Well I lived in the system for 8 years. I've seen the caliber of intellect of those running the system who face little to no accountability if anything goes wrong as evidenced by missing kids all over the country in addition to abuse in foster care and group home care, poor training, lousy limited inspection but I digress.

You say it's traumatic to the infant to remove them from a parent. I took many college courses regarding human development and I don't ever recall reading such a thing. In fact, I read about the effects of drugs on developing fetuses. I've also read about how volatile the cooking process is, which further endangers kids. In fact, a meth house was just busted with kids here a couple years ago. Exposure to the manufacturing process hasn't been researched to know the effects on the developing human mind, but something tells me that not healthy.

You suggest then that I'm referring to detox relative to "crack" babies, yet meth addicts who become pregnant and continue using can also send their newborn child into fits of withdrawal. There is ample evidence to support that. You contend they're transitory, yet there is a list of potential side effects not the least of which is developmental behavioral problems. The "research" if you can even call it that, that they did to test their hypothesis is junk science with negligible results at best. In both groups the rearrest rate was comparable, within 5%. To say they don't recidivate is dishonest. They fluffed the numbers to push an agenda.

Lastly, we don't know who the child's father is, nor his circumstances. Was he the other meth cook? If so, fine, but why is he not allowed the same opportunity to raise his child? What I'm getting at with this is it highlights the thinking that mothers are more important than fathers and reinforces the notion that fathers are disposable.