Toronto Bans Smoking in Parks, I Say Lay Off
http://www.flickr.com/photos/psycho-pics/3557813915/
The Junction Parents blog recently applauded the City of Toronto for banning smoking within 9 metres of all play areas. I’m sure that most parents agree, but I must admit that I’m ambivalent about this one.
Sure, smoking around the playground seems gross and tacky, but I haven’t seen any evidence that exposure to the minute amount of smoke found in open air areas is actually harmful. There are parents who smoke, but do not smoke in their homes. Bringing their kids to the playground and sneaking a smoke on the periphery might offend our sense of proper playground etiquette, but is it harmful? Should it be criminal?
Themocracy
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3476743.stm
Smoking outside ‘harms children’
Children have nicotine in their body even if parents smoke outdoors with the doors closed, researchers have found.
Researchers from Linkoping University in Sweden found children whose parents smoked outside had twice as much nicotine in their body as children of non-smokers.
But they still had significantly less nicotine in their bodies than children who were directly exposed to smoke.
Experts said the best way to protect children was not to smoke at all.
FULL ARTICLE: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3476743.stm
First, let me be clear that I agree that absolutely the best thing for children everywhere, in an ideal world, would be if they were never exposed to any toxins whatsoever.
But we do not live in an ideal world. There are four lanes of heavy traffic that run past my front door that I know dampen the air quality my children grow up with. I had to balance that against the prospect of moving away from the city and a community I love in order to buy a home in our price range. For example.
As for the study cited in that BBC piece, I don’t think it demonstrates conclusive harm to children who are exposed to infinitesimally small amounts of cigarette smoke while outdoors.
First, nicotine levels in the blood do not necessarily mean poorer health. Second, we cannot be sure that they are the cause of outdoor exposure to smoke as opposed to contact with a smoker’s clothes or some occasional indoor exposure.
Finally, this study only relates to children whose parents are smokers. These kids are going to be exposed to the same amount of smoke whether or not they get it at the playground. It says absolutely nothing about the health effects the occasional whiff of smoke might have on a child whose parents do not smoke.
I must admit that I rarely see anyone smoking at the playgrounds, especially not anywhere near other people’s kids. The only direct impact I can see this bylaw having is that smokers will take their kids to the park less. And THAT is not a good thing.
I’ve been struggling with my thoughts about this all day, but I ultimately agree with you Rebecca. I don’t know what the right answer is though, so this is a less-than-helpful comment.
It’s the cigarette butts that bug me the most! I mean I would rather people smoke outdoors if they have children and if it has to be at a park, fine. It’s when people leave their butts on the ground, now that’s GROSS!!!!
Thanks, Melissa.
I guess I would urge parents and caregivers to not smoke around children — their own or anyone else’s — insofar as possible. But I think people already know that. And if somebody is lurking around the edge of the playground with a cigarette while their kids dawdles in the swing, I am sure they are already well aware of the toll their addiction is taking on their family life.
They can build up and it is gross. Point taken.
I don’t smoke but am fairly open-minded about it. Both my parents smoked and so does my husband, although not around our daughter. I think many state policies about smoking are overkill and amount to moral prescriptions that attempt to reduce smoking by attaching a social stigma to it. Backward, in my view.
Still, I resent seeing people smoke around playgrounds. In my view it’s just not the place for it. Butts accumulate, Little kids imitate adults and ashes blow over everything. Every time we go to the playground, K picks up garbage, and the most prevalent object is cigarette buts dropped by parents and nannies under the benches right beside the play structure.
I don’t think the issue is one of air quality. Like you, Rebecca, I’m skeptical of reports claiming that even a whiff of second-hand smoke will cause your darling child to develop cancer. Anti-smoking advocates have just as much of a vested interest in promoting their position as the tobacco companies (researching the funding given to anti-smoking campaigns would raise a few eyebrows) and so I don’t trust them very much either.
But there are other issues. Most people, smokers included, would rather their kids not smoke. It’s an addiction and it does have serious health consequences. So it makes sense to ask smokers to relocate the activity away from children. Nine metres seems reasonable to me. I believe that’s how smokers must stand from public buildings. In the park we go to most days there’s a sitting area about 30 feet away from the play area, and in my view that’s a perfect place to smoke. Nearby, but not too close.
So, in summary, I’m in favour of the policy, even though I think there’s good reason to dispute the claims it is based on.
I agree that the playground isn’t the best place to smoke. I just don’t see it as a big enough issue to warrant a municipal ban. I really hardly ever see anyone smoking there and assume most butts are from people who frequent the parks at night, long after the kiddies are gone. And nine metres is 30 feet — I wouldn’t want Irene that far from me at the park.