This is an essay I wrote a year ago for english class. However it is an issue that I feel very strongly about. While the suggestion may sound a little radical, please listen to my reasoning and then make up your mind. Sorry that it is so long, I would have posted it in two parts, but that seemed kind of like cheating for the scholarship.
Picture a man. In one hand the man is affectionately holding a small baby that is probably only a few months old. In the other hand, between his two fingers, there is a lit cigarette.
This image may appear drastic; as such behavior only occurs in the lowest and most undereducated settings, in utmost scarcity, right?
Wrong. Studies have shown that despite the overwhelming research stating that second-hand smoke is unfeignedly harmful, 35% of children are regularly exposed to smoke by live-in relatives or frequent visitors and 50-75% of children in the United States have levels of cotinine, a major product of cigarette smoke (Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet). This is a horrific abuse of the innocent and accepting nature of children, who in many cases are not enlightened to the dangers of tobacco and are not in a position to simply stand up and walk away.
Right now several states are beginning the movement to protect children from the dangers of secondhand smoke. Vermont and Washington have made it illegal to smoke in foster homes. Arkansas and Louisiana have recently passed laws stating that adults may not smoke in cars where children under the age of five or young enough to require a car seat are present. Smoking in the presence of young children gravely damages their health and development, encourages them to make deleterious decisions regarding smoking later in life, and should therefore be illegal.
Critics of this movement, like Gary Nolan, a spokesperson for the Smoker’s Club, Inc, have tried to claim that secondhand smoke is not dangerous (Bazar). This argument holds no water. The multitude of studies demonstrates that second hand smoke is entirely dangerous. In fact Surgeon General’s Report from 2006 asserted that second hand smoke, even at brief exposures “can cause blood platelets to become stickier, damage the lining of blood vessels, decrease coronary flow velocity reserves, and reduce heart rate variability, potentially increasing the risk of heart attack” (Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet).
Secondhand smoke has been proven to cause death in its victims from both heart and lung disease. It has also been proven that secondhand smoke can, and often does, cause cancer. It is also a fact that any malevolent chemicals found in cigarettes, such as arsenic, cyanide, and tar are also inhaled by a child who is near a smoker (A Note for Parents on Smoking around Children). While large tobacco companies would lead everyone to believe that smoking cigarettes will not harm other people or cause serious conditions in children present, all evidence suggest that smoking is devastating to the health of anybody, especially children, who are constantly in a smoke-filled atmosphere.
In fact, every year $10 billion dollars worth of medical bills dealt with diseases and ailments that were a result of exposure to second-hand smoke. (Cordry). The state of New Jersey has banned smoking from all restaurants and bars, yet it does not protect the children of New Jersey. It does not protect the five year old child that lives in a house filled with smoke and cannot simply walk out and go somewhere else. It does not protect the infants who can neither stand up and leave the room nor ask their caretakers to put out their cigarettes. Is it fair that the clean air laws protect everyone except those who cannot protect or speak up for themselves?
If the risks of exposure to secondhand smoke are grievous in general, then young children, in the developing stages of life, are even more at risk. Children deserve to be protected from this melancholy and completely inexcusable attack to their growth.
Tobacco smoke is the contributor to 150,000 to 300,000 respiratory infections in infants every year. As a result of these infections 7,500 to 15,000 of these babies have to be hospitalized. Secondhand smoke causes children to cough and wheeze up to 80% more than children who are gifted with a smoke-free environment. Children in smoke-filled households become subject to frequent and repeated ear and throat infections.
Asthma is also created and triggered by secondhand smoke. About 26,000 new cases of childhood asthma appear every year as a result of exposure to cigarette smoke (A Note for Parents on Smoking around Children). In addition to this 400, 000 to 1,000,000 children with Asthma have symptoms aggravated by second hand smoke (Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet). Exposure is particularly dangerous to children under the age of two years. During these years critical lung development takes place.
Secondhand smoke damages lung growth and leaves a permanent decrease in lung function for the rest of the child’s life (A Note for Parents on Smoking around Children). Finally and tragically secondhand smoke creates 1,900 to 2,700 cases of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome every year, in which a baby suddenly, inexplicably dies.( Mendelson, Mellow) These may seem like a cumulus of numbers, but for children across the world these are far more than statistics.
As a child I was frequently exposed to secondhand smoke by my father, as a result I suffered numerous, severe, ear infections as a child, and ultimately had to have surgery in order to correct the damage. My sister also now suffers from asthma.
