Smoking Around Children

There was an interesting article recently about a man in B.C. who is trying to get an order that his separated partner not smoke around their son.  This is seen as a novel case that may set a precedent. 

This is not groundbreaking: it's just a new twist on an old theme.  Courts routinely limit the rights of separated parents when they are around their children.  Often, the non-custodial parent is prohibited from consuming alcohol when the parent has the child with him or her.  These no-alcohol orders are usually given after there is some evidence that the parent has some sort of problems with alcohol. Alcohol is legal and drinking it is legal.  (Of course, there are restrictions on drinking and driving and you can only drink in certain places.)

What is the basis for a no-alcohol order?  It is fairly obvious: the parent MAY drive after drinking.  Perhaps there is a concern that the parent MAY become violent or MAY be too incapacitated to properly care for the child.

In the no-alcohol scenario, the prohibition is based on the RISK that something might go wrong.

Tobacco is legal.  Like drinking, smoking is legal, except in certain places.  I think there is a stronger argument for prohibiting a parent from smoking around a child than there is for alcohol.  Unlike drinking, which MAY end up harming the child, subjecting a child to second-hand smoke DOES harm the child.

Despite the unbelievable protests of the tobacco executives, we know for a fact that tobacco smoke causes all sorts of health problems. There is more than a RISK of harm - there is certainty.  It would be even worse for a child with asthma, for example.

The man in B.C. was right on the money when he said that it is not a smoker's rights case at all.  The case is all about the health of the child.  "Go ahead and smoke; just keep it away from the children", he says.

If the courts apply the same logic as they use when making no-alcohol orders, he should win.  So should any parent where the child was not subjected to smoke before and is now subjected to it. 

It will be interesting to see how it turns out.  It could be the start of a movement to make smoking illegal around children at all times.  Why not?  It is illegal to hurt your child. You would probably be arrested if you were giving your child small daily doses of Windex. Why should it be any different for a parent who gives their child daily doses of addictive and poisonous cigarette smoke?