|
|
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
154,945 registered members
|
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
'Ban smoking in cars with kids'
[Posted: Mon 28/01/2008 by Niall Hunter, Editor www.irishhealth.com]
ASH Ireland wants smoking to be banned in cars carrying children under 16 years of age.
The Department of Health, in response, has said it will keep the possibility of imposing such a ban under review.
The organisation points out such a ban has been implemented in other parts of the world, including some Australian, Canadian and US states.
It says in Europe, the practice is banned in Cyprus and is under consideration in the Netherlands.
Dr Angie Brown, Chairperson of ASH Ireland said it would much prefer to have a total ban on smoking in cars as it is such an unhealthy practice.
"As an interim measure we have urged the Minister for Health to ban smoking in cars transporting children under 16 years of age."
ASH claims there is an abundance of evidence to show that passive smoke is harmful to children. and a major 1992 study showed that passive smoke can reach very high levels in motor vehicles.
It says this, combined with the fact that children have much higher respiratory rates and metabolism than adults makes exposure to passive smoke in vehicles a serious problem for children.
ASH says it is strongly of the view that if we protect adults by banning smoking in the workplace we must protect children by banning smoking in cars which they need and use for transport.
It says in the state of Colorado,when it banned smoking in cars with children, it based its decision on evidence which showed that a car can be 23 times more toxic than a house in the context of passive smoke.
Dr Browne added that there is significant evidence to show that children exposed to passive smoke are much more likely to develop asthma and lung infections.
"We urge adults who transport children in cars not to smoke either while the children are in the cards or not. Children are unlikely to ask adults to stop smoking, so we must take this important decision out of their hands," Dr Brown said.
The Irish Patients Association recently called on the Government to consider introducing a total ban on smoking.
The Department of Health, in a statement, said its smoke-free at work policy was confined to workplaces because it was clear there would be a sufficient measure of public support for such a measure to make it successful.
"It was not clear that there would be a similar level of support for measures to regulate smoking in homes or in family cars and this remains the situation," the Department said.
It added that in the medium to long term this position will change and the possibility of introducing restrictions on smoking in private cars will be kept under review.
Anyone who would like advice or information on quitting smoking can contact the National Smokers' Quitline on 1850 201 203.
snowbird Posted:
28/01/2008 17:47 |
| Ban smoking in cars with children present I'm afraid that the proposal to ban smoking in cars occupied by children represents an unwarranted intrusion into the privacy and autonomy of parenthood. The autonomy to make one's own decision about risks to subject a child to is not to be interfered with lightly. It should only be done in cases where there is a substantial threat of severe harm to the child. Interfering with parental autonomy in a case where there is only minor risk involved is unwarranted. Let me explain what I mean by substantial threat of severe harm and minor risk. If an infant is riding in a car without a car seat, there is a substantial threat of severe harm should the car be involved in an accident. In fact, if the car is in any major accident, severe harm to the child is almost certain. Death is likely if the accident is severe. The connection between not being in the child restraint and suffering severe injury or death in an accident is direct, immediate, and definitive. On the other hand, exposure to secondhand smoke in a car in most cases merely poses an increased risk of upper respiratory or middle ear infection. The likelihood, more often than not, is that the child will not suffer any harm. What is involved is only an elevation of risk for an ailment. There is no certainty of harm, nor is there any substantial threat of severe harm. The harm, if any occurs, is removed in time from the exposure and in most cases it is impossible to directly connect the exposure with the ailment. Thus, the connection is neither direct, immediate, nor definitive. This difference is not subtle. In fact, it is so stark that it serves as the basis for deciding when society should interfere with parental autonomy regarding exposure of their own children to health risks. Generally, causing harm to children or putting them at substantial risk of severe, direct, immediate, and definitive harm is viewed as something for which there is a legitimate government interest in interfering with parental autonomy. Simply placing children at an increased risk of more minor health effects is not something for which there is a legitimate government interest in interfering with parental autonomy. |
