#dcfs

Why pregnant women who seek help for opioid addiction are losing their children—not because they failed treatment, but because the system makes success mathematically impossible

Anonymously Written By, “The Uncounted Mother”

February 3rd, 2026

⸻

Across the United States, a quiet catastrophe is unfolding at the intersection of healthcare, child welfare, and the fentanyl epidemic. In dependency courtrooms, neonatal intensive care units, and methadone clinics, pregnant women and new mothers battling opioid use disorder are being permanently separated from their newborns—not because they have refused treatment, relapsed in defiance of medical advice, or harmed their children, but because they sought help within a system whose timelines make success unattainable.

This is not a story of parental neglect or personal failure. It is a story of structural impossibility: a collision between the pharmacological realities of treating fentanyl addiction during pregnancy and the rigid deadlines imposed by American child welfare law.

While policymakers and researchers often point to familiar barriers—insurance gaps, transportation challenges, rural clinic shortages, childcare constraints, stigma, or fear of Child Protective Services (CPS)—these explanations overlook the central problem. Even when a pregnant woman overcomes every one of those obstacles, she may still lose her child for a single, unavoidable reason: effective methadone stabilization for fentanyl addiction takes longer than pregnancy itself and longer than the child welfare system allows.

Fentanyl Changed the Rules—But the System Did Not

Fentanyl, a synthetic opioid 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine, has radically transformed opioid addiction in the United States. Its pharmacological properties differ fundamentally from heroin and prescription opioids that once dominated treatment protocols. Fentanyl’s high lipid solubility allows it to accumulate in fatty tissues, where it is slowly released over time—a process known as protracted clearance. As a result, individuals may test positive for fentanyl in urine screenings weeks or even months after discontinuing use (Huhn et al., Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 2020).

For pregnant women, this reality carries devastating consequences. Persistent positive drug screens—often misinterpreted as ongoing illicit use—are frequently treated by child welfare agencies and courts as proof of noncompliance or treatment failure, even when medical providers acknowledge that continued detection may reflect residual fentanyl stored in body tissues rather than recent use.

Methadone: The Gold Standard—with a Catch

Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with methadone is widely recognized as the gold standard for opioid use disorder during pregnancy. Leading medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), emphasize that methadone reduces relapse risk, stabilizes maternal physiology, and protects fetal health. Abrupt opioid withdrawal during pregnancy is associated with serious risks, including fetal distress, preterm labor, placental abruption, and stillbirth (ACOG Committee Opinion No. 711).

But methadone’s effectiveness depends entirely on achieving a therapeutic dose—one sufficient to prevent withdrawal symptoms and cravings. For women with fentanyl addiction, therapeutic doses are often dramatically higher than those required for heroin or prescription opioids. Clinical experience and emerging literature increasingly document stabilization doses in the range of 250 to 350 milligrams per day for fentanyl-exposed patients, compared with 80 to 120 milligrams for earlier opioid epidemics (McCarthy et al., Journal of Addiction Medicine, 2023).

Pregnancy further complicates dosing. Blood volume increases by up to 50 percent, renal clearance accelerates, and hormonal changes alter liver enzyme activity. These normal physiological shifts mean that a dose adequate before pregnancy may become insufficient mid-gestation. This is not “tolerance” in the colloquial sense; it is basic pharmacokinetics.

The Math That Guarantees Failure

Federal regulations governing opioid treatment programs (42 CFR Part 8) require cautious methadone induction to prevent overdose. Most clinics begin at 30 milligrams daily, increasing by no more than 10 milligrams per week. These safeguards are medically justified—but when applied to pregnant women with fentanyl addiction, they create an inescapable arithmetic trap.

Consider a woman who enters methadone treatment at 20 weeks of pregnancy—earlier than many, given the pervasive fear of CPS involvement. If she ultimately requires 300 milligrams to stabilize, reaching that dose from a 30-milligram starting point takes approximately 27 weeks under standard protocols. She has only 20 weeks until delivery. Even under ideal conditions, stabilization before birth is impossible.

During this prolonged period of under-dosing, she faces a brutal choice: endure severe withdrawal that endangers her fetus, or supplement her insufficient methadone dose with illicit opioids to prevent medical harm. Medical literature is clear that unmanaged withdrawal poses significant risks to both mother and fetus. Supplemental use in this context is not recklessness; it is harm reduction.

Yet those predictable, medically rational decisions generate positive drug screens—the very evidence child welfare systems rely upon to justify newborn removal.

