First-- two justices dissented so 😐
Second, the state had argued that one reason it should charge pregnant people with child abuse is because of the possibility they become pregnant again
Or, you know, maybe not.
"Labeling a woman as a perpetrator of child abuse does not prevent her from becoming pregnant or provide any protection for a later conceived child while in utero," the court noted.
But it does ensure that patient has a difficult time assimilating into the workforce and participate in the lives of the children they *DO* have
They also depend on a belief that the state is *owed* a healthy baby with each pregnancy