RESUMO
Racism pervades the US criminal legal and family policing systems, particularly impacting cases involving women with a history of a substance use disorder (SUD). Laws criminalizing SUD during pregnancy disproportionately harm Black women, as do family policing policies around family separation. Discrimination within intersecting systems may deter Black pregnant women with a SUD from seeking evidence-based pregnancy and substance use care. This convergent parallel mixed-methods study aimed to illuminate how systemic oppression influenced the lived experiences of Black mothers with a SUD, facing dual involvement in the criminal legal and family policing systems. Using convenience and snowball sampling techniques, we recruited 15 Black mothers who were incarcerated, used substances while pregnant, and had a history with family policing systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews and developed and distributed a scale questionnaire to describe participants' experiences navigating overlapping systems of surveillance and control. Drawing on models of systemic anti-Black racism and sexism and reproductive justice, we assessed participants' experiences of racism and gender-based violence within these oppressive systems. Participants described how intersecting systems of surveillance and control impeded their prenatal care, recovery, and abilities to parent their children in gender and racially specific ways. Although they mostly detailed experiences of interpersonal discriminatory treatment, particularly from custody staff while incarcerated and pregnant, participants highlighted instances of systemic anti-Black gendered racism and obstetric racism while accessing prenatal care and substance use treatment in carceral and community settings. Their narratives emphasize the need for action to measure and address the upstream macro-level systems perpetuating inequities.
RESUMO
Background: Incarcerated perinatal populations report high rates of substance use in the United States (US). Despite this, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment is not routinely available in carceral settings and state policies related to the provision of substance use screening and treatment are unknown. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in WestLaw through the end of the 2020 legislative session combining the terms "pregnant" and "postpartum" with terms for incarceration and related terms. The search returned 453 statutes from 43 states. A deductive codebook of various maternal health topics was developed. Legislative texts related to SUD screening and treatment were extracted for textual analysis. Results: Of the 43 states identified as having at least 1 state statute pertaining to pregnant or postpartum incarcerated people, 7 states had statutes relevant to SUD screening and treatment. Statutes related to substance use screening, education, treatment and diversion programs, program eligibility, aftercare and release planning, and funding appropriations. Conclusions: The majority of states across the U.S. lack legislation that address SUD screening and treatment among incarcerated perinatal populations. Given the known limited access to SUD treatment for perinatal populations in custody, increasing legislative statutes could increase access to essential care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has greatly impacted the health of incarcerated individuals in the US. The goal of this study was to examine perspectives of recently incarcerated individuals on greater restrictions on liberty to mitigate COVID-19 transmission. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured phone interviews from August through October 2021 with 21 people who had been incarcerated in Bureau of Prisons (BOP) facilities during the pandemic. Transcripts were coded and analyzed, using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Many facilities implemented universal "lockdowns," with time out of the cell often limited to one hour per day, with participants reporting not being able to meet all essential needs such as showers and calling loved ones. Several study participants reported that repurposed spaces and tents created for quarantine and isolation provided "unlivable conditions." Participants reported receiving no medical attention while in isolation, and staff using spaces designated for disciplinary purposes (e.g., solitary housing units) for public health isolation purposes. This resulted in the conflation of isolation and discipline, which discouraged symptom reporting. Some participants felt guilty over potentially causing another lockdown by not reporting their symptoms. Programming was frequently stopped or curtailed and communication with the outside was limited. Some participants relayed that staff threatened to punish noncompliance with masking and testing. Liberty restrictions were purportedly rationalized by staff with the idea that incarcerated people should not expect freedoms, while those incarcerated blamed staff for bringing COVID-19 into the facility. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlighted how actions by staff and administrators decreased the legitimacy of the facilities' COVID-19 response and were sometimes counterproductive. Legitimacy is key in building trust and obtaining cooperation with otherwise unpleasant but necessary restrictive measures. To prepare for future outbreaks facilities must consider the impact of liberty-restricting decisions on residents and build legitimacy for these decisions by communicating justifications to the extent possible.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Prisioneiros , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis , Comunicação , EmoçõesRESUMO
Importance: Thousands of pregnant people with opioid use disorder (OUD) enter US jails annually, yet their access to medications for OUD (MOUD) that meet the standard of care (methadone and/or buprenorphine) is unknown. Objective: To assess the availability of MOUD for the treatment of pregnant individuals with OUD in US jails. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, electronic and paper surveys were sent to all 2885 identifiable US jails verified in the National Jails Compendium between August 19 and November 7, 2019. Respondents were medical and custody leaders within the jails. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the availability of MOUD (methadone and/or buprenorphine) for the treatment of pregnant people with OUD in US jails. Availability of MOUD was assessed based on (1) continuation of MOUD for pregnant incarcerated individuals (if the individual was receiving MOUD before incarceration), with or without initiation of MOUD; (2) both initiation and continuation of MOUD for pregnant individuals; (3) only continuation of MOUD for pregnant individuals; and (4) management of opioid withdrawal for pregnant individuals. Secondary outcomes included MOUD availability during the postpartum period and logistical factors associated with the provision of MOUD. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors associated with MOUD availability during pregnancy. Results: Among 2885 total surveys sent, 1139 (39.5%) were returned; of those, 836 surveys (73.4%; 29.0% of all surveys sent) could be analyzed, with similar proportions from metropolitan (399 jails [47.7%]) and rural (381 jails [45.6%]) settings. Overall, 504 jails (60.3%) reported that MOUD was available for medication continuation, with or without medication initiation, during pregnancy. Of those, 267 jails (53.0%; 31.9% of surveys included in the analysis) both initiated and continued MOUD, and 237 jails (47.0%; 28.3% of surveys included in the analysis) only continued MOUD; 190 of 577 jails (32.9%; 22.7% of surveys included in the analysis) reported opioid withdrawal as the only management for pregnant people with OUD. Among the 504 medication-providing jails, only 120 (23.8%) continued to provide MOUD during the postpartum period. Methadone was more commonly available at jails that only continued MOUD (84 of 123 jails [68.3%]), whereas buprenorphine was more commonly available at jails that both initiated and continued MOUD (73 of 119 jails [61.3%]). In an adjusted model, jails with higher odds of MOUD availability were located in the Northeast (odds ratio [OR], 10.72; 95% CI, 2.43-47.36) or metropolitan areas (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.31-2.83), had private health care contracts (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.03-2.14) and a higher number of women (≥70) reported in the female census (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.02-2.80), and provided pregnancy testing within 2 weeks of arrival at the jail (OR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.69-4.17). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of US jails did not provide access to MOUD to pregnant people with OUD. Although most jails reported continuing to provide MOUD to individuals who were receiving medication before incarceration, few jails initiated MOUD, and most medication-providing jails discontinued MOUD during the postpartum period. These results suggest that many pregnant and postpartum people with OUD in US jails do not receive medication that is the standard of care and are required to endure opioid withdrawal, signaling an opportunity for intervention to improve care for pregnant people who are incarcerated.