Second hand smoke and kids

Zascar

We all know smoking is bad and children should not be around it, but now I'm hearing people say now that 2nd hand smoke can be damaging and that babies should not even be in a room that someone had earlier smoked in. I find this a little over the top. Many of us grew up around smoke, back in the day people would smoke everywhere, homes, pubs etc. This is mostly gone now so kids today are less exposed to it than ever before.

A friend of mine has a new baby and has basically said to her mother that she will no longer visit the house as she sometimes smokes in it, so the mother will barely get to see the child any more. She also will not let her hold the baby if she is wearing clothes that may contain traces of smoke if she had a cigarette earlier. She says all the doctors say this and all her parenting friends agree. Is this true?

bee06

Smoking, including being near people to have smoked, is the leading cause of SIDs so your friend is doing the responsible thing.

Ghekko

I grew up in a smoking household and have respiratory issues as a result. We don't allow anyone to smoke in our house. When mil smoked in her house we'd send the kids to a different room. I wouldn't want a baby anywhere near a smoking environment so for me it's not ott.

Rubberchikken

I would agree with this person. Personally i hate smoking. Cant bear being near someone smoking and hate the smell of it in the air and on peoples clothes.
Like many i grew up in a household with parents who smoked. Ive no health issues but would never have my kids anywhere near second hand smoke.
One time our washing machine was broken and i sent a bag of baby clothes to the local laundrette. Wgen i opened the bag and caught the smell of cigarettes (in those days people could smoke at work). Had to get the clothes rewashed elsewhere. Tjete was no way my child was wearing them.
.

Loveinapril

I agree with your friend. I hate smoking so am very funny about my ten week old being near smokers. I wouldn't bring him to a smoking house. I won't let a smoker hold him until a few hours after their last smoke. I am sensitive to smells so if I smell smoke, he is not going near them. My husband has been trying to give up since the baby was born and has managed to get down to one every couple of days but knows my stance so will try to smoke when he is away from the baby for a few hours. He also has to change the clothes he smoked in and wash his hands. The midwife in the hospital advised this too.

One eyed Jack

Zascar wrote: »

A friend of mine has a new baby and has basically said to her mother that she will no longer visit the house as she sometimes smokes in it, so the mother will barely get to see the child any more. She also will not let her hold the baby if she is wearing clothes that may contain traces of smoke if she had a cigarette earlier. She says all the doctors say this and all her parenting friends agree. Is this true?

Isn't the easiest solution to this problem that her mother would give up smoking? It is true btw that passive smoking is a health hazard - https://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/2289.aspx

I don't think your friend is being at all extreme. She understands that her priority is the health of her new born baby, and she isn't being unfair to her mother. It would be unfair of her mother or anyone to expect that her daughter should bring her child within an asses roar of anyone who smokes, or an environment where there is the potential for exposure to smoke.

I smoke myself, and I would understand completely if anyone were to take steps to protect their child from the risks of passive smoking. I'd actually say it was commendable tbh, and if your friends mum cared about seeing her grandchild, it's not going to kill her to give up smoking.

shesty

This is what the hospitals are telling people on discharge.
On leaving hospital after my second I was told nobody who smokes should hold the baby for at least thirty mins after they have finished smoked, and they should also remove their outer layer of clothing and thoroughly wash their hands before taking the baby.
Your friend is not being unreasonable.Her mother will have to go see the baby rther than the baby going to see her.

bee06

I would have thought expecting people to come see the baby rather than having the baby go to them would be pretty standard for a newborn anyway regardless. We’ve left the house twice in 4 weeks since my son was born. If people want to see him they can come to us.

Sleeper12

I don't think this is anything new. 20 years ago our family doctor told my wife that she shouldn't be smoking in the house if you have children. Not just the same room but the entire house. She got fed up smoking out the back garden in the middle of winter & thankfully gave up altogether.

I repair electric showers for a living. Believe it or not the inside of the white shower can be yellow from smoking in the bathroom. I can only imagine what a smokers lungs are like

Skatedude

The carcinogenics of cigarette smoke can persist in the room for long after someone has smoked in it. it isn't just the air, but it sticks and builds up on all surfaces. and kids like touching stuff and then putting their hands in their mouths.

