Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Alabama is prosecuting a mom for taking prescribed medication while pregnant

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    Not interested.
    Then why reply?
    "It ain't necessarily so
    The things that you're liable
    To read in the Bible
    It ain't necessarily so
    ."

    Sportin' Life
    Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

      It sounds like the doctor prescribed the meds pre-pregnancy, and she stopped taking them when she got pregnant.
      Then she refilled the prescription and started taking them again while pregnant - doctor wouldn't have to be involved in that.
      That's not necessarily true. I had to learn national rules when I worked at the pharmacy last year so: When the pharmacy ran her claim on her health insurance, the claim would have pinged back as "contraindicated in pregnancy" The pharmacy would've had to have a physician's override to proceed with the billing. If a pharmacist has a shred of conscience, they will say no to bypassing the insurance without a dr's order. And opioids are time limited prescriptions FYI. In all states they expire after 6 months. She would have had to have a new prescription to pick up a new medicine.
      I have an issue with this for a different reason. With my last pregnancy I had pain in my hip so severe I couldn't walk and I needed a dose of Ibuprofen too high. The decision on my dr's part was to prescribe 2 weeks worth of an opioid. No loving parent should be at risk for draconian laws like this.
      A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
      George Bernard Shaw

      Comment


      • I personally did a little more research, because the Guardian is weird. I do think this is an example of overreach. Social Services found no wrong doing. If the medicine was taken at guidelines, there needed to be other questions asked. In general some of the laws concerning opioid prescribing have gotten to a level I would consider to be dangerous. Not because patients get them too easily, but, for example, we had a patient who had broken his leg in 3 places, and two ribs. Normally you'd be given morphine or similar in the hospital, however the local emergency room, so afraid of liability and prosecution gave the man one single oral opioid pill. When he came to the pharmacy he was sweating and his blood pressure was through the roof. We thought he would pass out from shock. Not because he was in withdrawal, because the pain was so obvious.
        If a woman has a condition that renders her in such severe pain she is at risk of secondary conditions developing (high blood pressure is one) then she should have the right to be treated even if she is pregnant. The enforcement of the laws should not be so severe that she can't have access to treatment should she be pregnant. I'm not negating that we've been in an opioid crisis, but I do believe that what is happening now is not treating the crisis either.
        A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
        George Bernard Shaw

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

          Then why reply?
          To tell you I'm not interested.

          Again - I will post where I want and when I want within the decorum of this board.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Catholicity View Post

            That's not necessarily true. I had to learn national rules when I worked at the pharmacy last year so: When the pharmacy ran her claim on her health insurance, the claim would have pinged back as "contraindicated in pregnancy" The pharmacy would've had to have a physician's override to proceed with the billing. If a pharmacist has a shred of conscience, they will say no to bypassing the insurance without a dr's order. And opioids are time limited prescriptions FYI. In all states they expire after 6 months. She would have had to have a new prescription to pick up a new medicine.
            I have an issue with this for a different reason. With my last pregnancy I had pain in my hip so severe I couldn't walk and I needed a dose of Ibuprofen too high. The decision on my dr's part was to prescribe 2 weeks worth of an opioid. No loving parent should be at risk for draconian laws like this.
            Fact is she is being prosecuted for prescription fraud, not for "taking prescribed medication while pregnant", as the thread title claims.

            Whether that can be proven or not is beside the point, those are the facts.

            And you're assuming everything worked like you think it's supposed to work - I don't know that.

            And I already said it looked like overreach to me.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

              Fact is she is being prosecuted for prescription fraud, not for "taking prescribed medication while pregnant", as the thread title claims.

              Whether that can be proven or not is beside the point, those are the facts.

              And you're assuming everything worked like you think it's supposed to work - I don't know that.

              And I already said it looked like overreach to me.
              I just don't understand how a prosecutor jumps straight to fraud. It's up to the prescribing physician to obtain a pregnancy test every so often anyhow.....
              A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
              George Bernard Shaw

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Catholicity View Post
                I just don't understand how a prosecutor jumps straight to fraud.
                Do you know all he knows? I don't.

                It's up to the prescribing physician to obtain a pregnancy test every so often anyhow.....
                And how often does everything in the system work like it's supposed to work?

                I think there's a LOT here we don't know, and the article isn't exactly unbiased.

                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • So here's what we know from her own attorney....

                  Four years after she started taking hydrocodone, Blalock became pregnant with her youngest son and stopped her medication in early 2020. “It was a very rough, painful, long pregnancy,” Blalock said.

                  The pain became unbearable in the last six weeks before her due date, so she refilled her prescription. When Blalock delivered, she told her obstetrician about the hydrocodone, according to a letter from her lawyers to Lauderdale County authorities. Staff at North Alabama Medical Center tested her newborn for opiates, and it came back positive.

                  That triggered a brief investigation by the Department of Human Resources, which closed the case after Blalock showed them the prescription bottle and allowed a case worker to count the pills.


                  The letter from her lawyers did not say anything about a pregnancy test or coordinating with the pharmacy or special permission...

                  In making their best case, they indicate that Blalock informed her doctor after the fact - after she delivered.

                  Again, I think the prosecutor overreacted, but I don't know all the details.

                  I just know there is ZERO evidence to support the claim made in the thread's title. It is misleading.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • More....