When Timelines Collide

The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA) reshaped American child welfare by imposing strict permanency timelines. States are required to seek termination of parental rights when a child has been in foster care for 15 of the most recent 22 months, with limited exceptions. For newborns removed at birth, the clock starts immediately.

Within 9 to 12 months, parents are typically expected to demonstrate “substantial compliance” with reunification plans—often defined by sustained clean drug screens, stable housing, employment, and parenting classes. But a mother whose methadone dose has not yet reached therapeutic levels may still be experiencing withdrawal, protracted fentanyl clearance, or both. She may need months more to achieve the clean screens the system demands.

The result is a structural contradiction: the child welfare timeline expires before the medical treatment timeline can reasonably conclude.

Compliance Redefined as Failure

On paper, case plan requirements sound reasonable: engage in treatment, attend appointments, follow medical advice, achieve sobriety. In practice, these standards reflect a profound misunderstanding of fentanyl pharmacology and methadone treatment during pregnancy.

A woman who attends her clinic daily, participates in counseling, follows provider instructions, and avoids withdrawal-related risks may still test positive. By medical standards, she is compliant. By child welfare standards, she is failing.

This disconnect is compounded by communication breakdowns. Methadone providers—overburdened, wary of liability, or uncertain about confidentiality—often fail to explain treatment realities to CPS workers and judges. Meanwhile, caseworkers and courts, lacking training in addiction medicine, interpret positive screens at face value.

Courts, Counsel, and the Presumption of Authority

Dependency courts operate under a powerful presumption: CPS reports are accurate unless convincingly challenged. Parents, often represented by overworked court-appointed attorneys with little addiction medicine expertise, struggle to rebut allegations of noncompliance. Requests for expert testimony, timeline extensions, or alternative permanency options are rare and often denied.

Although most states permit timeline extensions when parents demonstrate progress, courts typically require evidence—such as sustained clean drug screens—that women in active dose titration cannot yet provide. The Catch-22 is devastating: those who need more time are denied it because they have not yet succeeded.

Adoption Versus Guardianship

In theory, guardianship offers a humane alternative: stability for children without permanently severing parental rights. Research consistently shows that guardianship can produce better outcomes, particularly when biological family connections are preserved. In practice, however, adoption is favored. It brings federal funding under Title IV-E, legal finality, and administrative closure.

For mothers who needed six more months to complete treatment, adoption is not a child-centered solution—it is an irreversible tragedy.

The Real Barrier Is Time

Studies examining poor outcomes for pregnant women with opioid use disorder often cite insurance gaps, transportation, stigma, and fragmented care. These barriers are real. But even women who overcome all of them still confront the central obstacle: time.

A realistic, evidence-based timeline for fentanyl-exposed pregnant women to achieve sustained stability is closer to 12 months from treatment initiation. That timeline accounts for gradual dose titration, postpartum metabolic normalization, protracted fentanyl clearance, and the establishment of a track record of sobriety. Pregnancy and ASFA timelines simply do not allow for it.

A Path Forward

This crisis is not inevitable. It is the result of policy choices—and it can be remedied by new ones.

Reform must include:

• ASFA amendments providing explicit timeline extensions for parents engaged in medication-assisted treatment.

• Mandatory coordination between methadone providers, child welfare agencies, and courts.

• Redefined compliance standards recognizing attendance and engagement—not drug screens alone—as evidence of treatment progress during dose optimization.

• Due process protections, including access to trained counsel and independent medical experts.

• Education requirements for judges, caseworkers, and attorneys on fentanyl pharmacology and MAT during pregnancy.

Without these changes, the system will continue to do profound harm—terminating families not because parents failed, but because policy refused to account for medical reality.

The Cost of Doing Nothing

Termination of parental rights has been called the civil death penalty: permanent, irrevocable, and imposed under a lower standard of proof than criminal convictions. Once adoption is finalized, even mothers who later achieve full recovery have no legal path back to their children.

This is not child protection. It is institutional failure.

Every month, women who did everything right—who sought treatment, attended clinics, followed medical advice, and fought to protect their unborn children—lose them anyway. Not because they were unfit. But because pregnancy is shorter than methadone titration and policy refused to bend.

The medical facts are clear. The mathematics are undeniable. The harm is permanent. What remains is whether the United States is willing to align its child welfare system with reality—or continue destroying families in the name of timelines that guarantee failure.

For the mothers still standing in line at clinics each morning, hoping someone will finally see their effort: you are not failing. The system is. And America must do better.

