Amicus Brief: Child
1. Read through the case overview of the Ankrum v. State of Alabama (2011) case (available at the end ).
2. You are a policy analyst for the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). You are working with the NASW legal counsel to complete an amicus brief on this case. You have been asked to help write an amicus brief from this perspective and as if the case were still pending before the Court. The brief should include the following sections: a. Case Headings/Captions – _This is the title page for the brief. It identifies the Court hearing the case; the parties; the date, case number and your name and contact information. This page also indicates that this document is an amicus brief and which party it is in support of.
b. Table of Contents
c. Table of Authorities – _This section simply lists different sources that you will use in support of your argument. Sources can include: laws, previous judicial decisions (i.e. precedents), social science research, journal articles, law review articles, etc. If searching for precedents that were set in previous cases, look for cases that centered on similar issues. However, because you are writing for the NASW, you can rely heavily on social science sources. If using more than one type of source, each type should be grouped together and include a header for each section indicating the source. Please include 8-10 sources.
d. Interest of Amicus Curiae – _This section explains to the Court why your organization (the NASW) is interested in the case. In writing this section, think about the mission, vision and values of the NASW, what a positive outcome would be for this organization and how a positive outcome in this case will support the mission, vision and values of the NASW.
e. Summary of Argument – _This section provides a summary for your arguments. It is similar to an executive summary in a report that briefly gives the reader an overview of your arguments.
f. Argument – _In this section, you will present your case for why the Court should make a ruling that is favorable to your position. You will rely on literature to do this. Think broadly about the impact charging or not charging someone criminally when they use illegal drugs while pregnant. For example, what impact w_i_l_l_ _t_h_i_s_ _h_a_v_e_ _o_n_ _w_o_m_e_n_?_ _O_r_ _h_o_w_ _w_i_l_l_ _i_t_ _i_m_p_a_c_t_ _a_ _w_o_m_a_n_’s_ _d_e_c_i_s_i_o_n_ _t_o_ _g_e_t_ _prenatal care or not? Or how will this impact all parties involved? Or what happens if the child dies? Ultimately, you are understanding how this issue is addressed in the literature. Support your argument with the sources listed in the table of authorities. Include 4-6 arguments.
g. Conclusion
Issue
Can a woman be criminally prosecuted in Alabama for using illegal drugs while pregnant?
Facts of the Case
“ ‘On January 31, 2009, the defendant, Hope Ankrom, gave birth to a son, [B.W.], at Medical Center Enterprise. Medical records showed that [Ankrom] tested positive for cocaine prior to giving birth and that the child tested positive for cocaine after birth.
“ ‘Department of Human Resources worker Ashley Arnold became involved and developed a plan for the care of the child. During the investigation [Ankrom] admitted to Ashley that she had used marijuana while she was pregnant but denied using cocaine.
“ ‘Medical records from her doctor show that he documented a substance abuse problem several times during her pregnancy and she had tested positive for cocaine and marijuana on more than one occasion during her pregnancy.’
“On February 18, 2009, Ankrom was arrested and charged with chemical endangerment of a child. On August 25, 2009, the grand jury indicted Ankrom. The indictment stated that Ankrom ‘did knowingly, recklessly, or intentionally cause or permit a child, to-wit: [B.W.], a better description of which is to the Grand Jury otherwise unknown, to be exposed to, to ingest or inhale, or to have contact with a controlled substance, chemical substance, or drug paraphernalia as defined in Section 13A–12–260 of the Code of Alabama, 1975, to-wit: Cocaine, in violation of Section [26–15–3.2(a)(1) ].’
“On September 25, 2009, Ankrom filed a motion styled as a ‘Motion to Dismiss Indictment.’ In that motion, after setting forth the facts, Ankrom argued that ‘[t]he plain language of [§ 26–15–3.2, Ala.Code 1975,] shows that the legislature intended for the statute to apply only to a child, not a fetus’; that ‘courts in other states which have enacted the same or similar chemical endangerment statutes have determined that such statutes do not apply to prenatal conduct that allegedly harms a fetus’; that ‘[t]he state’s contention that the defendant violated this statute renders the law impermissibly vague, and therefore the rule of lenity applies’; that ‘[t]he legislature has previously considered amending the statute to include prenatal conduct that harms a fetus, and declined to do so’; that ‘the defendant has not been accorded due process because there was no notice that her conduct was illegal under this statute’; that ‘[t]he prosecution of pregnant women is a violation of the constitutional guarantee of Equal Protection’; and that ‘[p]rosecution of pregnant, allegedly drug-addicted women is against public policy for numerous moral and ethical reasons.’ The State responded to that motion on October 13, 2009. In the State’s response, it agreed that on January 31, 2009, Ankrom gave birth to a son and that medical records showed that Ankrom tested positive for cocaine immediately prior to giving birth and that the child tested positive for cocaine after birth. Based on that conduct, the State argued that prosecution of Ankrom was proper under § 26–15–3.2, Ala.Code 1975. On October 15, 2009, the trial court denied Ankrom’s motion.
“On April 1, 2010, Ankrom pleaded guilty to a violation of § 26–15–3.2(a)(1), Ala.Code 1975.”
Ankrom v. State, [Ms. CR–09–1148, Aug. 26, 2011] _ So.3d _ (Ala.Crim.App.2011). Ankrom was sentenced to three years in prison, but her sentence was suspended and she was placed on probation for one year. Ankrom, _ So.3d at _.
“Ankrom alleges that the term ‘child’ in § 26–15–3.2, Ala.Code 1975, does not include a viable fetus. The State responds that the plain meaning of the term ‘child,’ as used in the statute, includes an unborn child.”
Retrieved from: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/al-supreme-court/1620470.html