Amicus Brief Urging Non-Punitive Interpretation of Maryland’s Safe Haven Law

OVERVIEW

On January 12, Physicians for Reproductive Health, Doing Right By Birth , and several physicians who practice in Maryland, including Dr. Carolyn Sufrin, filed an amicus brief  to the Supreme Court of Maryland in In re B.CD. & B.CB. challenging the imposition of civil neglect findings against postpartum parents who lawfully use Maryland’s Safe Haven Law.

The brief argues that penalizing parents for safely surrendering an unharmed newborn contradicts the law’s purpose and threatens maternal and infant health. Drawing on medical and public health evidence, the amici explain that attaching CINA neglect findings to Safe Haven use discourages care-seeking, undermines the law’s effectiveness, and exacerbates the ongoing maternal health crisis—particularly for Black and other historically marginalized parents.

The brief states:

In the midst of an ongoing maternal health crisis in the United States, in the early 2000s Maryland adopted a safe haven law with the goal of providing a safe resource for postpartum persons to surrender their unharmed newborn(s) without fear of penalty (the “Safe Haven Law” or the “Law”). In fact, lawmakers expressly stated that the Law was designed to shield persons “who are in such desperate situations” from penalty, reasoning that punishing postpartum persons in crisis could cause “a grave injustice.” Despite the clear intent of the Law, the interpretation urged by Respondent would penalize postpartum persons for availing themselves of the Law, thereby frustrating its purpose and further exacerbating the maternal health crisis.