⸻

About the Author

“The Uncounted Mother” is a 39-year-old mom living somewhere in California who has direct, lived experience navigating the intersection of pregnancy, opioid use disorder treatment, and the child welfare system. With the support of her child’s father, she fought to retain custody of her first child after a positive drug test at birth in 2023—an effort that ultimately ended in the termination of her parental rights despite documented engagement in treatment and sustained progress toward recovery.

Since that time, The Uncounted Mother and her partner have remained in treatment and substance-free. They are currently expecting their second child and are no longer at risk of child welfare involvement.

Drawing on personal experience, clinical research, and legal analysis, her work focuses on exposing systemic failures in dependency courts, medication-assisted treatment policy, and child welfare timelines—particularly as they affect pregnant women and new mothers.

Kidnapping Twats

A.k.a. FUCK YOU DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES 👍

I have lived in an la county ODR mental health and homeless housing program. They teach us sobreity and re-introduce us into society. I got pregnant while I was a client and finished my program while staying at a maternity house. I ahd been sober for longer than ever before. I was a great mom and took all the parenting classes offered & more. But then they kidnapped my child because I was electrocuted & missed one court date because my infant son had a fever .

Now that my son is gone, im no longer sober, I keep smoking meth, Its like coffee to me. I literally might as well drink coffee. But i keep answering my damn doorbell or the constant knocking from people who live in my apartment complex. I didnt have this problem a few months ago. I was a normal, albeit fat, ugly mom who spent all day taking care of her baby.

The first month we moved in, our direct neighbor started a fire in his apartment. Ours flooded. Then the electrical problems ensued. I got electrocuted, Instead of calling an ambulance I sat in the house managers car. They saw me starting at my burnt hands but decided to claim I hallucinated getting electrocuted. I hate people.

Then they said the building wasnt safe when its a brand new apartment building; you need to be logged for facial recognition to get into the building.

Long story short, they decided they would rather me loose my child then face me in court. They said the security guard could "see my baby had a wet diaper " that night.

So now, I sit here and smoke meth and sell my body and cry randomly at how fucked your "legal kidnapping by the department of children and familiy services" world is.

He lost 13 pounds in their care and i said he would be better off coming home with me and now i have to visit him at a police station.

So now that you kidnapped my son, Im a meth head and cant even test for you because you took away the love of my life . And, as a previously homeless person with rape and violent trauma ptsd, you now expect me to stay strong and carry on ?

FUCK YOUR SYSTEM. ASS-TWATS.

LMFAO

By An Anonymous Davis Citizen Of ~ 40 Years Time In The Community

________________

In Yolo County, California, one powerful man’s personal heartbreak has reshaped an entire child welfare system — and many families are going to suffer now because of it.

The person responsible for the changes just referenced is Matt Rexroad, a longtime Republican political consultant, former county supervisor, and former mayor of Woodland. He did not begin his foster care journey with a plan to reform the system. He and his wife took in a baby boy from the foster system, whom Rexroad publicly referred to as “Bonus Baby” — a term that soon became a symbol of a larger, more controversial movement.

After parenting the boy for over two years, the Rexroads petitioned to adopt him. But the county’s Child Welfare Services (CWS) disagreed. In line with California’s state-mandated priority of family reunification, the agency determined that the child could safely return to his biological mother just days before the deadline in which her parental rights were set to be taken. The decision prompted a legal battle. The Rexroads fought the reunification plan in court but ultimately lost as foster parents have very little rights to the children they volunteer to help prior to adoption. It is generally the accepted principle that if you decide to volunteer as a foster parent, you’re aware that there may be a multitude of systemic inequities that you will witness when caring for foster children. However, the average person doesn’t generally concede of a vengeant plan born of ill will afterward that is with the intent to make everyone else in society have to suffer because of your emotional turmoil or in this case, emotional instability and incapacity to handle loss in a mature way.

Rather than walk away, Rexroad then effectively used his political leverage to launch a crusade against the county’s child welfare agency and against any and all families that would be seeking reunification or otherwise granted that privilege as Mr. Rexroad sought to take it from every family and child in Yolo County involved with CPS who should have benefited from this opportunity. And he did this to get even for the fact that he wasn’t allowed to adopt a child that wasn’t his from the get go. As a result, the doctrine of family reunification itself has now permanently changed in Yolo County. The end result is that Yolo County’s approach to child welfare has now dramatically changed and raised alarming questions about due process, judicial independence, and the real cost of political power in CPS decision-making.

A System Under Siege

What followed the court’s denial of the Rexroads’ adoption petition was an unprecedented campaign. Rexroad publicly lambasted the social workers and judges involved in the case. He argued that the child welfare system placed ideological allegiance to family reunification over the actual well-being of children. With the support of conservative networks and growing public sympathy, he called for sweeping changes to the way Yolo County handled foster care cases.

