5) Re: Your ideas of possible ways to employ homoeopathy here.

As I wrote that must be the job of the treating homoeopath only.

This question was about one specific case, so any speculation about drugs and culture in general is out of place here and would equal to abusing this space.

I have not heard of anyone trying to eliminate poisoning by such drugs in an isopathic way ( compare "Lead in baby's blood" ). It may or may not work.
Effects of strong allo-drugs ( "anti-biosis" )are often cleared out with remedies like sulphur , nux vomica and others, acc. to s.s.
I once read about an Indian medical study employing nux v. to get rats rid of experimentally induced alc. addiction; but in the journal where I read this study reviewed it was torn into pieces on methodological grounds, i.e. how they did and documented it was hopelessly below any generally accepted standarts ( I am speaking about this particular study only ).

As I wrote above, the poisoning has to stop first.
Then you can treat the mother.
Thatz in itself is a form of "prevention", with regard to the baby. Hahnemann spoke of a form of "pre-birht healing" with his antimiasmatic "eugenic cures".
I do not see any room for blind prescibing for "cannabis intoxication in utero".

And after the child is born, you can treat the child as well.

If you ever read a good textbook of homoeopathy you know pretty well that nobody is completely healthy, with all inheritance of chronic stuff etc; starting early, with highest quality, gives the best start a human can have.

I don't like that term "const. simillimum", because it is so vague ( and a late invention anyway ). Chronic and acute remedies will have to be chosen according to the rules of the art. I do not see any reason to further speculate on these here.

Regards,
Panthera

[ 03. March 2003, 19:15: Message edited by: panthera-non-onca ]