3
   

Smoking Foes try to stop PARENT from SMOKING IN THEIR HOME?

 
 
woiyo
 
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 10:07 am
http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20051215-112826-9119r.htm

"Anti-smoking activists who are driving cigarettes from public places across the country are now targeting private homes -- especially those with children.
Their efforts so far have contributed to regulations in three states -- Maine, Oklahoma and Vermont -- forbidding foster parents from smoking around children. Parental smoking also has become a critical point in some child-custody cases, including ones in Virginia and Maryland.
In a highly publicized Virginia case, a judge barred Caroline County resident Tamara Silvius from smoking around her children as a condition for child visitation. "


Some how, the Constitutionality of this escapes me.

Talk about rights being taken away by "liberal" courts!!
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 1,814 • Replies: 24
No top replies

 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 10:59 am
In a way I can see it as a rule for foster parents - they are, after all, paid by the state to raise children in a healthy environment.

But then you get into a whole weird deal about should parent's receiving TANF have to meet the same requirements?

And if they do, what about other parents?

And so on and so on and so on.

I'm not quite ready for a government nanny, personally.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 11:45 am
Smoking around kids has all kinds of heath risks for the children. Increased risks of SIDS, for one.

Kids don't have the opportunity to move to a smoke-free environment if their parents smoke.

Kids have rights, too.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 11:59 am
I agree with you DrewDad - smoking around kids is not okay but when it comes to toxic environments I can think of a lot of things that are worse.

How far are we willing to let the government intrude?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 12:48 pm
Ask Terri Schiavo.....
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 01:18 pm
No kidding.

I think it is dumb to smoke around kids but if I had to choose having a kid live with a smoker or a drinker I'd have to go with the smoker.

I think the "second hand" effects of alcoholism are more severe than those of second hand smoke.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 01:31 pm
I smoke outside. I do not smoke in confined areas with anyone, let alone my children. It's called respecting other peoples space and right to breath clean(er) air.

I don't need the government to tell me to do so.
0 Replies
 
rodeman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 01:34 pm
What squinney said.........................!
0 Replies
 
Ray
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 02:04 pm
I guess their argument is that there are parents who are careless enough to not respect the rights of their children to be in a free-smoke environment.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 02:32 pm
DrewDad wrote:
Smoking around kids has all kinds of heath risks for the children. Increased risks of SIDS, for one.

Kids don't have the opportunity to move to a smoke-free environment if their parents smoke.

Kids have rights, too.


Like being born?

(Just had to throw that in there...)
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 05:40 pm
That IS a tough one.

Clearly smoking presents a large and well researched risk to kids.


I have known of Family Court rulings here where access can only occur if the parent having the access agrees not to smoke around kids who are sensitive to the smoke.

The fact is, no normally sane and responsible parent SHOULD smoke around kids.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 05:59 pm
I once worked for a homeless family shelter. Even with long experience, i was still amazed by the incredible stupidity of people, who were nonetheless possessed of sufficient competence to screw one another--although not sufficient competence to ever use birth control or calculate the cost of alcoholism and drug abuse.

I stopped in to check on one of the families one evening, a "family" in which the mother of five children, having four different fathers, lived with a boyfriend who was not the father of any of the children. After delivering their food aid to them, i asked if there were anything i could help them with before i left. The "father" asked if i would drop him off at the hospital. I told him sure, and asked him what the matter was . . .

Oh, that annoying little son of a bitch over there was smart-mouthin' me, so i aimed a kick at his backside. But he dodged real quick, and i hit the door frame. I think i broke my toe. It hurts real bad.

This clown was referring to a six year old who probably did not weight 40 pounds. He was, himself, about six feet tall and probably weighed two fifty. If he had connected with the boy, i'd have been taking the boy to the hospital.

We arrived there, and when the physician asked what had happened (i usually stayed with the clients, many of whom were functionally illiterate, and could not have navigated the bureaucracy in anything under two hours, otherwise), he gave her a suspicious look, and then gave me an inquisitive look. I told him to tell her what he had told me. He did. Before he was released, the folks from Children's Services showed up to tell him he could find someplace else to stay, and that they'd secured a temporary restraining order to prevent him entering that domicile.

At the hearing on the charge of child endangerment (to which he plead, for a reduced sentence), he glared at me, and on the way out said he oughta get me for that. I told him his own big mouth had landed him in hot water, and that if he really felt that froggy, why didn't he just wind up and try to kick me as hard as he could.

Some people ought not be allowed to reproduce--but as i don't want to live in a society in which anyone gets to make decisions like that, i guess we'll all just have to continue to deal with people having children who are themselves, mentally children.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 06:28 pm
Give kids a chance, I say. Stop polluting them with smoke, alcohol, processed food and sadistic behavior.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 06:33 pm
Someone who smokes three packs a day around a baby is really thwacking out the harm, especially if it was going on during the pregnancy. We've learned a lot in, oh, forty years.

I worry about the edge of control though, as others do here.

I am chary about the rule imposing.

Plus... y'know, a bunch of us in my generation were born living with that. Not that that solves anything, just a comment.

More preventative health services with education, less bombing, please.
0 Replies
 
ralpheb
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Dec, 2005 09:37 pm
Am I the only one who sees the irony of this. Most of you I have seen on other threads and you all seem to be anti right wingers. The beaty of this thread is that it is the liberal left wingers that are trying to impose this.
I do love the irony of all this.
Oh, and I don't smoke so I could care less how much of a smoking ban they put on people.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 01:36 am
ralpheb wrote:
Oh, and I don't smoke so I could care less how much of a smoking ban they put on people.

Are you trying to sound like an idiot, or was this an accident?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 01:37 am
McGentrix wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Kids have rights, too.

Like being born?

Conception->embryo->fetus->birth->kid

Too hard to follow?
ralpheb
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 12:29 pm
why? because people are bound and determined to smoke and create unneeded health risks around other people.

I must be the same level of idiot you are.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 03:17 pm
My point is that if one only cares about items that affect one directly, then one is a fool.
0 Replies
 
ralpheb
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 03:36 pm
My point is that there is no constitutional right for a person to smoke. We agree and two different levels. Most(notice I do not say all) smokers only care about their next cigarette and they do not care about other peoples health issues. In this case the smoker only cares about the effect the cigarette has on them.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Smoking Foes try to stop PARENT from SMOKING IN THEIR HOME?
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/02/2020 at 03:51:23