testified, that after their birth but before testing, the children were not exposed to methamphetamine by Hettieh or any other person. The exposure occurred prior to birth. [¶ 7] Hettieh moved to dismiss the complaint under N.D.R.Crim.P. 12(b)(2). She argued the State failed to allege she committed any criminal act upon her child postpartum. The State argued that the child was “exposed” to methamphetamine postpartum and the mother was criminally liable. The trial court dismissed the complaint, concluding the State failed to prove in its information or affidavit of probable caus h Carolina and Alabama have held an unborn child is a child, person, or individual for purposes of criminal prosecution. See Ex Parte Ankrom, Nos. 1110176 and 1110219, 2013 WL 135748, at *1 (Ala. Jan. 11, 2013) (<HOLDING>); Whitner v. State, 328 S.C. 1, 492 S.E.2d 777
holding that an unborn child is not a dependent for purposes of the neglect statute holding a fetus is not a child person or individual for purposes of criminal prosecution under the reckless injury to a child statute holding an unborn child is not a child for purposes of criminal prosecution of mistreatment of a child holding a mothers ingestion of a controlled substance while pregnant does not constitute child abuse as an unborn child is not a person for purposes of criminal prosecution holding an unborn child is a child for purposes of prosecuting chemical endangerment of a child