NAPW engages in legal advocacy that challenges efforts to criminalize pregnancy and motherhood, establish fetal rights under the law, and expand the war on drugs to women's wombs. NAPW provides litigation support in both civil and criminal cases across the country, particularly for public defenders and other local lawyers faced with cases that raise legal and medical issues with which they may be unfamiliar. This litigation support encompasses finding experts to testify, locating counsel, providing model briefs and research, and organizing opposition to punitive approaches through amicus (friend of the court) briefs and open letters from leading medical, public health, and child welfare organizations.
NAPW acts as national legal clearinghouse and back-up center for lawyers, defendants, activists, and researchers across the country. NAPW has a unique collection of model briefs and other materials offering legal, scientific, policy and advocacy information on the interconnected issues of reproductive rights, drug policy, birthing rights, public health, child welfare, race, and social justice.
Through its litigation and litigation support, NAPW has successfully challenged efforts to expand the war on drugs, has kept mothers out of jail and children with their families. NAPW uses each case as an opportunity to empower local activists and the women who are directly affected; to mobilize a growing number of medical, public health and social justice organizations; and to move academics, health care providers and educators to become effective political activists. Whether joining an amicus brief, writing a public letter opposing a prosecution, or preparing an analysis of a new policy, NAPW recognizes that these cases are not only about the woman charged - they are a part of a larger political effort to distract attention from the government's failure to support pregnant women, families and communities. No matter what our involvement, NAPW does not litigate and leave. We litigate and build.
Nationwide Coalition Calls on Department of Justice to Denounce Enhanced Sentence for Pregnant Woman. Download the letter here.
Press Statement: Unanimous NJ Supreme Court Decision Affirms that Drug War Propaganda and Junk Science Provides No Basis for Child Neglect and Abuse Finding Against Pregnant Women
Press Statement: National Advocates for Pregnant Women’s Lynn Paltrow on Alabama Supreme Court’s Decision in “Personhood” Measure in Disguise Case
FOR IMMEDIATE DISTRIBUTION
JANUARY 12, 2013
PRESS RELEASE: Yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a strong ruling protecting pregnant women and their decisions in the case McCormack v. Hiedeman. In the first decision of its kind, the Court affirmed the trial court's preliminary injunction preventing the state from using Idaho's criminal abortion statutes to prosecute a woman for seeking abortion care, finding her constitutional challenge was likely to succeed on the merits.
Press Release: NAPW, 50 Leading Medical, Public Health, and Child Welfare Organizations and Experts To Argue to NJ Supreme Court on Monday that Family Courts Should Insist on Science Not Stigma
On Friday of last week, Bei Bei Shuai once again demonstrated her enormous courage. Ms. Shuai turned down a plea bargain - an offer from the prosecutor in which the state would drop the murder charge if she would plead guilty to the lesser crime of attempted feticide. Ms. Shuai stood firm and refused.
Eleanor Bader discusses how NAPW's legal work broadens the debate beyond pro-life versus pro-choice and challenges both sides to come together to stand-up for the basic human rights of ALL women, a pro-lives movement.
Read her article here.
This case is not just about one woman. Legal cases set precedent for everyone.
We are very happy to report that, with NAPW's help, Ms. Shuai is finally out of the jail cell that she was held in for over a year. Make no mistake, however, Ms. Shuai is far from free.
Just in time for Mother's Day, the Indiana Supreme Court let stand a Court of Appeals decision that tells mothers that if they experience a pregnancy loss they can be charged with the crimes of feticide and murder.
If you follow National Advocates for Pregnant Women on Facebook and Twitter, you already know that Katha Pollitt has written an important article for The Nation magazine: Protect Pregnant Women: Free Bei Bei Shuai.
We hope you will read the article and take action: Please sign this Change.org petition demanding Ms. Shuai’s freedom.
We are still celebrating the fact that Mississippians soundly rejected the so-called “personhood” measure that would have given fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses separate legal rights. We know that when people understand that fetal separatist measures hurt all pregnant women, they mobilize. But prosecutors are still trying to use the courts to put into place the same kinds of personhood measures – only in disguise.
Yesterday, Mississippians rejected (58-42) Proposition 26 that would have recognized fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses as separate legal persons under Mississippi law. Put another way, yesterday, 58% of Mississippians supported and reaffirmed the constitutional personhood of pregnant women.
We say this because NAPW knows that so-called personhood measures, as well as more subtle but just as dangerous feticide laws and anti-abortion legislation, are all ultimately designed to deprive pregnant women of their status as full persons under the law.
National Advocates for Pregnant Women is pleased to share Missed Opportunities in McCorvey v. Hill: The Limits of Pro-Choice Lawyering, published in the New York University Review of Law and Social Change. This article is an outgrowth of a speech given by Founder and Executive Director, Lynn Paltrow, at the New York University School of Law as part of a symposium, From Page to Practice: Broadening the Lens for Reproductive and Sexual Rights.
As NAPW’s newest commentary in RH Reality Check and the Huffington Post makes clear, state laws treating fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses as legally separate from the pregnant women who carry, nurture, and sustain them creates the basis for denying pregnant women their personhood and their right to be treated like other human beings.
