In the state of California, it is illegal to smoke in a vehicle in the presence of persons under the age of 18. Some people have argued that if the minors are one's own kids, than such action should be allowed. However, it is proven that smoking causes a number of health problems, athsma and lung cancer to name a few.
However, it has also been said that physical disciplinary action is considered child abuse. Now, why would a self-imposed punishment, which leaves no permanent damage be considered abuse, when an unprovoked ride in a smoke-filled car, which causes permanent, often serious damage be allowed?
I grew up inhaling second hand smoke all my life. When I joined track in Eighth grade, after every run I finished, I would cough uncontrollably for about 10 minutes. Obviously, second hand smoke didn't help me
I grew up inhaling second hand smoke all my life. When I joined track in Eighth grade, after every run I finished, I would cough uncontrollably for about 10 minutes. Obviously, second hand smoke didn't help me
Ah, see i can offer the flip side of this. Both my parents smoked around me, and i competed in cross-country and a bunch of sports just fine. It wasn't until i started smoking myself i felt the effects during sports, and even that took a while.
If abuse is only what immediately puts someone in the hospital... then I guess psychological abuse doesn't exist? What if I have a daughter and I tell her she's ugly every day of her life... so much so to the point where she believes I'm telling the truth? I force her into a constant depressed state... depression can have ill-effects on her health... but it isn't going to send her straight to the hospital. (unless she tries to an hero). Abuse isn't just the beating of children with baseball bats. There is more to it.
If abuse is only what immediately puts someone in the hospital... then I guess psychological abuse doesn't exist?
I never said that abuse is only that which lands someone in the hospital.
It's a known thing you shouldn't do as a parent, doesn't mean it's abuse. If you're uneducated and you feed your child unhealthly without realizing the extent, are you being abusive?
I think most people who smoke around baby's and young children don't know the actual effects of second-hand smoking. This is why i do not deem it abuse. If they're perfectly aware of it and they're blowing smoke directly into the babys face, then yeah sure, call it abuse.
I never said that abuse is only that which lands someone in the hospital.
One of the others in this thread alluded to it.
Some people go by a slightly different interpretation of the word. Some view it as encompassing more than just actively striving to damage the child in some way shape form or fashion. There are people advocating that the super obese children in America should be removable by law from their parents b/c their parents are basically setting them up to suffer the rest of their lives (I'm sure you don't need elaboration on the problems that come from being obese)
I think that some people view abuse as significantly damaging a person via a known yet easily remedied cause. I'm not going to say that everyone in the world is in the know on 2nd hand smoke... but I find it very hard to believe that the vast majority of smokers wouldn't know that 2nd hand smoke is bad for the ones inhaling it. I think it's more along the lines of the parents that don't go searching for their kids after 1-20 days of being missing... they just don't care.
Let's redo this a little...
Is smoking around children an issue bad enough that it demands that we take action when we see it?
Is smoking around children an issue bad enough that it demands that we take action when we see it?
Yet again it sadly depends on the situation. If you are to see a baby in a car seat, and a car, all windows up steamed up with smoke: then yes i believe action should be taken.
I think smoking outside is a bit different.
I didn't know you smoke.
Yeah probably for about 6 years now, although i hope to quit this year - never start.
Is it unhealthy? Of course. Is it wrong? Probably. But abuse? Not at all. My parents smoked around me in my younger years and the only abuse I had was purely mental from my father. And I love my mother dearly (Who quit smoking a very, very long time ago)
Certainly, I'm probably less healthy than I should be but I don't consider it abuse. Same way sharing a room with my brother who smokes when he can afford it... I don't see him as "abusing" me. It's just really, really annoying :P
Certainly, I'm probably less healthy than I should be but I don't consider it abuse. Same way sharing a room with my brother who smokes when he can afford it... I don't see him as "abusing" me. It's just really, really annoying :P
I understand your position, but you now know the consequences of second hand smoking. To stay around him while he is in the act of smoking is of your own free will.
It's like if your brother were to be in a band, and he and his band members practiced in your room with you in it. If they got your approval to play really loud music in your room with you in it and you were to get ear damage then or later from it... then it would be your own fault because you know that loud noises can permanently damage your hearing... If you knew that the person didn't know that loud noises were damaging, then you should make it known to them and only then seek their approval. Did that explain the difference in little kids and you at all?
To stay around him while he is in the act of smoking is of your own free will.
Well, I usually leave the room. But sharing the room is hardly free will. But I'm not going to lay out -all- of my family drama here, so people don't really see my full situation, so you're missing some context.
I know I'm not a kid and all, but I still don't see it as abuse. More like an... environmental hazard. Yes, I find chemical workers sueing for chemical burns just as ridiculous. They have their free will to work in that environment, right?
>___________________> I knew I left something out of there.
If they do not understand the concept of danger and the permanence of the consequences of said danger, then there shouldn't be any question about doing the action in their presence. It should be an automatic no go.
Is a little child who consents to being beat with a pipe being abused?
That's just stupid parenting, then. Not quite abuse.
Like House said about the Vegan parents who wouldn't feed their infant meat, on the grounds of their own eating habits... Which turned out to be unhealthy.
