IF PARENTS SMOKE IN FRONT OF CHILDREN, SHOULD THAT BE CHILD ABUSE?

user ballots

Newest Ballots
Newest Blogs
Private Ballots
Joke Ballots
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes

Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz

TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase

Discussion
Bug Report

IF PARENTS SMOKE IN FRONT OF CHILDREN, SHOULD THAT BE CHILD ABUSE?

[+] ballot by ladyshanalyn
created Tue Feb 27, 07
In homes, close quarters or cars? It is a debate here at work.

yes
no

Ballot #112598 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 1.5 © BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank:

similiar ballots:
119173. Would you smoke marijuana in front of this car for $1,000,000?
106555. Child abuse, do you intervene?
117602. What should the penalty be for child abuse?
72992. What should be done to reduce or eliminate child abuse?
94424. Are "Prussian Blue" victims of child abuse?
118323. Should persons convicted of child abuse be sterilized?
13682. Why do so many smokers expose their children to secondhand smoke?
116773. Australia defends anti-child abuse measures
13888. Should Parents be allowed by law to hit their children?
40882. Do you believe children to be property of their parents?

COMMENTS:
Voted : yes
Second hand smoke leads to immediate (in the case of asthmatics and stuff) and imminent long term health risks. Seems pretty bogus to me. Smoke outside imo.

by ThisIsNate on Tue Feb 27, 07 3:11pm [+]

Voted : yes
with what we know now about the harmful effects of smoke on those young lungs, I would have to say yes.

I don't know the level of legislation that I would be comfortable with. After all, shouldn't FOX TV be prosecuted for abuse for exposing kids to offensive materials? How about coal burning powerplant and their effect on kids? etc.etc.

Education, rather than legislation should be the answer to stamp out these type of abuse.

by LCD on Tue Feb 27, 07 3:12pm [+]

Voted : no
sure. then they better include eating trans fats or if a child catches his / her parents having sex, make that child abuse too. i say no. but, parents should use common sense and not expose their kids to second-hand smoke.

by Kev24 on Tue Feb 27, 07 3:43pm [+]

I don't think it's just the cigarette smoke that is harmfull, considering the pollution in the air that we breath on a daily basis.

Cigarette smoke is the least of our concerns I think.

What I thought funny (and a little hypocritical) was walking in and almost choking on smoke in a non smokers house one time. She doesnt allow cigarettes in her house and around her kids, but she'll light up that incense and those smudging sticks in a heart beat.

by Grumpy_Person on Tue Feb 27, 07 3:47pm [+]

And when her kids complain, it goes in one ear and out the other.

That's abuse.

by Grumpy_Person on Tue Feb 27, 07 3:49pm [+]

We're having trouble ridding the world of a known cancer-causing product and its intended usage.
Isn't that an odd situation?
Any pharmaceutical product exhibiting carcinogenic tendencies would have been immediately withdrawn from the market, 20-35 yrs. ago!!
And U-guys think the Bush Admin. is fishy?
This Tobacco thing bin going one for near half a century(since we've known the nasty truth)

by aplmac on Tue Feb 27, 07 4:07pm [+]

Voted : yes
Yes, because they are subjecting the child to carsinogens, and the child can't easily get away from them.

Actually, someone told me that Maine now has a law against smoking in a car with children inside.

by Psycho_Frighead on Thu Sep 06, 07 1:51pm [+]

Voted : no
Only if it's crack

by Kiki on Thu Sep 06, 07 2:04pm [+]

About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact