Ban smoking in car with kids?

Avatar for cmkristy
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2005
Ban smoking in car with kids?
24
Thu, 03-14-2013 - 2:52pm

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — Adults who smoke in a car with a child could face hundreds of dollars in fines under a bill approved Wednesday in the Oregon Senate.

If the House gives its approval and Gov. John Kitzhaber signs the bill, Oregon would join four other states with similar measures. Violators would face a maximum fine of $250 for a first offense and $500 for subsequent offenses.

The Senate's 19-10 vote Wednesday did not follow party lines.

Proponents said secondhand smoke is harmful, and minors shouldn't be subjected to health hazards because of their parents' decision to smoke. They say smoke can be trapped inside a vehicle and pool in the back seat where children often sit.

Oregon senate votes to ban smoking in car with kids- http://www.katu.com/politics/Oregon-Senate-votes-to-ban-smoking-in-car-with-kids-197833801.html

What do you think? Should smoking with children in the car be banned?

 photo snowsiggy.png

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sat, 03-30-2013 - 8:49am

You're not denying that there are health risks with smoking are you ommy?

Ya know Jams, I think you need to take a minute and find anything that I have written that would support the above statement of yours. :) I think, for some reason, you and Mom are grasping at straws trying to turn this into an argument and avoid addressing the concerns that are actually brought up. :)

lol .. one post, I flat out say no one is saying smoking in a car is a healthy choice ... lol .. but ok, if the above statement is the best you have, well ... *shrug*

Please, go ahead and find any statement I've made stating smoking is not a health risk. If anything, I have supported the position, disagreeing with Mom that smoking in a home is somehow healthier then smoking in a car. hmm, and I brought up third hand smoke and I believe I posted studies which support my view that smoking in the home causes just as much or maybe more exposure to children then smoking in a car.

What neither of you can answer is what health benefit will this ban actually create?? You can't answer it so, you create your own debate. lol It's really kind of humorous.

Either way Jams, some people actually feel this is kind of like a slippery slope when the government begins to tell people what to do in their own private space. Smoking cigarettes is a legal. But, this insistence between Mom and yourself that smoking in car creates some unusual health risk above smoking in the home is just illogical.

Some people feel the police have better things to do then to be pulling people over for smoking in car. Some people feel laws like this are much more above control then freedom. Where does it end? What risky behavior will be next?

IDK what to tell you ladies. If you want to keep debating some fictional statements about smoking and health risks ... maybe you two should debate each other. ;)

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Sat, 03-30-2013 - 7:09am
You're not denying that there are health risks with smoking are you ommy? NY state has some disgusting anti-smoking commercial/campaigns. I don't think that helps the cause either.

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Fri, 03-29-2013 - 11:21pm

I don't understand your reply.

Do I think this is being considered b/c of health risks and second hand smoke? Absolutely! I don't agree this is only b/c its a distraction

Sorry, I just don't understand your reply in the context of my response. You don't agree with something I never said so, maybe you were referring to Moms responses? I was agreeing with you, in saying, the law should apply to all smoking within the vehicle and not solely directed and limited to children being in the car.

Either way, such restrictions are not going to give overall health benefits to a child if the the child is still exposed to smoking at home. Nothing I've read here or online suggests otherwise. So, the law just becomes a big brother, micro management law. JMO

I know, That was my little tid bit about her smoking in my car.

Adults have choices children do not have. Overall though, I do not agree with this suggested law.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Fri, 03-29-2013 - 11:20pm

Mom,

I don't know why you keep writing posts debating issues that no one else is debating.

Do you really think I believe that second hand smoking is NOT dangerous for children? Really? Wow! No one should smoke, at all. It is a self-destructive addictive habit which puts others at risk.

:/ .... where did I say that?? lol ... my last post was actually about thirdhand smoke.

Would it be benefical to the health of children if no smoking was allowed in any home they lived in?

Why are you asking yourself questions?? I certainly didn't ask you this question?

But governments can ban smoking in cars and vehicles. Those laws are enforceable because those vechicles use public roadways. Any reduction in a child's exposure to second hand smoke helps.

Ok, well, if you believe that, then ok. I haven't read anything that supports this if the child is living in a home with smokers, but if you think so .. ok.

