Comparative Analysis of State Statutes

Hyunah Kang
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of State Statutes","authors":"Hyunah Kang","doi":"10.1300/J185v02n04_06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purposes of this study were to analyze statutory requirements regarding prenatal substance abuse reporting, related healthcare assessments, and state interventions with reported women and their families. The author conducted a legal search of the statutes of ten states, which were identified as having “specific gestational abuse statutes” in previous literature (Lieb & Sterk-Elifson, 1995). The findings revealed that seven of the ten states included a specific reporting requirement. Even in these seven states, neither assessment procedures nor treatment provisions were well-delineated. Only three states had specific provisions on therapeutic intervention with reported women. Based on the findings, three principles for a model statute are recommended for balancing the rights of infants and mothers.","PeriodicalId":437502,"journal":{"name":"The Social Policy Journal","volume":"89 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Social Policy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1300/J185v02n04_06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The purposes of this study were to analyze statutory requirements regarding prenatal substance abuse reporting, related healthcare assessments, and state interventions with reported women and their families. The author conducted a legal search of the statutes of ten states, which were identified as having “specific gestational abuse statutes” in previous literature (Lieb & Sterk-Elifson, 1995). The findings revealed that seven of the ten states included a specific reporting requirement. Even in these seven states, neither assessment procedures nor treatment provisions were well-delineated. Only three states had specific provisions on therapeutic intervention with reported women. Based on the findings, three principles for a model statute are recommended for balancing the rights of infants and mothers.
国家法规的比较分析
摘要本研究的目的是分析有关产前药物滥用报告的法律要求、相关的医疗评估以及国家对报告的妇女及其家庭的干预措施。作者对10个州的法规进行了法律搜索,这些州在以前的文献中被确定为有“特定的妊娠虐待法规”(Lieb & Sterk-Elifson, 1995)。调查结果显示,10个州中有7个州规定了具体的报告要求。即使在这七个州,评估程序和治疗条款都没有得到很好的描述。只有三个州对报告的妇女进行治疗干预作出了具体规定。根据调查结果,建议制定示范法规的三项原则,以平衡婴儿和母亲的权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信