Still, there is a whole other side to this issue besides the devastating effects upon a child’s health. Young children, especially those under the age of thirteen, are exceptionally impressionable. Craig Anderson, who studies the effect of media violence at Iowa State University stated that “’Kids are basically little learning machines. Whatever the content is in front of them, they’re going to pick it up’” (Parents' Smoking, Drinking Influence Children).
Studies have found that children are far more likely to eventually smoke if their parents or older siblings are smokers (Lang, Marks). One particularly interesting study was conducted that attempted to gauge children’s attitude toward cigarettes. 120 Preschoolers were told to play in a pretend grocery store and purchase items for a Barbie party. The store contained 133 miniature items which included different types of food and drink, household products, alcohol and cigarettes. 28% of the children chose to purchase the cigarettes, and of those children who picked cigarettes, nearly 18% were actually able to identify what brand they wanted. A four year old girl told the cashier “I need this for my man. A man needs cigarettes”.
Those children who had parents who smoke were four times more likely to choose cigarettes as one of their items (Parents' Smoking, Drinking Influence Children). A child who is constantly watching a role model smoking cigarettes comes to think of smoking as normal and acceptable. Parents have a responsibility to shield children from this mentality that cigarettes are harmless or the child will be completely uninhibited from experimenting with tobacco.
Aside from the utterly derisory claim of “big tobacco” that second hand smoke is not hazardous the only major opposition to this suggestion and the clean air movement in general, comes from smoker rights groups. These people claim that a law parallel to the suggestions in this essay would be violating the rights of American smokers. This fear is unfounded. This essay is not targeting smokers, it is targeting irresponsible parents.
For example, many people watch R and P-13 rated movies. Still, if someone walks into a room and sees a four year old child watching Saw the majority of people will would agree that it that is not appropriate. Is it really too much to ask an adult smoker, that for the sake of their own child or sibling’s health, they exercise responsibility and smoke outside? It is neither difficult nor impossible.
My mother’s cousin is a heavy smoker, nevertheless she does not smoke in her house or her car, and she never smokes in front of her daughter. She holds herself accountable for her daughter’s health and acts prudently as a parent. The fact is that we do not live in a purely libertarian society. We have the freedom and rights that we need, but we are not given rights that can damage or kill other people.
Why is it that smokers should be extended the right to kill – and there own children at that? Former smoker and Democratic state representative in Arkansas, Bob Mathis, stated “We have laws on the books in every state of the union against child abuse. This is a form of child abuse” (Bazar).
The solution to this problem, the death and illness of thousands of children, is simple. Smoking in the presence of children under the age of 18, where they can clearly see and inhale the secondhand smoke, should undoubtedly be illegal. Those who break this law should be subject to fines. The age 18 may seem excessively high and a little unreasonable, still it is, after consideration the most logical cut off age. At first around ten seemed like a reasonable age, but it would be vacuous to allow parents to begin smoking in front a child, just as he or she is most impressionable and is approaching a point where he or she will have to begin making decision about cigarettes.
Under age 18 it is illegal to purchase and use cigarettes, so why should it be legal to receive somebody else’s smoke? Call or write to the New Jersey legislature and urge them to begin protecting the right of children the way that they protect the rights of restaurant and bar customers. Help the clean air movement reach the youth of America. However, the most important way to help is to not be a part of the problem.
If you are a smoker, smoke outdoors and away from young children. Do not smoke in front of children or encourage them to believe it is a healthy behavior. If you do not smoke keep your own children or siblings away from people who are smoking and make sure that all daycare centers are smoke-free. Do not smoke in the presence of pregnant women, and if you see a pregnant woman smoking, encourage her to stop, at least for the remainder of the pregnancy. Make her aware that her smoking could cause ADHD, poor development, cancer or even death of the fetus. (Smoking During Pregnancy Linked with ADHD).
It is hypocritical for the government to begin prosecuting child abusers when this ignored form of abuse is still legal. 35% of children are frequently exposed to smoke by a live-in family member or a frequent visitor. 35% of children are being put at risk of lung disease, heart disease and cancer. 35% of children are have throat infection, ear infections, and respiratory infections inflicted upon them by there own parents. 35% of children are being taught that it is okay to smoke.
These children are being constantly and legally abused. Stop the abuse. It must be made illegal for children under the age of 18 to be exposed to cigarette smoke or else these tragic symptoms will keep appearing, the teen smoking problem will continue, and the abuse of innocent children will proceed.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