|
mamags Posted:
29/01/2008 00:31 |
| A big yes to BAN, I am a smoker, but no way will I smoke when grandchildren are in the car. If it is banned on a factory floor, which is huge and well ventilated because it may harm, what about the poor children stuck in a room (car) 4ft by 6ft with windows closed. No child asks to be put into a car where there is ( increased risk of more health effects) Minor or otherwise. Ok the child might not get ( a minor health effect ) today. But tell me again when the same child has had a few years of being in that 4ft by 6ft room (car) how healthy he or she might be ( minor or otherwise) |
|
Steve(YCY67152) Posted:
29/01/2008 02:14 |
| "We urge adults who transport children in cars not to smoke either while the children are in the cars === or not." When does the majority realize they are being "taken for a ride" by anti-smokers. Smokers exhale less than 500 milligrams of second hand smoke per day. Cars exhale more than 2.2 MILLION milligrams per day. Multiple those numbers times the number of smokers and cars you see every day. It's CARS that need banning, not smokers. Steve Hartwell |
|
ExPat Posted:
29/01/2008 18:08 |
| Typical ASH drivel. We don't believe these fanatics anymore. |
|
Anon Posted:
30/01/2008 12:06 |
| Are parents of today sooo irresponsible that they have to have a law brought in to stop them from doing something that they think is dangerous for their children? If you think it is dangerous to smoke in a car with your kids in it, then don't do it. Why on earth do we need a law for this? |
|
Anon Posted:
30/01/2008 12:40 |
| Mamags, You mention your grandchildren. So, was there central heating in your home when you were a child or indeed, when you had your children, or did you have an open fire place? Also, you do realise that children are at more risk from car emissions than they are from passive smoking? |
|
mamags Posted:
31/01/2008 00:31 |
| ANON. What on earth are you on about, open fires and central heating. This is about passive smoking, for children on board, it's a killer. We all know what car emissions are doing to our people and the planet. We are slowly but surely killing the younger generation with our modern ways, and only slowly learning of our mistakes. This is a start in the right direction. |
|
Homer Posted:
01/02/2008 03:47 |
| Hello I have read the report on Banning smoking in cars with children & read some comment's. I do see this taking place when on the road smoking in cars a total ban should be looked at. 1 example is the driver or front seat passenger who smoke.The smoke smouldering away or being exhaled in a small envoironment can get into the eye's of the driver irritating him to not having full control of his ability to drive & lack of concentration of the road. Should be taken into consideration. I am not a smoker but unfortubately am addicted to the N.R.T. Lozenges I informed my Doctor & he said do your best. He would rather me have a N.R.T.Lozenge than have a cigarette .Why I am only getting the Nicotine & not the rest of the 42,000 other poisions contained in just 1 CIGARETTE. So yes I am in favor of a ban on smoking on any size car. My home has 1 well ventilated room for those who smoke & this room is comfortable for them if they choose to smoke. I know some people have a total ban in their home on smoking & unfortunately the negative point her is their friends / relations / family who smoke do not visit them at all . This is very sad. Especially to miss out on Family visit's. Iam not against a person's right of choice to enjoy a CIGARETTE but I do say have a Cigarette in a well ventilated area. And as for roads / Path's I have to say this is worse Vehicle polluting the air we breathe while out. Smoker.s have a choice BUT so do non-smoker.s. And the Department or Regulator for out door pollution should not on look at vehicles but Factories too. Ther is no point just looking at 1 pollution problem look at them all & ban it |
|
Mary Posted:
01/02/2008 14:10 |