Just ask any non smoker why they wont buy a smokers car, even though the smoker swears the car smells fine to them, even after they cleaned it.

ted1

bee06 wrote: »

I would have thought expecting people to come see the baby rather than having the baby go to them would be pretty standard for a newborn anyway regardless. We’ve left the house twice in 4 weeks since my son was born. If people want to see him they can come to us.

We were constantly out of the house when ours were born. You’d get cabin fever, Also it’s easier to leave people’s houses than kick them out of yours.

Your friend is right. If the mother wants to disregard every medical professional and keep killing her self by smoking that’s fine , but a newborn or any child shouldn’t be subjected to it.

ted1

Skatedude wrote: »

The carcinogenics of cigarette smoke can persist in the room for long after someone has smoked in it. it isn't just the air, but it sticks and builds up on all surfaces. and kids like touching stuff and then putting their hands in their mouths.

Just ask any non smoker why they wont buy a smokers car, even though the smoker swears the car smells fine to them, even after they cleaned it.

Or take a picture of the wall and see how yellow the paint / wallpaper is compared to the parts that covered

CelticRambler

Zascar wrote: »

but now I'm hearing people say now that 2nd hand smoke can be damaging and that babies should not even be in a room that someone had earlier smoked in. ...

I'm finding it hard to believe that you're only hearing about this now! :eek: It's something that's been well-known for more than 25 years. Ask my mother, with whom I had a big row one year over her letting foreign students smoke in the house. :mad:

And even if you weren't around then, surely you know that in some countries, it's illegal to smoke in a car when there's a child in it? (Don't know why Ireland is dragging its heels in this respect when we were ahead of the game with regard to banning it in the workplace and entertainment venues).

As for the timescale: the cancer-causing substances in cigarette smoke are the same that give clothes and rooms that characteristic "been smoking" smell. If you can smell it, that stuff is getting into your airways.

I have a good friend, 70 years old, who's recently taken it up again "because of stress" that I hadn't seen for most of last year. I spent a few hours round at her house last week (to train her to use a smartphone :pac: ) and she only had two while I was there, and in a different room, but the stink of smoke on my clothes for two days afterwards was disgusting. Why would anyone want to subject a baby to that kind of treatment?

More power to your friend!

Zascar

Thanks for all the replies.

CelticRambler wrote: »

I'm finding it hard to believe that you're only hearing about this now!

Ah of course I knew but not quite to this degree. Maybe I should have explained myself a little better. Her mother would not smoke in the house at all that day if she knew she was coming down - and air the place out. She does not smoke that much anyway - a few a day - and she keeps her house immaculate. This is not good enough apparently and I think that's a little much personally - but I don't have kids so i don't have the same mindset. I mean if you take your kid into a city centre or you live along a busy road you are going to get pollution and smog etc. Surely this is far worse? Without doubt you should keep your kids from harmful substances as much as realistically possible, but where does it end? Kids cant see their granny because she smoked in the house yesterday? Kids cant play on the road will be next. What else is the child not going to be allowed to do for the feat of a slight possibility of some danger?

CelticRambler

Zascar wrote: »

Her mother would not smoke in the house at all that day if she knew she was coming down - and air the place out. She does not smoke that much anyway - a few a day - and she keeps her house immaculate. This is not good enough apparently and I think that's a little much personally - but I don't have kids so i don't have the same mindset.

I take your point about urban pollution (one of the reasons I moved my children to the countryside) but to a large extent that's outside of a parent's control.

I suppose it all depends on whether the mother is keeping or breaking whatever promises she's made to the daughter. "A few a day" can mean different things to different people, and [blanket criticism alert] smokers have a tendency delude themselves as to where their smoke is going (e.g. smoking just outside the door, or holding their cigarette out the window, with the wind blowing the smoke back into the house) and how long it hangs around on them.

It sounds like there's more to the story than just the cigarettes ...

bee06

Is she unable to go to their house to see the kids? Why do they have to go to her house?

Neyite

I know someone who said the same to her smoker mother. The gran point-blank stated that she'd smoke in her own home and in front of any baby because it was her house and her rules.

As a compromise her daughter said that any time she wanted to see the grandchild, she would send her husband to collect the gran for the visit at their house and drop her home again. But that if she wasn't prepared to not smoke during a visit, then they would not bring the baby over.

