Increasing prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD) among pregnant women in recent years has led state policy makers and health care professionals alike to focus on reducing rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) and associated complications experienced by families. Policy makers in some states have responded by adopting punitive laws that criminalize substance use during pregnancy, considering it grounds for civil commitment or presuming child abuse or neglect.However, as the recent analysis of state policy and NAS rates in the study by Faherty et al 1 suggested, punitive approaches are counterproductive and instead are associated with higher rates of NAS.Faherty et al 1 hypothesized that pregnant women were less likely to engage with the health care system and pursue interventions, such as substance use disorder treatment, owing to these punitive polices, leaving the substance use untreated and NAS a more likely outcome. We applaud the authors' conclusion that states should pursue policies that instead focus on primary prevention strategies.However, framing the discussion about perinatal opioid use using NAS reduction as a primary outcome is problematic. From the maternal-fetal perspective, decreasing substance exposure is an important goal; polysubstance exposure is associated with overall increased risk for the mother, fetus, and neonate, including greater severity, longer duration, and increased need for pharmacologic treatment of NAS. 2 Maternal OUD treatment improves all of these outcomes. However, maternal OUD treatment also causes NAS, making the presence of NAS diagnosis a nonspecific measure, as it does not differentiate exposure to nonprescribed drugs vs maternal OUD treatment. Symptoms of NAS may also be exacerbated by other maternal medications (eg, SSRIs) that were appropriately prescribed for cooccurring mental health disorders, such as depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder. The finding in the study by Faherty et al 1 that NAS rates were higher in counties with better access to maternal substance use treatment programs illustrates this point.Faherty et al 1 reported no apparent association between rates of NAS and the enactment of policies that require reporting of prenatal substance use to child protection services (CPS), suggesting that "reporting policies are more likely to result in conversations between clinicians and pregnant women that result in decreased opioid use or greater engagement in treatment for opioidrelated complications, actions that may decrease rates of NAS." We are not convinced. Qualitative studies on this topic have suggested that women who fear losing custody of their children may not see much distinction between policies defining maternal substance use as child abuse and those which require reporting substance use to CPS based on prenatal substance exposure alone. For example, a study by Stone 3 reported that 73% of the women interviewed were afraid of their drug use being detected specifically due to fear of losing custody or legal consequences. A st...