| I totally disagree with Homer, this debate is far more sensible than the one about banning smoking in cars altogether. If there are children in the car, banning is sensible. If there are adults they can make their own decisions. Obviously Anon some parents of today are sooo irresponsible that they have to have a law brought in to stop them from doing something that they think is dangerous for their children? That is the problem some don't think it is dangerous to smoke in a car with your kids in it - which is precisely why a law is needed. Steve, your statement is ludicrous. The obvious difference is that we need cars (unless you are pepared to do my job, buy my groceries and pay my bills). Snow bird, automony of parents is forfeit when they do something to potentially harm their children. Then the state must step in, it is their function to do so. |
|
happymum Posted:
02/02/2008 19:36 |
| I can remember being in the car as a child with my parents smoking away in the front. I remember having headaches and sore throats and feeling sick. To smoke a cigarette in an enclosed area with anyone who doesn't smoke, never mind a child who gets no choice in the matter, is selfish and thoughtless. If you want to smoke, that's your right. Others also have the right not to inhale your smoke. Incidentally, I have smoked myself in the past and have NEVER smoked in front of children. Smokers can make an informed choice, children can't. I would certainly be in favour of a ban on smoking in cars where children are present. |
|
Anon Posted:
03/02/2008 22:22 |
| IF YOU NEED A LAW TO BAN SMOKING IN CARS WITH KIDS THEN YOU ARE A VERY IRRESPONSIBLE PARENT/CARER. YOU SHOULDN'T NEED A LAW TO STOP YOU DOING SOMETHING THAT YOU BELIEVE IS BAD FOR YOUR CHILDREN. ALL THESE BANS ARE COMPLETELY STUPID. THE IRRESPONSIBLE PARENTS WILL CONTINUE SMOKING AND WE DO NOT HAVE ANY CHANCE OF EVER CATCHING PEOPLE WHO DO THIS BECAUSE ONCE THEY THROW THE BUTTS OUT THE WINDOW THERE IS NO EVIDENCE. IT IS JUST ANOTHER STUPID AND SILLY LAW BEING ATTEMPTED JUST TO DISTRACT FROM THE REAL ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE DEALT WITH IN THIS COUNTRY SUCH AS SERIOUS CRIME ETC ETC. |
|
Anonymous
Posted:
04/02/2008 09:38 |
| I had the same experience HappyMum. And it is selfish and thoughless. But as Anonymous said - how is it going to be policed? |
|
Homer Posted:
04/02/2008 14:03 |
| Hello Mary I am giving the Forum my opinion. Did you not agree with all I had to say, or is there a certain part of my opinion you don't agree with? I add some of what I mentioned I experienced as a child in a car, thank you for letting me know you totally disagree with me, yet I have to ask this - did you read and think about what I said? |
|
Anonymous
Posted:
07/02/2008 20:05 |
| they have a law that said children in cars must wear seat belts and i still see them in cars with none on them. how will you police this |
|
Mary Posted:
08/02/2008 11:40 |
| Homer, I read and disagreed with this part of your post: the example of the driver or front seat passenger who smoke. The smoke smouldering away or being exhaled in a small envoironment can get into the eye's of the driver irritating him to not having full control of his ability to drive & lack of concentration of the road. This is pure nannyism. If as a driver, the passengers cigarette affectrs younthat much then don't permit anyone to smoke in your car. Surely you don't need spomeone to make a state law for this? Fair play to you for trying to quit and as a smoker being considerate enough to have a room for smokers in your home (which presumably you clean!). To say that those who have a total ban in their home on smoking results in their friends / relations / family who smoke not visitong them at all is absolute tosh. If smoking relatives won't visit a non-smoking house it is out of pure selfishness. Every smoker I know has no porblem stepign outside of a cigarette in any house they visit. Your point about vehicle polution is a moot point. we need cars in order to go to work - we do not need to smoke. |
|
Jo Posted:
18/11/2008 16:11 |
| Unfortunately we do need laws to protect our children from people, we know that. Children get killed and seriously hurt both physically and mentally every day by the actions of adults who are capable of abusing and hurting them. I want to cry when I see children unstrapped in cars been thrown from side to another or dangling between the front seats and even worse when someone is quite happy to let their kids sit in smoke filled cars while they puff away. Dont tell me they dont know the dangers everyone does it is so well documented the dangers of passive smoking. It's nothing but selfishness but they are in a minority and if there was even the slightest of risk wouldnt you protect your kids? |
|
Homer Posted:
19/11/2008 00:48 |
| Hello Mary No we dont need a state law for smoking while driving. We do need a ban on smoking while children are in the cars. The Adult / Parent / Guardian of the children should be more sensible. And yes my Home is clean especially in the smoking area which is also well ventilated. And yes people need their cars for taken their children to school / creche , & then on to work. Especially in this recession Thank you for your reply Regards Homer. |
