you knew if the usage rates were higher among black and hispanic women compared to white women. just from living my generalized life it seems that blacks and hispanics are much more likely to smoke weed than whites. not trying to make an argument here just curious if you had information on this.
Robbie, obviously if the information appeared at stopthedrugwar.com, then it is completely unbiased and factual. We all should know that by now, considering every headline from the website finds its way into a new thread in this forum...
