Dr. Chris Covert-Bowlds is a member of the informal, unorganized and quiet movement toward making it a criminal act to smoke around kids.
IN MY VIEW: Making it Unlawful to Smoke Around Children Could have Detrimental Effect on Childrens’ Health, Especially Among Disadvantaged Populations
By Michael Siegel
There has recently been a push within the anti-smoking movement calling for the regulation of smoking around children in private homes to protect them from the hazards of secondhand smoke exposure. At least one major anti-smoking advocate has called for criminalization of smoking around children in the home, a major anti-smoking group supports banning smoking in homes with foster children present, and a number of advocates and groups have called for treating smoking around children as a form of child abuse and/or for the referral of parents who smoke around children to social services agencies or family courts.
While I have already argued against these proposals on a number of grounds not directly related to health, such as violation of parental autonomy, undue intrusion into privacy, and blind fanaticism that views a few ear infections as more important than preserving the ability of a child to remain with his or her loving parents and is willing to rip families apart in order to pursue its narrow aims, here I argue that the proposed policy could well harm the health of many children, especially the most disadvantaged, by inserting a nearly-insurmountable barrier to their obtaining appropriate medical care.
The Rest of the Story
By making it unlawful to smoke around one’s children in a private home, imposing criminal or even civil penalties, referring parents who smoke around their children to authorities, or treating smoking around children as a form of child abuse, we would actually be imposing a huge barrier to children’s access to appropriate medical treatment for conditions that are associated with secondhand smoke exposure.
The reason is simple: Parents who smoke around their children are going to be very reluctant to present to medical authorities if they are afraid they may be penalized, face criminal sanctions, be referred to social service agencies or the court system, or risk having their children taken away from them.
This problem is particularly important among children in already disadvantaged communities, where lack of health insurance and other barriers are now interfering with parents seeking appropriate care of their children’s medical conditions. Based on my own experience, the emergency room is often used as a source of what should be primary care for many disadvantaged children. Existing fear of medical authorities, in some communities, already hinders parents from seeking medical attention for their children unless it is absolutely necessary.
This is why we often do not see children with ear infections in the doctor’s office until the condition has progressed to become a more widespread infection and we often don’t see asthmatic children until they are unable to breathe and need more extreme treatment then if they presented for medical treatment at an earlier stage.
To get a glimpse of what might occur if smoking around children were made unlawful, just look at what is happening in the field of immigrant health, where it is well-documented that many immigrant families (including children) are reluctant to present to medical authorities because of fear that the status of undocumented immigrants may be revealed and reported to authorities (see this Health Affairs article to see data on the lack of access of immigrants and children of immigrants to health care).
The rest of the story is that while some anti-smoking groups are promoting making it unlawful to smoke around children in order to protect childrens’ health, such a policy would likely harm the health of large numbers of children by reducing their access to health care by creating fear among parents that they will be penalized, criminalized, or lose their children if they present for medical care and their smoking around children is found to be a cause of the child’s health problem.
This is likely to be a particular problem among children who are already disadvantaged, and in communities where existing barriers to health care access are already undermining the health of our nation’s children.
This is another example of the dangers of narrow-minded thinking that focuses on just one problem without maintaining a broader perspective on the public’s health, especially factors that influence the health and well-being of children living in disadvantaged families or communities.
The anti-smoking movement needs to broaden its perspective or we may well end up seriously harming the very citizens who we are purporting to be helping.
Read
IN MY VIEW: On the Entrance of Classism into the Anti-Smoking Movement
Losing Your Parents to Smoking
Equating smoking around children with child abuse would be the most devastating and damaging thing that could possibly be done to these children–far worse than the exposure to the secondhand smoke itself. It’s one thing to be at an increased risk of developing an upper respiratory infection, middle ear infection, or asthma, but quite another to be seized from the custody of your loving parents.
Anti-Smoking Advocate Pushing to Make Smoking Around Kids a Form of Child Abuse
According to the article, entitled “Doctor Pushes to Make Smoking An Act of Child Abuse,” Dr. Chris Covert-Bowlds, a physician who heads an anti-smoking coalition (Tobacco Free Whatcom County), is active with the American Lung Association of Washington, and who played a major role in the Washington statewide ban on smoking in workplaces, including bars and restaurants, “is a member of the informal, unorganized and quiet movement toward making it a criminal act to smoke around kids.”
According to the article: “The physician is the father of Washington’s new sweeping anti-smoking law for public places. He believes protecting children from smoking parents is next.”