Rexroad’s criticism extended to the courtroom. He targeted Judge Steven Basha, a respected judge known for adhering to California’s reunification-first legal framework. Rexroad accused Basha of bias and used unethical maneuvers to have him removed from hearing child welfare cases by being forced to have to recuse himself from working in the juvenile detention court in order to avoid termination after most likely a lengthy term of legal proceedings that would have put his entire career under a microscope and traumatized him and his family in the process. He had no other reasonable option but to resign from the child welfare court in order to avoid being crucified in Rexroad’s witch hunt. Shortly thereafter, Judge Basha retired completely from practicing law.

Meanwhile, changes were happening behind the scenes. The county’s Department of Health and Human Services saw a leadership shake-up. The agency’s director resigned, and her replacement implemented a policy direction far more aligned with Rexroad’s views and the new policy director was more or less put in place by Rexroad pulling political shoestrings to line up circumstances as they would need to be set forth in order to guarantee a successful forward momentum on his personal vendetta.

Although Yolo County counsel warned the Board of Supervisors that a policy limiting reunification efforts would be illegal, the Board — influenced by Rexroad — still moved forward with directives that effectively discouraged returning children to their biological families.

A Dramatic Shift in Numbers — and Consequences

The results were swift and jarring.

Between 2016 and 2017, Yolo County saw a 70% increase in children removed from their homes and placed into foster care — all this at a time when statewide foster care numbers were on the decline. Most of these removals cited “neglect” as the reason, a charge that can be vague and often stems from issues related to poverty and substance abuse, but not necessarily abuse or any factual harm or overt harm to the children involved - in the majority of cases. Of course there are exceptions and these exceptions are not the majority nor the children whose families are being victimized unnecessarily by these changes.

While child safety should be paramount in any child welfare system, the data from Yolo County paints a concerning picture. As more children have been removed from their homes, rates of repeat maltreatment have now also begun to rise. This metric is a key indicator of system effectiveness, and the spike suggests that more removals do not translate into better outcomes for children. Rather they overwhelm child welfare social workers causing them to not have the necessary time needed to devote to their cases so that nobody ends up being able to get the appropriate services they need nor the social support and assistance for families that is necessary for the families and clients being served by this agency in order to be able to succeed.

Critics argue that rather than addressing root causes — such as lack of family support services, economic hardship, or housing instability — the system now simply defaults to removal. And with this shift, the very goals of child welfare may have been turned on their head.

The Broader Implications

What has happened is impacting people in every aspect of child welfare in Yolo County. For example, it has made the remaining juvenile dependency court judges in Yolo County such as Judge Daniel P. Mcguire, obviously far too nervous to rock the boat or to even dare to disagree with the recommendation of CPS social workers in the courts now, no matter how false or unjustified their claims and recommendations may be* because they have seen their colleague get ousted now for having stood up for what’s right. You can hardly blame these judges for trying to protect their own assets as surely they have their own families to consider and mouths to feed.

The bottom line though is that this sort of political manipulation is causing the citizens of Yolo County to suffer as a result of this man’s ethically wanton disregard for the taxpaying families of Yolo County. These citizens who initially supported him having his position here in our county chose to support Mr. Rexroad because they trusted him to look out for the betterment of our community and yet he has betrayed everyone and used legal power to undermine everyone, but particularly harming the children and their mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers and friends and neighbors because the damage caused by frivolously terminating the rights of parents who otherwise could have easily reunified with their children is far reaching and impacts the entire community for the entirety of those people’s lives.

Matt Rexroad’s campaign has become a case study in what can happen when political influence supersedes policy expertise and judicial independence. While some parents and advocates have praised his willingness to challenge a broken system, many others warn that the reforms he inspired may have created a more punitive, less accountable CPS apparatus — one where removing children from their homes has become not just easier, but encouraged, and where reunification is just a buzzword in the court and no longer an actual incentive where families are concerned.

The case underscores the delicate balance CPS must strike: protecting children from harm without unnecessarily destroying families. When that balance is disrupted by personal agendas or political pressure, the consequences ripple far beyond a single case.

Yolo County’s experience is a cautionary tale. It highlights the vulnerability of child welfare systems to powerful individuals, especially when those individuals operate from a place of personal grievance and hold the levers of government.

