Using protective custody statutes as the grounds for litigation, an increasing number of states have initiated lawsuits against pregnant women on behalf of the fetus ("baby Jane Doe versus Ms. Doe") in what has been referred to as maternal-fetal conflict. Most of these cases have involved pregnant women taking illicit drugs. However, women's constitutional rights, in particular the right not to be subjected to "cruel and unusual punishment" (U.S. Const. amend. VIII) and the "right to be secure in their persons" (U.S. Const. amend. IV), as well as the right to refuse treatment, have been denied because they stopped taking a licit drug for a mental health condition (e.g., because they were concerned about the potential effects on fetal development). Recently, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (Siu et al., 2016) recommended routine depression screening for women during pregnancy and postpartum. The authors discuss the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation from a Foucauldian perspective, considering the possibility that routine questionnaire-based depression screening may serve as a neoliberal surveillance tactic, thereby undermining women's ability to have control over their bodies and to be self-determining. Medical neoliberalism and the unintended consequences of screening-qua-surveillance are reviewed in terms of recent legal cases of maternal-fetal conflict.
Public Significance StatementPractitioners should be aware that questionnaire-based screening for depression is not evidence-based and has many iatrogenic effects. Additionally, depression screening during pregnancy pathologizes and de-politicizes women's experiences of pregnancy and maternal stress. It may serve as a neoliberal surveillance tactic, thereby undermining women's ability to have control over their bodies and to be self-determining. Medical neoliberalism and the unintended consequences of screening-qua-surveillance are reviewed in terms of recent legal cases of maternalfetal conflict.