Oh, and did you just change your position to mean all smoking in cars because before you said only when children are in the car.

um, just so you know, what is sited as the number one reason people stop smoking is cost ... lol ... not law changes. As a mater of fact, since the price in cigarettes has stablized, so hasn't the number of smokers.

"The relatively unchanged price of cigarettes since 2002 is considered important, because more people stop smoking because of cost than for any other single reason. That is especially true of younger smokers."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/08/AR2007110801094.html

So, once again, your logic fails. Just because people can't smoke in public, does not mean they will not smoke at home or any other place they can. So, just because the government decides to micromanage people and maybe ban smoking in cars ... does not mean children will cease to be exposed to second and third hand smoke in the home in unhealthy amounts.

Or do you maybe believe people will quit because of some smoking ban in cars?? I just don't see your point.

Ya know Mom, the government just can't micromanage every single behavior that poses a health risk. IMO, it's a rediculous concept. And I believe this is why most people are opposed to such regulations. You want to devise some debate that just isn't the issue.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009
Wed, 03-27-2013 - 10:30am

Do you really think I believe that second hand smoking is NOT dangerous for children? Really? Wow! No one should smoke, at all. It is a self-destructive addictive habit which puts others at risk. Talk about twisting what I wrote!

I was responding to your comment that all you had to do was crack open a window while driving and all was Ok. And why smoking in a confined space, with children, is especially dangerous if you look at the physics (i.e. air flow etc) of the situation.  Smoking in a non-confined space is still, OF COURSE, not a good idea. But, at least, the addicted smoker can distance himself from others by going outside a good distance. That will reduce the risk by reducing ppm concentration of toxins. Do you understand what ppm is?

Would it be benefical to the health of children if no smoking was allowed in any home they lived in?  Sure, it would but such a law would not be enforceable.   But governments can ban smoking in cars and vehicles. Those laws are enforceable because those vechicles use public roadways. Any reduction in a child's exposure to second hand smoke helps. 

Here, we have a ban on smoking in all public areas-parks, malls, theaters, busses, trains, restaurants, stores, places of businesses. No smoking in the break room allowed here.  If people want to smoke, you have to move a certain distance (I forget how far) from all public buildings.

We also do not allow any advertisements for cigarettes; cigarettes are not displayed in any store. They are stored behind the counter, in non-glass cabinets. The person has to ask for the cigarettes and provide proof of  age (19) is challenged.

We also ban smoking in cars with children. Even if there are no children in a car, if a smoker causes an accident because he/she did not have two hands on the wheel and was distracted, they can be charged with dangerous driving.

Are these laws working? Yup, they are. The % of people smoking and the degree those smokers do smoke is dropping, especially among the young.

You rarely see a person smoking here now; no more ash trays of discarded butts.

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Mon, 03-25-2013 - 11:30am

She sometimes lights up when she's driving in our car too and thinks she's doing us a favor by cracking the window

Jams, I don't think, maybe I am wrong, this law would go into effect based on what is the polite thing to do

I know, That was my little tid bit about her smoking in my car. 

Do I think this is being considered b/c of health risks and second hand smoke?  Absolutely!  I don't agree this is only b/c its a distraction.  Putting on lipstick is a distraction, Eating a burger in a car is a distraction and cell phones are , Why (we as individual states) crack down on some distractions but not all is beyond me too...

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Fri, 03-22-2013 - 7:07am

Mom, I thought I would supply you with a little information since you seem to support the idea smoking in a house is somehow healthier for children.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/third-hand-smoke/AN01985

Thirdhand smoke is generally considered to be residual nicotine and other chemicals left on a variety of indoor surfaces by tobacco smoke. This residue is thought to react with common indoor pollutants to create a toxic mix. This toxic mix of thirdhand smoke contains cancer-causing substances, posing a potential health hazard to nonsmokers who are exposed to it, especially children.

Thirdhand smoke can't be eliminated by airing out rooms, opening windows, using fans or air conditioners, or confining smoking to only certain areas of a home. Thirdhand smoke remains long after smoking has stopped. In contrast, secondhand smoke is the smoke and other airborne products that come from being close to burning tobacco products, such as cigarettes.

