I thought they just took them and placed them with other family or a temporary home.

I saw this in a prison show once. It was sad....the girl just cried and cried. But hey, If you're a criminal...

I like this though. It seems like a good way to turn someone around.

For anyone thinking that an imprisoned offender doesn't deserve much, please remember that there is also a completely innocent baby involved.

I'd like to see this expanded to more prison inmates (very few mothers-to-be are incarcerated for violent crimes) and more public help programs to aid the lower income folks.

Is Washington state offering this doula program ONLY to women inmates - or is it also offering it to disadvantaged women who actually happen to be law-abiding and not in the slammer? The article makes it sound like it is for jailbirds only.

This points to one of the great ironies of our prison system: inmates receive a bed to sleep on, shelter, clothing, 2-3 square meals a day, healthcare, even access to exercise facilities. And they don't have to pay anything; we (law-abiding) taxpayers foot the bill.

I was once homeless and penniless for a short period as a young adult. I never broke the law (although some conservatives believe being homeless itself is/should be a crime), even though I was aware of the fact that committing a felony would put food in my belly in exchange for a temporary loss of freedom...

Personally, I think more charitable programs should focus on people who are struggling to get by who nonetheless obey the laws of the land.

This sounds wonderful! I wonder how many of these women in prison had less-than-stellar mother role models, which may have played a role in the bad choices they made for themselves. It can be a way to break that cycle. I do agree that more mentoring for women in disadvantaged areas would be wonderful too. My mom used to work for a place like this, called MELD (http://www.rockfordmeld.org/).

I also know others get fed up with 'footing the bill.' Honestly, I would much rather foot this bill and not have to pay a greater price later.

Why should an "innocent child" be spending tender years in a facility for criminals? Sounds like something out of Charles Dickens - whom I imagine was really AGAINST that sort of thing.

Put the kid into foster care pronto - with guardians who'll do frequent visitations per court order. It's not the kid's fault that mom (or dad) is doing time!

as other posters have pointed out, this is the best situation for a completely innocent, law-abiding, baby. And while I agree that this kind of program should be available to any mother, regardless of income or criminal status, prison is no Club Med.

As long as it's kept to the very young babies, who don't realize they're in a prison. A strong mother/child bond is of considerable value to both mother and child, well worth the extra care needed. It sounds like the doulas are not just coaching the women through childbirth, but giving them skills to help them cope with many areas of life. It's much cheaper to help people become productive members of society, than to keep rejailing them when they reoffend.

All that said, if the baby has a father who is not in jail, it should live with the father, not the mother; provided that the father isn't abusive and wants the baby.

Plus, "law-abiding baby"? That strikes me as an odd idea, the baby cannot be law-abiding, because it cannot form the concept of laws. It's more outside the law really, because it cannot form intent to break a concept it doesn't understand.

I was simply pointing out that the baby wasn't a law-breaker :)

If I were a young woman in Washington State, the policy of keeping screamin' babies under the age of 2 1/2 would definitely keep me on the straight and narrow.

...best situation for a completely innocent, law-abiding, baby.

I see your point here, but surely you can agree that prison moms keeping their innocent, law-abiding babies should be decided on a case-by-case basis?

A mom in jail for petty theft or check fraud, say, is a different situation from a mom in jail for repeat DUIs or crack dealing or meth use.

In the latter cases, the TRUE best situation for the baby - assuming a competent father / immediate family member / caretaker is not around - might be (carefully screened) foster parents...and perhaps adoption.

*************

I wish successful rehabilitation to all prison inmates, male or female. But the reality is that at least some of them cannot break their habit(s); in such cases, motherhood and access to your still-INNOCENT baby's life is not a right, but a privilege they have sorely, sorely abused.

Gayle said, "Put the kid into foster care pronto - with guardians who'll do frequent visitations per court order. It's not the kid's fault that mom (or dad) is doing time!"

No, it sure isn't. But my guess is, you don't know much about foster care in Chicago or other budget-strapped cities. The reality is, the babies are probably better off staying with mom while she actually learns to mother. If mom shows she can't hack it, or the baby is harmed, she loses the baby. It's a chance. Guardians doing frequent visitations? Like who, family members? Ground zero for the abuse mom probably suffered in the first place.

We pay now, or we pay later.

You said, "Personally, I think more charitable programs should focus on people who are struggling to get by who nonetheless obey the laws of the land."

I agree with you. The ones that are out there seem either too religious or constrictive of personal freedom. And overburdened, widening the gap between mission statement and reality. It's a bad situation.

My other post addresses this story's topic.

Well, a women in jail for abusing or neglecting or murdering or letting her boyfriend abuse her child would bother me waaaay more than a woman with a drug addiction.

In fact, the baby is probably better off with the mom while she's doing time and getting counseling, than if mom and baby are reunited after her term is up, and she still has a major problem.

Babies and moms are in controlled environments, with services and supervision (and I assume less accuse to drugs and booze than "outside"). And maybe the mom gets her act together, which is better for baby *and* for mom.

At any rate, I believe I read recently that more women serve time for dating drug users and drug dealers (and thus being accessories to crimes) than for using. In which case, babies in prison with moms are waaaaay better off than babies with loser dad. But it's time to put my own kids to bed, so I can't look that up now.