Jailing is not the answer, no, but throwing in "[m]arijuana may not even harm fetuses" is not the kind of message we want to be sending. One of my professors is a leading expert in cannabis research in Canada, and he is currently studying the effects of cannabis on fetal development in rats. They and previous studies are finding/have found increased anxiety and decreased cognition and sociability in rat pups exposed in utero, with worse effects in females than males. Other studies have found some physical deformations I believe, but I'm not so familiar with their research. My professor is studying this specifically because of the extent of its use in pregnancy and his concern with the long-term and large-scale effects of this. Cannabis is a drug and should not be used –
without exception – in pregnancy until its safety and efficacy is established. I sympathise with women in a tough situation, but it's simply not fair to the children. I just think throwing in these kinds of phrases is dismissive of rational concerns, even if the responses to these concerns are irrational.
Perhaps I should've gone into more detail:
It's OK with me if pregnant women smoke weed, drink beer, stay up late, do or don't take pre-natal vitamins, or have an abortion. I shrug, whistle a happy tune, and do not care.
Drug isn't a dirty word, I apply this thinking to any and every drug, whether or not it's a "drug of abuse." If it hasn't been shown to be safe during pregnancy, then it shouldn't be used in pregnancy.
And I agree wholeheartedly, so long as it's a doctor's recommendation and a public-service ad on TV and scolding from a mom-to-be's mother-in-law. When such advice becomes law, enforced by police action, it's lunacy.
Well then you should have just said that instead, because your initial reply was unwarranted given that I made my position on police enforcement in this regard quite clear.