Gran stuck to her guns.
So did the daughter.

The result was that Gran was too stubborn to visit her grandchild in a smoke free environment and ultimately missed out on years of contact.

shesty

While this situation is a complete no-brainer for me, there is a another dynamic at play when babies come.....suddenly the new mother is in a position of "power" so to speak - making decisions and deciding what is going to be the rule for her family.It's tends to be less of an issue before kids arrive but the arrival of babies can heighten tensions a bit.Especially when it's around things like this that might have changed over the years and it's "not what we used to do" (from the now grandparent's viewpoint).
Some grandparents can struggle a bit with the shift in dynamic, especially the realisation that they are essentially on the sidelines when it comes to decision making about the new arrival, even if they have done it all before themselves. It takes a while for everyone to find their feet and their new place in relation to this new person.
Hopefully your friend and her mother can reach a compromise that allows a relationship to build between them all.

Zascar

I suppose the real question here is How much damage is it actually going to do if the kid spends 2 hours in a room that was smoked in the previous day and is it worth ruining your relationship with your mother over?? Seriously, I personally just think it's a bit ridiculous. By all means protect your kid from obvious danger when you can, but you cant protect them from absolutely everything? Many of us grew up in smoking households, or spent time in smokey pubs - and you are worried about minuscule traces in clothes? Now I would say that my friend is the type of person that believes every bloody health fad and scare going (which is partly why i didn't believe this and wanted to post this message). She will not let anyone touch or hold the baby unless they have sterilised their hands immediately beforehand. I mentioned this to a nurse friend of mine and she said 'that child is going to get sick as it has no exposure to germs. It seems to me that these parenting blogs have a new scare every day of something new you need to avoid and should be terrified of. I see it from some of my friends who recently had kids and now all they post on facebook is 'dont give your child strawberries', or some nonsense. The people writing these articles often have no qualifications other than writing click bait articles to vulnerable new mothers.

Is reality I don't think she's going to change, and I just wonder what other ridiculous things she'll enforce on her kids. Will they be allowed to ride bicycles? Can they play in the park? We're creating children that are so protected that as they get older they can barely learn how to look after themselves..

Dev84

Zascar wrote: »

We all know smoking is bad and children should not be around it, but now I'm hearing people say now that 2nd hand smoke can be damaging and that babies should not even be in a room that someone had earlier smoked in. I find this a little over the top. Many of us grew up around smoke, back in the day people would smoke everywhere, homes, pubs etc. This is mostly gone now so kids today are less exposed to it than ever before.

A friend of mine has a new baby and has basically said to her mother that she will no longer visit the house as she sometimes smokes in it, so the mother will barely get to see the child any more. She also will not let her hold the baby if she is wearing clothes that may contain traces of smoke if she had a cigarette earlier. She says all the doctors say this and all her parenting friends agree. Is this true?

Your friend sounds like an asshole.

James 007

I think your friend needs to balance things out with her mother. My mother is in her 80s and she smokes to odd cigarette, actually half each time spread out over a few hours. However she only smokes in the separate kitchen and not in the sitting room. This is her own house only. However I would never dream about not having my mother see her grand children over something like this. She needs to agree some set of rules when the grand children visit, but by no means restrict the visits like the way your friend is thinking. I grew up in a house where my old man used to smoke in the sitting room, those days. I have no health issues. My mother smokes in the kitchen, with the back door open, more worried in case the aunt down the road drops by.

bee06

I don’t get the “sure we grew up in smoke filled houses and we’re grand” argument. When my parents brought me home from the hospital my mom had me in her arms in the front seat and I turned out grand, that doesn’t mean I’m going to try it with my baby.

Your friend does seem over to top with the hand cleaning but I agree with her on the smoking. It seems to me like there is a pretty simple resolution with the mother visiting them instead and wearing clothes she hasn’t smoked in.

Zascar

Sure but she's basically said she wont allow her child in the house at all. I'm not looking for a solution here as she won't listen to me, I just wanted to see if this is the way all parents think these days - seems like the answer is mostly yes.