                    Less than two months after the birth, police officers swarmed Blalock’s house while she and her husband were out of town. Her two teenagers were at home and said at least seven armed officers entered asking questions about her whereabouts. The teenagers were so rattled they went to stay with their grandparents.

                    “The incident with the police left Ms. Blalock and her sons feeling terrified, confused, and unsafe,” Roth said.


                    Blalock wasn't even home when the "armed officers" (H_A had to emphasize "armed officers" -- ALL of them were armed! ) "swarmed her home".

                    That last line is interesting ..... “The incident with the police left Ms. Blalock and her sons feeling terrified, confused, and unsafe,”

                    The officers are not reported as pistol-whipping anybody or "tossing the house", or doing anything other than "asking questions about her whereabouts".

                    This information comes from the family, the family's attorney, and sources sympathetic to Blalock and hostile to the prosecution.

                    The worst they can come up with is that police came and asked questions, and it threw everybody into panic?


                    Guys, seriously..... this sounds like attorneys trying to build a case for a civil lawsuit against the prosecution, not an actual report of the incident.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      Guys, seriously..... this sounds like attorneys trying to build a case for a civil lawsuit against the prosecution, not an actual report of the incident.
                      And, BINGO......

                      Where do we get the biggest portion of information about this case?

                      Prescription fraud cases usually happen when a person uses a false identity or forgery to get controlled substances. Emma Roth, an attorney for National Advocates for Pregnant Women representing Blalock, said Lauderdale County officials are using charges of prescription fraud to get around the exemption in the chemical endangerment law.


                      A woman's advocacy lawyer!

                      ATTENTION WOMEN!!!!

                      Have you had the PERQUACKIES scared out of you because the police came to your house ASKING QUESTIONS?
                      Did it scare you so bad you didn't buy Christmas presents for your kids because you needed bail money?
                      Were the police in real police uniforms including carrying holstered GUNS?
                      Have the NEIGHBORS seen the police around your home?
                      Then you need to call our tough smart lawyer, Emma Roth,
                      who will write up your case in such a way
                      that it doesn't even sound like what happened,
                      but will make internet trolls start misleading threads about it!!!
                      Call 1-800-FAK-NEWS NOW!!!




                      (Emma Roth is a "civil rights attorney and gender justice advocate".


                      So, yeah, it still seems like this prosecution is overreach, but we're only hearing one very prejudiced side of the story.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Catholicity View Post
                        Social Services found no wrong doing.
                        That would seem to be a compelling argument.

                        The problem being of course, that the law is not particularly concerned with the concept of "wrong-doing" or justice.

                        If a person acts within the letter of the law, prosecutors are not interested. If a person steps outside the letter of the law, prosecutors take an interest.
                        Whether it proceeds beyond that point often comes down to a prosecutors interest in the cause of justice, and all too often there is none.

                        So, on the face of it - compelling argument to drop the case, and a prosecutor who wants to score brownie points.

                        ALWAYS ASSUMING that other relevant facts have not been buried by the reporter.
                        sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                          To tell you I'm not interested.

                          Again - I will post where I want and when I want within the decorum of this board.
                          You are not interested in the content of a comment yet reply to that comment in order to demonstrate that you are not interested in its content.

                          Each to their own I suppose.



                          "It ain't necessarily so
                          The things that you're liable
                          To read in the Bible
                          It ain't necessarily so
                          ."

                          Sportin' Life
                          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            But it gave her yet another opportunity to talk about sex and sexual functions. It makes her day.
                            As I said it is a tactic that she employs in an attempt to silence men from giving an opinion on the matter. You see it all the time in abortion debates. Of course those who employ it in that fashion always blanch from explaining why they therefore don't reject Roe v. Wade given that it was based on what nine men thought.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                              It's not been one of your best days today has it rogue06? Your attempt to pose as an Art connoisseur has been somewhat less than successful!
                              Um, speaking of bad days... Not only did you start posting responses in the wrong thread yesterday but here you are even addressing a post by to me. smiley snicker.gif


                              And I make no pretenses about art. I enjoy it and do know a bit about it picking it up from my brother who was in the business for nearly 40 years and having a gf who opened an art gallery. While I may have not recognized the artist, I did correctly classify it as being from the Dutch/Flemish school and the proper period, so it isn't like I complete missed it.

                              Ironically I got in the fossil business as a direct result of missing out on purchasing a work at a silent auction partially done by Albrecht Dürer. It woulda been so cool to own something by a genuine Renaissance master.
                              Last edited by rogue06; 08-04-2021, 07:57 AM. Reason: Dürer not Düer

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • Does anyone remember the case of Jürgen Bartsch. He was the German guy who was arrested for visiting an air-raid shelter. Germany kept this man, who was sexually abused by his parents and teachers, in jail for 9 years, where they eventually killed him during surgery.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Ronson, 09-17-2021, 08:16 PM
                                10 responses
                                71 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 09-17-2021, 05:33 PM
                                9 responses
                                64 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 09-17-2021, 02:13 PM
                                41 responses
                                211 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 09-17-2021, 01:05 PM
                                15 responses
                                85 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Gondwanaland  
                                Started by seer, 09-16-2021, 09:23 AM
                                12 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Working...
                                X