Comments (2)

By rebecca, May 4, 2009 3:24 am

My goodness, there is a lot of hype out there over Mother’s Day. Every business under the sun is hocking something special for Mom. And every mommy blogger is jostling for a piece of the action: We’re moms! We know what we want. And what do we want? Bluetooth headsets, tote bags, teeth whitening and more. Now far be it from me to take the air out of anyone’s shopping sails, especially when shopping can be done in the name of economic recovery, but it really is a bit much.

If half as much time and energy were put toward forwarding some real mom-friendly initiatives as is spent on marketing for Mother’s Day, we might be lightyears ahead. So here’s a rare and uncharacteristically earnest call to arms at the Playground Confidential. All I want for Mother’s Day is: Continue reading 'All I Want For Mother’s Day'»

Comments (4)

By rebecca, May 30, 2008 1:26 pm

I have never owned a car. My husband has never owned a car – he doesn’t even have his driver’s license. We live in the city of Toronto, right on two bus lines and a 15 minute walk from the nearest subway station. My husband uses the TTC to commute to work, and Colum and I can meet all our daily needs right in our neighbourhood. Even my parents are only a 15 minute walk away.

We don’t get out of town much, admittedly. But when we do, we hop on a Greyhound bus or Via Rail train. Unlike airports, which are always perched at the edge of whichever city they serve, bus and train stations are right downtown. Still, there are times when you need to go to the suburbs; to visit family, mostly, or to make a purchase at a big-box store. And a car is really nice to have then.

I must admit, though, that with a second baby on the way I keep thinking that a car might be really nice to have more and more often. We still wouldn’t need one on a daily basis, but the longer cross-city transit trips are exponentially more patience draining with kiddies in tow. And while it’s one thing for you and your girlfriend to bum a ride to the nearest subway station, it’s another entirely for you and your wife and two kids and car seats and gear to rely on other people’s vehicles. It stands to reason, then, that we should consider picking up a small used car to keep in the driveway and use sparingly. And that is precisely where I see my next big pay cheque (first big pay cheque, actually) going.

But the economic and environmental repercussions are not that simple. My in-laws are out of town for two weeks and have lent us their car. I can already see how just having a car in the driveway will instantly multiply the number of uses we will have for one. A trip to Sunnyside Beach, for example, is something we might make once a month during the spring and summer. It’s a pleasant hour’s walk down to Bloor Street and through High Park from our home. We would then either walk back or hop on a bus. Last night, though, I found myself suggesting we could pack up our dinner and drive down to the beach for an impromptu picnic. We can go further afield for all kinds of things and drive when we otherwise wouldn’t.

This is not so bad, in and of itself, but the sky-rocketing cost of oil and the snowball effect that is having on our oil-dependant society has me freaked. An article in this week’s Macleans lays out all the doomsday predictions for us to wallow in. Of course, it does vindicate our choice of not looking into buying a home in the suburbs and continuing to rent in the city. Still, there are going to be a lot of young families stranded in their remote cul-de-sac ghettos when they can’t afford to drive anywhere and the value of their homes take a nosedive. And even I will have to learn a little discipline if I ever get my own car. Taking a midnight freedom ride on the open road with classic rock blasting on the radio might be one of life’s greatest pleasures. (Sorry, nature lovers.) But it’s one that we cannot afford to indulge. At least not very often.

Comments (1)

By rebecca, December 3, 2007 9:21 am

It turns out that it is illegal – a criminal offense – to smoke in a vehicle carrying a child in the town of Wolfville, Nova Scotia. City councilors in Ontario’s York region and in London, Ontario are proposing similar laws in their respective municipalities. And now the Ontario Medical Association (OMA) is pushing for a province-wide ban on smoking in cars with kids.

Let me first go on record as being against exposing children to toxic fumes of any stripe. That includes cigarette smoke, especially in vehicles. I think we should do our utmost to raise our children in the safest and healthiest environment possible. It is irresponsible not to. But why, oh why, is the first line of attack here an outright prohibition?

The last I checked, a person’s car is part of their personal property. It is a private space where the government cannot impinge on personal freedoms with undue cause. (This is a basic value of our western liberal democracy. I am not prepared to make a detailed legal argument here.) There is ample evidence directly linking alcohol consumption with impaired driving, and car seats with lower mortality rates in collisions. There is good reason, then, for drinking and driving and car seat laws. The evidence surrounding second-hand smoke is still murky, I’m afraid. Yes, life-long exposure to high levels of second-hand smoke has been linked to respiratory ailments, but just how much exposure puts one at just how much risk is unclear. We can certainly acknowledge that exposure to cigarette smoke may contribute to the future ill health of a child. We can even aggressively disapprove of the act of smoking in a car with a child without making the act criminal. Individual freedoms are the cornerstone of our society, and should only be subject to limits in light of clear evidence of direct harm.

Why not push for a public service campaign, then? In their press release, the OMA claims that “levels of second-hand smoke(SHS) in vehicles can be 23 times more toxic than in a house.” That is actually a good bit of information most people are not aware of. It would probably not go unheeded by the majority of people who do smoke in vehicles with children. Who are these people anyway? Is there some sort of an epidemic of people with children lighting up in their cars? Has the problem gotten so far out of hand that we must pass legislation against it? Or, perhaps, it is more plausible to assume there has been a steady decline in the number of people smoking in their cars with or without children. And if the elevated toxin levels were advertised in a campaign that urged people to refrain from smoking on road trips with the family – even suggest pulling over and letting the kids stretch their legs while you get you nic fix if need be – then I’m sure most people would listen. You see, most people (even dirty smokers) want to do what’s best for their children.

Will there be 100 per cent compliance? No. But no law is completely effective either. The potential for harm here simply does not warrant any infringement on personal freedom. Should we make it illegal to not properly childproof one’s bathroom? (Oh yes, I know you mean to lock that medicine cabinet. And are those razors in that drawer?) How about a ban on that second cookie? Or the first, for that matter? Our freedoms should not be subject to the prevailing trends and morality of the day – no matter how much we believe in them. And, I’m sorry, but exposure to second-hand smoke is not child abuse.

On a related note … While researching this piece for Spacing, I interviewed Geoffery Harris, director of the Centre for Atmospheric Chemistry at York University. He mentioned an experiment that measured the levels of carbon monoxide present in a vehicle traveling Toronto area freeways and compared them to the levels pedestrians are normally exposed to. He said, “It was quite an illuminating little study. Just to drive along the 401 at varying times of the day with the windows open, just to see what was in the air that drivers are breathing. And it actually made very little difference whether the windows were open or not. And the levels were surprisingly high … They were much higher than I would have expected, and I should know these things.” Despite being pretty good at keeping cigarette smoke in, cars are apparently not very good at keeping other toxins out. Maybe children shouldn’t be allowed in cars at all? Of course not. But maybe if more people knew about these air quality concerns they would choose local daycare over workplace care, and real neighbourhoods over subdivisions.

(Photo courtesty of Benetton Talk)