We believe that a pregnant teenager who experiences a stillbirth deserves dignity and the power of a broad coalition behind her.
That is why when NAPW and Mississippi counsel Rob McDuff and Carrie Jourdan filed the opening briefs in the R.G. case in the Mississippi Supreme Court, we didn’t do it alone. Five amicus briefs representing 70 local, state, national, and international organizations were filed in support of Ms. G., and in support of dignity, human rights, and the health of women and children. We want to highlight for you this spectacular collaborative effort.
This week, voters in Colorado once again rejected an effort to amend the Colorado state constitution to grant eggs, embryos, and fetuses separate, legal status from the pregnant women who carry, nurture, and sustain them. In the week leading up to the vote , NAPW released a commentary, PersonhoodUSA's Radical, Fetal-Separatist Agenda published on both RH Reality Check and the Huffington Post. Here is what we had to say:
In 2008, Amanda K. was six months pregnant and went into early labor with a prolapsed umbilical cord. She went to a local hospital for care where she underwent emergency cesarean surgery to facilitate delivery of her son. Unfortunately, her son, delivered prematurely, died shortly after delivery.
We are happy to report that the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey has ruled in favor of VM in New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services vs. V.M. and B.G.. In the Matter of J.M.G.
In this case, a VM's refusal to sign a consent form for cesarean surgery led to hospital interventions and a report of abuse to child welfare authorities.
Health Experts Warn Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals That Prosecuting Pregnant Women As Drug Labs Is Bad For Babies
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA- On Friday, attorneys asked the court for permission to file an amicus curiae (friend-of-the-court) brief in the case A.K. v. Alabama (Docket: CR-09-0485) on behalf of twenty-four public health advocates, organizations and experts. This public health brief has been filed in support of A.K., who was convicted under Alabama’s chemical endangerment law because she attempted to carry her pregnancy to term in spite of a drug problem.
I am thrilled to let you know that the Kentucky Supreme Court once again refused to advance the war on drugs to women's wombs and made clear that pregnant women, no less than other persons, are protected by the rule of law. By refusing to accept the prosecution's argument that the "unborn" should be legally disconnected from the pregnant women who carry them and treated as if they were separate legal persons, this decision protects the civil and reproductive rights and health of all women in Kentucky.
National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW) works on behalf of all pregnant women including pregnant women who have been arrested and charged with child abuse or some other crime because they continued a pregnancy to term in spite of a drug problem. These pregnant women are particularly unpopular. Liked or disliked, misunderstood or understood, their cases have huge legal implications for all pregnant women- potentially setting devastating precedent that could establish special, separate legal rights for the fetus and the basis for punishing all pregnant women, including those who suffer miscarriages.
On Thursday, a Utah legislator withdrew a bill that would allow sentences of up to life in prison for a woman who experiences a miscarriage or stillbirth as a result of her "reckless" behavior. This move has been attributed to a "firestorm" of opposition. Almost immediately, however, Utah legislators revised the bill to exempt women who commit reckless acts but permit the prosecution of women who commit "knowing" acts that may result in stillbirths and miscarriages from the earliest stages of pregnancy.
Tomorrow, December 10, 2009 the Kentucky Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a case involving the prosecution of a pregnant, drug-using woman. It is an important opportunity to understand the broader issues at stake in cases that seem narrowly focused on the very small percentage of pregnant women who use illegal drugs. Oral argument is scheduled for 10 AM and you will be able to watch a live stream of the arguments by clicking this link
Last weekend I saw the movie Precious. This movie, about "an overweight, illiterate teen who is pregnant with her second child" is a soaring tribute to human dignity and, for me, captures the reasons why NAPW takes the cases we do.
Recently, NAPW chose to work on behalf of R.G. -- an African American teenager from Mississippi who became pregnant when she was fifteen. She suffered a stillbirth one month after turning sixteen. What was the state's response? They arrested her and charged her with murder.
NAPW learned about the case shortly before R.G. was scheduled to go on trial as an adult. We learned that her mother's efforts to obtain help from other organizations had been rebuffed. NAPW reached out to her local counsel and offered our assistance.
On Friday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit (the federal level appellate court that reviews decisions from federal district courts in North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, Minnesota, and Arkansas) issued the long-awaited decision in Nelson v. Norris. In this case, Shawanna Nelson argued that being forced to go through the final stages of labor with both legs shackled to her hospital bed was cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. She argued that she should be allowed to sue the director of the prison and the guard who repeatedly re-shackled her legs to the bed. Ms. Nelson, an African-American woman, was incarcerated for non-violent offenses of credit card fraud and "hot checks."
A U.S. District Court Judge in Maine held a sentencing hearing for an HIV positive, pregnant woman from Cameroon and released her on time served. You may recall that earlier this summer Judge Woodcock sentenced her to 238 days, stating this sentence was calculated specifically to ensure that she remained incarcerated for the duration of her pregnancy, rather than time served as recommend by Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the U.S. Attorney and the defense attorney.
Today, February 24th, NAPW filed a public health amicus brief on behalf of ACOG, the APA, and other groups before the Kentucky Supreme Court in Cochran v. Commonwealth in a case where a woman was prosecuted for continuing her pregnancy to term in spite of a drug problem.