Smoking Whilst Pregnant!

monty-doggy

Dumbe wrote: »

I ..



And by restricting freedoms that is what is wrong .. What's next lock pregnant people up and take away all their rights ..

If those 'rights' equate to destroying another humans life then damn right.

Dumbe

monty-doggy wrote: »

If those 'rights' equate to destroying another humans life then damn right.

I take it you are also against abortion. Which is also a legal right.

Smoking is bad .. But surely it's bad, evil and disgusting for everyone, pregnant people, asmatics, children, old people, white people, black people, short people fat people everyone.

If you demonise smoking correctly all I am saying is do it equally..

If you believe smoking is bad .. Ban it for everyone ... Have a thread that says how angry you are because you saw a person smoking.

Talk about how bad smoking is for everyone, get it banned.

But don't attack one section Society and make out they have less rights then another section of society

Caitlin_Bree

sillygoose wrote: »

I could argue I can beat my kids raw with a cane and its 'my business' no one should interfere because they are my kids and I can do what I like to them.

I think a more accurate analogy would be "I can beat myself raw with a cane whilst pregnant" and yes, that probably would be your business.
Obviously many people would think you were disturbed to do that to a baby you had committed to give birth to.

This probably sounds harsh but I think it's essentially Darwinism in action.. A parent that applies that level of care to a child that they're committed to having, is probably not going to be a great parent.

Let's not make things rubbish for others because some people can't take care of their children.
It's like with Nesquik. They ruined the banana milkhake by adding vitamins to it.. for what? .. because some idiot parent thinks it should be healthy enough to wean their children on?
If a child has parents who know that little, then that child probably has worse problems than lack of vitamins.


Incidentally, does anyone know if it's considered discrimination if an airline don't allow pregnant women to fly?

George_Michael

Dumbe wrote: »

Smoking is bad .. But surely it's bad, evil and disgusting for everyone, pregnant people, asmatics, children, old people, white people, black people, short people fat people everyone.

Are you honestly saying that you can't see the difference between the groups that you mention above?

Generally, if an asthmatic person, an old person, a black or white person or a short fat person smokes, the only one that will be be harmed is the smoker themselves. (apart from passive smoking which is a separate issue as this can often be bypased).
If anyone in the same room or area doesn't like the smoke or the chemicals contained in that smoke, they can walk away.

Tell me, if a pregnant woman smokes, how is her unborn child meant to avoid the effects of the chemicals that they are being forced into their bodies? They are not given any choice but to absorb whatever carcinogens are being put into their system.

If you believe smoking is bad .. Ban it for everyone ...

You don't have to ban it for everyone, simply ban it in places where the effects of smoking won't have an effect on others, which is exactly what has been done with the smoking in public places where it can have a serious effect on other people.

fluffnutter

Dumbe wrote: »

Do pregnant people become second class citizens without the right to make their own choices within the law.

Absolutely. Spot on. In our society a woman's rights override the rights of her unborn child. And rightly so. It's frightening to think that we could start going the way I think the US is potentially going whereby the foetus's rights become paramount. There was that alarming case in one of the States where abortion is illegal that held the mother responsible for actions that brought about an accidental miscarriage. Truly a frightening path to go down.

Of course women should protect their unborn babies, and in the main, most of them do. But women are not merely incubators for the next generation and any legal move to make them so is very, very dangerous.

mummyroysof3

I don't think that asking a woman not to smoke when pregnant is saying the baby has more rights than her..,.,someone who wants a child should want to do everything possible to keep them healthy. If they don't then what sort of parent does that make them?

MothballsWallet

Caitlin_Bree wrote: »

Incidentally, does anyone know if it's considered discrimination if an airline don't allow pregnant women to fly?

The airline industry has set of a limit of (iirc) 24 weeks for accepting pregnant women as passengers: after that, they require a doctor's note (I believe this is a requirement of their insurers).

Ronaldo_Mconaldo

When we had our baby what really annoyed me was having to walk past pregnany mums smoking in the door way of the hospital we were trying to get to. I couldn't care less what these simple folk do to their benefits ticket, I mean baby but if they have to do it then I don't want smoke being blown in the face of my pregnant wife or day old baby when we are leaving the hospital.

pink_princess

Ronaldo_Mconaldo wrote: »

When we had our baby what really annoyed me was having to walk past pregnany mums smoking in the door way of the hospital we were trying to get to. I couldn't care less what these simple folk do to their benefits ticket, I mean baby but if they have to do it then I don't want smoke being blown in the face of my pregnant wife or day old baby when we are leaving the hospital.

That was a slow walk past if you managed to find out their benefit entitlement and their IQ!

Caitlin_Bree

I don't think that asking a woman not to smoke when pregnant is saying the baby has more rights than her..,.,someone who wants a child should want to do everything possible to keep them healthy. If they don't then what sort of parent does that make them?

A poor one. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Most people that have kids do want to give them the best start in life and yes absolutely, they should do. But "should" isn't a thing that exists outside of ideals and sadly what should happen and what does happen are seldom the same.

If a mother chooses to increase the risk of there being something wrong with her baby, (and it is a risk, not a certainty) she will live with the consequences of that (whether it does, or not).

Legislating for what pregnant women can and can't do, would not stop with smoking. It would presumably encompass any activity or action the mother took. For instance, being told what you can and can't eat whilst pregnant.
(I can't see anyone wanting that enforcement job... can you imagine trying to wrestle food from a pregnant woman?)

Or, on a slightly more serious note, having treatments for conditions like cancer.

Thanks Mothballs, I assumed it would be for indemnity purposes rather than concern for the mother. I wasn't actually aware that they would allow them to fly.