The only way to protect nonsmokers from thirdhand smoke is to create a smoke-free environment, whether that's your private home or vehicle, or in public places, such as hotels and restaurants.

http://www.njgasp.org/ths.htm

The persistence of thirdhand smoke in real-world residential settings has been demonstrated based on nicotine and 3-EP concentrations in air, dust, and surfaces in the days, weeks, and months after the last smoking has taken place. Further support comes from quantitative measurements of ultrafine tobacco smoke particles resuspended after their deposition on household surfaces.

  • Thirdhand smoke is ubiquitous and pervasive wherever tobacco has been smoked. Its presence in air and dust and on surfaces allows for multiple exposure routes, and thirdhand smoke creates special risks for nonsmokers who spend time indoors in proximity to polluted surfaces. Infants and children are especially vulnerable, because of their increased exposure and increased sensitivity to pollutants, as are persons with limited mobility and populations that spend time in multiunit housing and spaces with frequent changes in occupancy.
  • The presence of thirdhand smoke compounds in the air, in dust, and on surfaces of indoor environments creates potential exposure routes through inhalation, ingestion, and dermal transfer. It is estimated that infants and young children are 100 times more sensitive than adults to pollutants in house dust because of such factors as increased respiration relative to body size and immature metabolic capacity. These pathways are likely to be relevant for children living in homes in which adults smoke, even if smoking occurs at times or in rooms when no children are present.
  • The review stated that tobacco smoke contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and the constituents of thirdhand smoke identified to date include nicotine, 3-ethenylpyridine (3-EP), phenol, cresols, naphthalene, formaldehyde, and tobacco-specific nitrosamines.
  • Knowledge about THS could be used clinically to encourage home and car smoking bans among individuals and to promote cessation.

 

Smokers may also contaminate their homes by bringing in clothing exposed to smoke.

  • Matt, G.E., Quintana, P.J.E., Hovell, M.F., Bernert, J.T., Song, S., Novianti, N., Juarez, T., Flora, J., Gehrman, C., Garcia, M. and Larson, S. Households contaminated by environmental tobacco smoke: sources of infant exposures. Tobacco Control, 13:29-37, 2004. Read the study.
  • Although all smoking was outdoors, children had nicotine in their hair and urine, and mothers who smoked away from their children were found to have nearly as much nicotine on their hands as smokers who made no special effort. Cited from http://www.thestressoflife.com/smoking_outside_may_not_protect_.htm.

 

So again Mom, your claim smoking in a home or outdoors is somehow healthier for children, just doesn't hold up. Children simply cannot move away from exposure .... as you claimed.

So, again, can you explain the overall health benfits, to children, this big brother law will create?

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Thu, 03-21-2013 - 7:20am

She sometimes lights up when she's driving in our car too and thinks she's doing us a favor by cracking the window

Jams, I don't think, maybe I am wrong, this law would go into effect based on what is the polite thing to do. I don't even think there's a debate on the health risks of second hand smoke.

But in consideration of this one I wouldn't limit it to just kids in the car.

A law like this would actually make more sense, whether I agreed with the law or not ... it seems more logical. As Mom so kindly pointed out, there's risks involved with smoking in a car ... or like I said, there's sparks, smoke in the eyes .... or as Mom said (lol) smoking can be a distraction. So, sure, if the government wants to impose this restriction, then why not just say ... no smoking while driving .. like no texting or some states, no using cell phones while driving.

IMO, when someone tries to twist this as it being a health concern for children, it looses logic, IMO ... unless of course we are strictly considering a non parent smoking in a car with children that would otherwise not be exposed to second hand smoke.

btw, I just wanted to add, on occasion, my son will smoke in his car, when I am with him. He very politely will ask if that is ok, he waits until we are on the high way and then, yes, he opens the window a bit and the key here is ... he holds the cigarette right by the opening, unless of course he is taking a drag. Not that this happens often and not that I am thrilled with the idea, but this is quite different from some people, who will just crack a window holding the cigarette away from it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Thu, 03-21-2013 - 7:13am

I read a study that said that in "no-texting" states, accidents from texting went up.
 
Wouldn't surprise me.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-18-2004
Wed, 03-20-2013 - 7:44pm
I read a study that said that in "no-texting" states, accidents from texting went up. It said that texting takes more "eye" time away from the road, to hold the phone down on one's lap to text, than up by the steering wheel.

Pages