What We Can Do To Prevent This From Happening Again

At the heart of it all, a boy known only to the public as “Bonus Baby” — now home with his family where he should be — we are all being forced to now pay a terrible price for this child and his family’s due process because of a powerful ex-foster parent’s inability to handle the emotional burdens of the job they chose to volunteer for. Perhaps child welfare workers should be subjecting potential foster parents to a far more rigorous requirement of psychological evaluation before allowing people to become approved and perhaps the emotional devastation that may be a potential cost of helping children via foster parenting is something that ought to be better communicated to potential foster parents beforehand because clearly some people are not cut out for such an emotionally demanding task.

…And there’s nothing wrong with that either. It takes a very special kind of person to be able to handle the ups and downs of foster parenting without becoming emotionally broken inside. But when individuals show that they cannot handle it, we as a society cannot permit them to destroy whole sections of our society on an emotional rampage as an acceptable response to their suffering.

The political changes that have occurred we must now work diligently to undo and everyone must do their part to make sure no one is ever allowed to victimize a community in this way ever again.

________________

The manipulation of those who are in system is appalling. Some day I will write a tell all book and name names. Because it’s specific individuals who are doing this out of spite, hiding behind the system. I am so mad.

And as a Mandatory Reporter this has brought serious questions about how reports are made and to who. Buckle up kids and sorry for how dark this is about to get. But I need to say something...

After observing and mapping the protocols and structure of DCFS's decisions (as someone who does this professionally) Ive been unable to discover any pathway through this system that doesn't endanger victims or benefit their captors.

Not only that... Exhaustive efforts are taken by CSWs at the direction of their supervisors to suppress evidence, avoid record keeping for posterity, and interfere with other law enforcement investigations. Because I've tried to take this to EVERYONE up the ladder. It's designed this way.

At a profit of $4bn a year. That's right, most DCFS agencies are contracted to a for profit company- Maximus… with the privileges of a government agency.

The system is broken. My DCFS worker visited today because she got another report. She said “Grace I got another report. It’s Saturday but I had to come out because you told the same stuff about your mom that you always tell. Do you keep telling because you want me to visit you? I like you but you don’t have to keep telling the same things your mom does so that I’ll visit.”

WHAT.

I really thought I misheard her. I did not. And to be clear, I had pictures and bruises and texts to backup what I told the doctors yesterday. My mom is bad and getting worse because she KNOWS no one will do anything to her. I immediately dialed CB’s number and she ripped into the social worker as kindly as any angry lawyer could. The social worker tried to spin it as if she just meant she gets a lot of reports. CB knew better. So in true CB fashion, she said (on speaker) definitely directed toward the social worker:

“Well, Grace, ms. ______ gets paid to come out even if it’s on a Saturday and ms. ______ is required by law to make a visit when she gets a report whether she likes it or not and whether it is the first report or the hundredth report because MAYBE if ms._______ does her job, she will eventually get information that can substantiate a removal and a protective order. Right, ms. _____? I sincerely hope you wouldn’t be discouraging Grace from reporting any information whatsoever no matter how many reports have been made and no matter how many times it might require you to come out on a Saturday. Are you aware of exactly how long it has taken Grace to trust people and to come forward with information? I would hope you wouldn’t risk the chance of destroying progress that all of us have worked hard for. And I also want to add that if you spent more than the mandatory 5 minutes with Grace you would notice the deficits. Major deficits. Yes she has a drivers license and yes she can read and write. She’s not in a vegetative state. It is a spectrum. I can spend an hour with her and recognize that my 8 year old has skills and comprehension that Grace doesn’t have. But in some areas she is incredibly bright and gifted. So your mandatory welfare check is for nothing unless you take the time to get to know her rather than glance at the surface.”

The social worker froze. And then TRIED to recover but CB was already way too mad.

So…in case anyone was wondering, the system is broken. And when they get tired of doing their job, they just…stop. No matter how many reports they get. No matter the risk of danger.

The system silences victims and we suffer because of it.

This is an old case summary written February 2020

Please exercise caution when reading this, as there are accounts of very brutal abuse amounting to torture and a child victim. Click images at your own discretion.

---

On May 22, 2013 Pearl Fernandez called 911. Her 8-year-old son Gabriel fell and hit his head on a dresser, and now he wasn't breathing. Paramedics arrived at her Palmdale, California apartment to find Gabriel unconscious. They rushed him to Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, where he was on life support for two days. It was very clear that this was no accidental fall. First responders noted that every single inch of his body had signs of abuse.

"These are actual kids already traumatized and they're being told – ‘here sleep on a floor' -- because we don't have anywhere for you to sleep," Golbert said.