English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Would the Government be right to stop it happening?
Do we have the right to harm children in this way?

2007-06-19 08:37:04 · 41 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Other - News & Events

Scorpionbabe , the point is secondary smoke . this is not the case with chocolate or alcohol.

2007-06-19 08:44:39 · update #1

41 answers

Children have a right to grow up in a safe environment. If they are constantly smoking passively then they are being denied that right.
If you deny a child it`s rights that IS a form of child abuse.

2007-06-19 08:40:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7 9

As someone who found out the hard way what child abuse is, I find that a very silly comparison.

I'm sorry, I mean no disrespect to you personally... but *please*, just stop and think for a minute. Passive smoking is obviously dangerous, I'd never deny that, but it is NOT tantamount to child abuse - that is ridiculous, hysterical rubbish. Lighting up is not exactly equivalent to beating a child or throwing them down the stairs, is it??? Or worse? Believe me, I could tell you plenty of personal experiences that would make you long for a lifetime of second hand smoke instead. What I am saying is this: let's get things in perspective, people. Endangering kids' health by smoking around them is wrong, but it's not child abuse. Not to anyone who knows what the latter truly is.

However... I do think that smoking in front of your kids regularly is damn selfish and disgusting. My dad used to smoke 60 a day and my mum and sister both developed lung problems because of it (at least, that is what the experts told them was the most likely cause). If I smoke I will certainly not subject my kids to it - I find that morally wrong.

2007-06-19 09:01:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 8 0

Actually secondhand smoke IS NOT PROVEN but everyone thinks it is because someone on the news told you that.It was a campaign,to stop smokers.How about this for child abuse,driving and texing with a child in the car?None of you want to give up that cell phone or how about that Sunday picnic with Small children and a swimming pool and all the adults are drunk or drinking?Or how about the man you invite over that your children hate,do you stop?no.The list goes on and on,When governments regulates everything you do then mourn for your freedoms because once gone will never get them back.You are entitled to your opinion in your own home but don't force your narrow,unloving,and hate filled views on others,that's just plain wrong.If we all live long enough I fear we will have no freedoms anywhere of any kind.

2007-06-19 17:52:08 · answer #3 · answered by peppersham 7 · 4 0

There are rather a lot of toxic fumes in the atmosphere, just about everywhere in the modern world.
The blame is being pushed on to individuals who smoke and at the same time government and business are let off the hook for the pollution they produce.
We should be concerned about all pollution around our children.
People generally are now much more careful about where they smoke, lets not demonise parents who are also smokers.

2007-06-21 10:12:30 · answer #4 · answered by Mabel 2 · 2 0

I think taking a small child out onto main road in a pram is just as much of a 'child abuse' but you don't see that do you. If you look at prams, they are just about at the hight of car exhausts so the fumes coming out of the exhausts go straight into kiddies lungs who sit in prams. By the time it reaches the hight where their mothers stand over the pram, it has had some time to disperse into the air and much less concentrated, therefore the ones pushing the prams are not getting that deadly dose of car fumes.

2007-06-19 21:22:19 · answer #5 · answered by Luvfactory 5 · 1 0

If that is the case i think all those that use chemical fragrances in any form or shape in their home should be made to stopped by the government to do so.
I'd much rather my daughter gets the odd bout of second-hand smoke than if she would have to grow up in an artificial environment full of plug-in airfresheners, room fragrancers, smells from perfumes, window cleaners, oven cleaners and the like.

2007-06-19 11:22:41 · answer #6 · answered by Part Time Cynic 7 · 2 1

Secondary smoking is probably a secondary issue here. Children learn by emulating their parent's example. The question is how do we discourage children from taking up smoking? This must be a doubly difficult task if either parent smokes themselves. No, not abuse but nevertheless a difficult moral problem.

2007-06-19 10:35:04 · answer #7 · answered by RTF 3 · 2 2

Any considerate parent will try and not smoke when children are present, but I wouldn't consider it child abuse and hope they'll never classify it as such.
Free giving up smoking help http://whyquit.com/

2007-06-21 00:25:46 · answer #8 · answered by moaatimo 4 · 1 0

You could say the same thing about alcohol or blooming cleaning products,car pollution, bins not getting emptied for two weeks and the list goes on and on.

Smokers are aware a ban is coming in to force and as a smoker I will respect that law, which I do already as I don't smoke in public. However be careful what you wish for as the next target might be against enjoying a drink at a weekend or should we ban chocolate as it makes some people fat.

A smoker pays a hell of a lot of tax to the government that's why they will never ban it completely. I have never smoked around my child as it's my choice to smoke I am not going to impose my choice of smoking on her.

Edit*tv installer how many times have you witnessed violence because people have drunk too much ? I have seen it nearly every Saturday night in most town centres. Is that not a secondary health risk to people who only want a quiet drink?

2007-06-19 08:42:51 · answer #9 · answered by scorpionbabe32 6 · 11 3

I would rather have my child be around some one who smokes than someone who drinks. And it is the same. You are harming the child either way, by example. Should we ban cars because the exhaust harms the air our children breathe? According to you, yes we should. That is some serious second-hand smoke! Smokers should have the right to smoke in their own homes. The children can go to their rooms for fresh air. We have taken away smokers rights to smoke in public, and you propose to take their kids away from them if they smoke in their own homes. You must be a donkey!

2007-06-19 08:56:06 · answer #10 · answered by magix151 7 · 11 1

I am the youngest of 4 with big gaps between us both of my parents smoked and my eldest brother and sister was that abuse NO it wasn't I was spoilt and loved I smoke and smoked when mine were young my daughter didn't mind she don't smoke my son hated me smoking even washing his own uniform and putting it out of the way HE SMOKES were my children abused NO, my grandchildren visit and I smoke only when they were babies I didn't so is that abuse NO. Years ago when there were coal fires you could see the dirty air and a lot covered their mouths and noses now we have gas if your chimney is blocked you die, we all have gas fire an/or central heating fumes going into the air so we are all breathing in poison are we not? YES driving cars fumes are drivers abusing everyone NO. Think on.

2007-06-19 09:13:22 · answer #11 · answered by Bernie c 6 · 8 1

fedest.com, questions and answers