|
devery Posted:
27/07/2011 11:08 |
|
This simple fact is that this legislation will not pass as they can't police it. Simple solution will be to have a carpet ban, No smoking in cars. I am a single guy with no kids and soon it'll be illegal for me to smoke in my own car!!! This state is a ****ing joke. |
|
Jamie Posted:
27/07/2011 14:45 |
|
The government are seriously considering this: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/smoking-in-cars-may-soon-be-banned-says-health-minister-2831977.html The Minister for Health, Dr James Reilly, has said the Government is considering banning smoking in cars. According to a report in today's Irish Times, Dr Reilly said he was “in favour of legislating in this area” but added the public would need persuading first. He was responding to a parliamentary question from Fianna Fail TD Sean Fleming. A spokeswoman for the Department of Health confirmed that officials were examining two possible scenarios. One would be a ban on smoking if children under 16 were present. If this was considered unworkable, a blanket ban on smoking in private cars would be considered. If implemented, this would make Ireland the first country to impose such a ban. Smoking in taxis, company cars and vans, which are classed as workplaces, is already prohibited. Anti-smoking campaigner Luke Clancy said today that a comprehensive ban would work. “Second hand smoke levels in cars are very high and second hand smoke can be lethal,” he said. Previous evidence had shown that when people became aware of the dangers of second hand smoke they were not prepared to harm others. |
|
Anonymous Posted:
27/07/2011 17:04 |
|
Heard that this morning as well. In reality we should not need to ban smoking in cars with children but if some people are too ignorant or too selfish to refrain from the practise then the state must step in to protect those who cannot protect themselves. But where there are no children present well - it is your car, your property and your cigarettes which you've bought with your money to smoke - which itself is not illegal so I can't see a ban working there any more than banning smoking in your back shed would work. It was suggested this morning that as well as a health hazard (and if it only your own health you are ruining it is your business) it is a distration to the smoker but to be honest I do not buy that idea. If that were the case radios and amusing billboard ad would be just as much a distraction. |
|
devery Posted:
28/07/2011 09:59 |
|
To Anonymous, How many crashes have been caused by Smoking?? I was wondering how long it would take before the whole road safety issue was brought into this!! Next they will be bringing in a rule that you can't change the station on the radio in your car as it is a distraction and likely to cause a crash. More nonsense legislation when the Minister should be concentrating on the major issues, like our health care system or rather of our lack of a health care system. This is the usually smoke and mirrors (forgive the Pun) by politicians to distract the public from the real issues. Lets cop on as a national and deal with the real issues first. |
|
Anonymous Posted:
28/07/2011 17:36 |
|
Exactly my point Devery - I do not buy the road sefety gambit. If that were the case, radios and amusing billboard ads would be just as much a distraction. I have seen smokers light up without ever taking their eyes off the road - much as you might eat mints. |
|
devery Posted:
29/07/2011 10:35 |
|
Unfortunately, the nanny state we live in is of the opinion that we are unable to make decisions by ourselves and want to bring in Legislation on every minute detail of our lives, while at the same time dodging or completely making a hash of issues of national importance. Glad to see i have a comrade in arms, LOL |
|
Witofire Posted:
22/08/2011 16:47 |
|
Smoking in cars with children is a disgusting, unhealthy and inexcusable practice. It is unbelievable that a government may have to step in to protect children from their own parents. How anyone would be against this is beyond me. |
| To join the discussion, register by clicking here |
|
QUICK LINKS: asthma | arthritis | psoriasis | crohn's | heart | epilepsy | eczema | osteoporosis | pregnancy | depression | alzheimer | cancer | anxiety | overweight |
 |
About Irishhealth.com | Privacy Policy | Contact us | Why Register? | Terms of Use/Disclaimer | Site Map |  |
| Copyright © 2013. All rights reserved. We subscribe to the principles of the Health On the Net Foundation |