Neyite

Zascar wrote: »

Sure but she's basically said she wont allow her child in the house at all. I'm not looking for a solution here as she won't listen to me, I just wanted to see if this is the way all parents think these days - seems like the answer is mostly yes.

I think most parents go with best practice and that can change throughout the years. The latest research on car safety, on nutrition, on sleeping positions, on contaminants in the home - we all want to ensure that nothing harms our baby, and try to minimise exposure to risks.

A smoker can smoke outside. They do all the time here in this country. They can wash their hands. You cant undo cot death, or asthma in your child or grandchild where smoking was a contributory factor. If a smoker cant prioritise their grandchild's health and possibly life over their fags, well, it speaks volumes about their selfishness.

One eyed Jack

Zascar wrote: »

Sure but she's basically said she wont allow her child in the house at all. I'm not looking for a solution here as she won't listen to me, I just wanted to see if this is the way all parents think these days - seems like the answer is mostly yes.

Ahh jaysis, you're complaining about these parenting blogs exaggerating and spreading fearmongering (and for what it's worth I agree with you, they're generally setting impossible standards for parents), but then you're exaggerating yourself in saying that off the back of a small handful of posters, you're extrapolating that all parents must think this way. Of course they don't, not even close.

What I don't understand is why you can't understand that with a new born baby, new parents are bound to be overly cautious. It should be perfectly understandable that if you're looking at it from their perspective, it's perfectly natural that they would want to take all sorts of precautions and would be attuned to all sorts of blogs setting unrealistic parenting standards. Give her a bit of support and time to find her feet and the whole 'attachment parenting' ideas begin to fall away naturally as your friend becomes more confident in her own parenting skills.

She may never roll back on her standards, and honestly IMO that's fine, those are her standards for her child. Would I share the same standards myself? No, not even close :pac: But then again I'm not her child's parent either.

I think her standards on smoking around her child is perfectly reasonable. I know your argument is that the child won't develop a relationship with their grandmother, but given the trade-off with regard to the childs health, well-being and welfare, I know which one I'd choose personally. They were different times when we were growing up, and now we know better, and some people choose to do better for their children, and that really shouldn't be seen as a bad thing IMO, or fearing that the child will grow up with no ability to fight off infections or get themselves into plenty of hairy situations. I won't tell you how many times my own young lad has put the heart crossways in me, and I already have people telling me 'wait until he starts going out!'. I'd rather not thanks, I have more immediate concerns :pac:

Like I said, I agree with you about the parenting blogs, but there's no need to go worrying on someone else's behalf and painting the other extreme future prospects either! Both of yiz could do with chillin' the beans tbh, but at the end of the day your friend is her child's parent, and therefore has ultimate responsibility for her own child's welfare.

beans

I would insist that the child would not be in a room where smoking was taking place... but I would argue that the benefits to the child of contact with her grandmother and extended family would trump any concerns regarding carcinogens persisting on surfaces / clothes etc (edit - assuming the grandmother was a positive force in all other aspects of her relationship with the family)

The loss of cohesion in the family that the point-blank refusal that is outlined in the OP would be damaging to the child, IMO.

lukesmom

Completely and utterly over the top. I've 3 children myself and I smoke. I don't smoke in the house unless its very late at night and they are in bed. I would never allow someone to smoke while my kids were in the room. However, I would never tell someone to steralize their hands or no be around my kids if they had been smoking. Its just not something that ever entered my head.

If I had a tiny newborn, I'd follow the medical advice to the letter. Let granny visit on the babys territory after having a short break so she's residue free.

There's no risk I'd take if I could avoid it, and it's easy to avoid this one.

Weyhey

While it may seems harsh to some I think this will become the norm sooner or later. As others have said you can't undo the damage smoking including 3rd hard smoking causes.

Then we will be worry about 'Fragrance being the new second hand smoke'.

December2012

The problem is that a lot of smokers are so hooked that they will continue to smoke, while the parent (who doesn't smoke) will feel that the grandparents have chosen smoking over their grandchildren.

Zascar

I was watching a documentary about the Volkswagen emissions scandal the other day - any Volkswagen diesel (and diesels in general) over the last number of years is pumping far higher levels of toxic fumes into the car than you are even going to get in a room that someone smoked in the day before. So I suppose the question is if you had such a car would you change it immediately?