The article quotes Dr. Covert-Bowlds as stating: “I think eventually there will be legislation to say that exposing kids to smoke in your own home is not right.”
The Rest of the Story
And removing children from their parents who smoke in the home would benefit these kids exactly how?
Frankly, this is one of the most disturbing things I have seen occur in the anti-smoking movement in a long time. Equating smoking around children with child abuse would be the most devastating and damaging thing that could possibly be done to these children – far worse than the exposure to the secondhand smoke itself.
It’s one thing to be at an increased risk of developing an upper respiratory infection, middle ear infection, or asthma, but quite another to be seized from the custody of your loving parents.
Classifying smoking around kids as a form of child abuse would open the door to placing these children under the scrutiny of child protection services, and ultimately, to removing them from the custody of their parent or parents who smoke in their presence.
And that would be a complete disaster; it would be a true tragedy for these children. I can’t think of anything that could possibly be worse for the health and welfare of these kids.
While I wholeheartedly agree that children should be protected from secondhand smoke exposure, tearing them away from their families is not a reasonable means to achieve this desired end.
Moreover, making smoking around children a criminal offense opens the door to making all kinds of parental behavior criminal offenses. Should parents go to jail because they fail to put sunscreen on their kid and the child gets a sunburn? Should parents be charged with a crime if they are caught eating at Burger King and feeding their kids greasy french fries? Should it be a crime to let your kid watch television all day and not get any physical activity? Should parents be sent to jail when their kids are admitted to the hospital for treatment of lead poisoning that they obtained by eating peeling paint chips?
Criminalizing smoking in the home is an unwarranted intrusion into privacy as well as parental autonomy. It has no place in our free society.
And anti-smoking advocates and groups that are pushing to criminalize smoking around kids in the home are threatening to destroy any respect that this country has for privacy rights. There is something here a lot more important than health that is at stake.
Privacy and autonomy are not all that anti-smoking advocates and groups which support making smoking around children a form of child abuse are threatening to destroy. They are also threatening to destroy the lives of these children. It is shameful that they propose to do this in the name of helping these kids in any way.
The rest of the story here is that the anti-smoking movement is completely losing sight of its means because of its overwhelming and unchecked zeal to achieve its desired ends. Sure, protecting kids from secondhand smoke is an important goal, but to do so by removing kids from their parents or by making their parents criminals is not the way to go about it.
I well recognize that “protecting kids” is now supposed to justify everything the anti-smoking movement does, but this is getting ridiculous. When these kids are removed from their parents to live in foster homes, what are we going to tell them: “It’s for your own good?”
Read
Doctor pushes to make smoking an act of child abuse
Dan Tilkin
A note below a letter to the editor by Dr. Chris Covert-Bowlds, discloses that he received funding for “Tobacco Cessation Talks” from GlaxoSmithKline. Gee, isn’t THAT interesting. Dr.Covert-Bowlds is also president of an organization called COMMIT for a Tobacco Free Whatcom County. And guess who makes the COMMIT “stop-smoking” lozenge. Why gee whiz, its initials are GSK. You suppose that’s merely a coincidence?
Sure it is…A quick look at the GSK web site also tells us that they manufacture Consumer Brands Nicoderm CQ, Nicorette, NiQuitin and Nicabate and the list something called Committed Quitters: “A behavioural support programme that offers advice and counselling for smokers trying to quit using GSK’s nicotine replacement therapy products. Committed Quitters typically involves a free, personally tailored quit plan, complete with newsletters, award certificates and other motivational material, as well as a toll-free help line.”
GSK prescription medicines include Zyban, (“Sustained-release tablets are a non-nicotine aid to smoking cessation”) also sold as the antidepressant Wellbutrin. So, what do you suppose the doc cares most about… children’s health or forcing their parents into a position where they have no choice but to quit and turn to some GSK product to help them do that?
– A Newsletter Reader
Tobacco Carcinogens Found in Urine of Smokers’ Babies
Friday, May 12, 2006 By Ker Than
Smoking, obesity pose risks for 80 million Americans
May 11, 2006
LONDON (Reuters) – More than 80 million American adults are smokers, obese or both and face an increased risk of poor health and an early death, researchers said on Friday.
Secondhand Smoke Study Raises Ire
May 15, 2003
Study Shows No Association Between Passive Smoke and Health Risks; Others Criticize Research
Our Public Editor Looks at WebMD’s Coverage of Secondhand Smoke
July 29, 2005
