New York senate recently passed a law that requires hair follicle drug testing for children under three years old. In order to qualify for testing, these toddlers' parents would have to be arrested on illegal drug charges. The bill was proposed after the death of an 18- month old girl named Kayleigh Mae. Hair follicle testing after her death revealed that her parents were feeding her cocaine and heroin since infancy.
This legislation is designed to protect children who are at risk due to the dangers of drug abuse. This seems like an appropriate measure of protection for those who cannot speak for themselves. But why stop at three years old? Will provisions be made to protect children who are exposed to drugs but have too much to lose by "telling on" mom or dad? How do we determine what age children can consent for testing ? How do we address youth who have developed drug addictions because of their early exposure? By cutting the testing age off at three there are children who are neglected in the rehabilitation process.
I believe that Kayleigh Mae's law is a step in the right direction for New York. I would like to see something like this implemented in Ohio, but there are concerns. Will drug testing create larger disparities in the criminal justice system? Those disparities have a negative impact on children whose parents are incarcerated instead receiving rehabilitation. I am also concerned about the reunification process if the child is though to be the person to blame for their parent's incarceration. When these children are placed back with their families of origin what services are in place for the family?
Kayleigh Mae's law has representation in the New York house of representatives and is likely to pass. It is my hope that before they pass this they address the impoact that this law has on the rehabilitation of families.
No comments:
Post a Comment