Most people would probably gut-agree that if you have a pregnant woman who is abusing her body (and the fetus within) through drug use, "something oughta be done." But the experience with "cocaine mom" laws demonstrate that this quickly turns into a Zero Tolerance Handmaid's Tale type of situation, where (properly) informing a doctor of past drug use can lead to incarceration "for the sake of the baby" and, ironically, even worse pre-natal treatment.
Bottom line: if you teach addict (let alone someone who has previously been addicted or abusive of drugs) that talking honestly to your doctor while seeking prenatal care can lead to jail — what sort of behavior are you incenting? If you said, "Lying to the doctor or not seeking care at all," then you see the dilemma, because that's not in the best interest of anyone.
The High Stakes of Wisconsin’s Fetal-Protection Law – The Atlantic
A Wisconsin mother, imprisoned to protect her fetus, fought back in federal court—and won.
If I recall, the "Crack Baby" scare was simply wrong. (That is still NOT an endorsement for pregnant women to use cocaine).
+Dan Eastwood Yes, the article references the whole "crack baby" scare and how, no, it didn't turn out that way.
Still, it is a bit of a mess as to at what point intervention should happen (if at all), and what that intervention should look like. Alas, that all takes judgment and nuance, something our justice system truly sucks at.