To hate the idea of the new smoking bribe?

[CharleyFarleyy]

What do people who dont smoke anyway get? seems like they are going to miss out un-fairly.

Also if quitting for your and your babys health isnt incentive enough will shopping vouchers help anyway?

If smoking is so bad that the government want to bribe people to stop, why not ban it all together.

Because it brings in £12bn in tax each year and helps avert the pensions and elder social care crisis.

I bet if we taxed heroin the government would get shit tons of money, doesn't mean its right!

If we taxed ridiculous, poorly thought through opinions, then we'd make even more.

I didn't say it was a good reason, but you did ask why (although actually legalising and regulating heroin, along with other drugs, would be a brilliant harm reduction policy but it's a topic for another thread)

Why do you keeping banging on about what's 'right' and 'fair'?

It's about getting results. Protecting the vulnerable. In this case unborn babies. IF IT WORKS IT WORKS.

Why don't you post on the Daily Mail with your nonsensical 'anologies' about the death penalty and taxing heroin.

What do people who dont smoke anyway get? seems like they are going to miss out un-fairly.

Less pressure on the NHS, ultimately lower NHS spending, healthier babies and a more productive workforce due to fewer days missed due to ill-health?

The psychology of quitting is bloody difficult, and there is some evidence that incentives can help. Worth trying.

That's a whole other debate - I would support legitimising and taxing heroin, but that's a completely different issue.

somesort

I just wanted to correct you that smoking in pregnancy is not confined to people on low income from deprived areas, even though you may say they are a higher percentage of overall.

I live opposite our local ante natal clinic and see all sorts of women puffing outside before they go in. I see them light up as they leave the premises.
We do live in a socially deprived area, there are pockets like these in most towns and cities though and I see and hear well spoken, well dressed middle class older women smoking.
I think these are the ones who will be hard to reach as what use is a voucher to them?

The thing is, there are a certain type of women who care more about getting shopping vouchers than the potential damage they are doing to their baby. That is the issue. Probably poor, uneducated selfish cunts people.

This will help those babies. It is always shame there are people like this in the UK, but there are, and it's not the baby's fault.

People don't stop because of the vouchers - that's an incentive to access support. If you gave people the vouchers without the counselling etc it wouldn't work.

Please tell me you're not serious about wanting to fine pregnant smokers.

I have reservations about this scheme - and yes, the selfish part of me is thinking it's not fair that I can't have vouchers because I've never smoked - but if this actually works and improves the rate of smokers quitting then surely it's a good thing in the long run?

Punishing pregnant smokers would probably mean fewer pregnant smokers admitting they smoke, fewer smokers seeking help to quit for fear of the consequences of failure, a reluctance tn engage with ante-natal services, and worse outcomes for pregnant women and babies.

There are many threads elsewhere about contesting "nicotine test" results - suspicion of background CO2 in home, walking through heavy traffic to reach appointment, etc - so it seems the excuses are already being rehearsed

Does anyone seriously imagine that the kind of mother who doesn't care enough for their baby to quit smoking will accept being told "no" to a handout??

In fact there was an outcry back in 2012 about the very idea of pregnant women being nic-tested at all - do those folk think it's now somehow okay if they're getting paid??

I know lots of women on low/no income who are well spoken and dress nicely. Are they middle class now?

WRT pregnant smokers being probably poor, uneducated, selfish cunts....

You do realise addiction doesn't recognise class, don't you?

There is an entire thread somewhere on Mumsnet full of people TTC/already pregnant and trying to lose weight at the same time. Some have an absolutely massive amount to lose.

Would you consider them poor, uneducated, selfish cunts too? The risk to mother and baby are strikingly similar.

Surely it's a lot more complicated and doesn't deserve such a dismissive attitude?

Fair enough, Morethan I'm looking at this with my deprivation blinkers on, coming from one of the most deprived areas in the country. It's what I see all around me, every day. I'm not denying that addiction is classless, because of course it is, just that I think schemes like this will benefit low income women more.

I would just like to go on record that I never said pregnant smokers were poor, uneducated, selfish cunts though. Very much hoping that comment wasn't directed at me (and I don't think it was) but it followed shortly after MoreThan's, so I wasn't sure.

Hello, poor, uneducated cunt here. I'm posting my degree back to my university now, as I'm obviously too stupid to have it.

I grew up in a smoking household. You go one of two ways when you live in that environment - you either join in or detest it for life. I smoked right up until I saw those two lines, have given up cold turkey. It's bloody hard, but I will do it for my child. However, if I wasn't pregnant I would still be smoking. I know how bad it is for me, but I enjoy it. Other peoples judgements on the matter mean sod all to me. And government plans won't change things, the plain packets nonsense for example. If people want to smoke, they will.
You want people to stop smoking? Make the packaging 22ct gold with diamond casing, no one would be able to afford it!

Gosh no SomeSort, I was quoting a previous poster.

Phew! Must learn to stop skim reading at the speed of light!

I hate it, if having a baby isn't enough of an incentive to stop smoking then you shouldn't have one.

Short term this could help save money, but long term would have stupid outcomes.

Worra

I said the sort of people who would be more likely respond to this bribe would be poor. Otherwise why care about £400 shopping vouchers?

Oh yes my mistake.

The thing is, there are a certain type of women who care more about getting shopping vouchers than the potential damage they are doing to their baby. That is the issue. Probably poor, uneducated selfish cunts people.

So the wealthier pregnant smokers would be rich, uneducated, selfish cunts?

I mean rather than simply nicotine addicts?

Any smoking woman who considers themselves mother material ought to give up smoking full stop. It's great that we encourage women to refrain from smoking during pregnancy, but it needs to extend way beyond that point. The amount of women I see in my local area, happily puffing away on their cancer sticks whilst they have their DC in the car, angers me so very much to the point of wanting to punch them in the face.

You really don't deserve DC if you have that little regard for their health.

It says a lot about our society that, despite the knowledge on how bad smoking is, we still need to bribe some women to act on that knowledge.

More than 20% of the women offered vouchers stopped smoking, compared with 9% given normal NHS support alone.

I wonder which group had the lowest rate of women who started smoking once the baby was born?

I can't help thinking that if the incentive has gone (ie the vouchers) then what is the point of not smoking again? If the motive is health, then that incentive remains.

I wonder what the statistics would be if the mother had to stay off cigarettes until the baby's first birthday.

BRIBE!

FFS.

Erm. No. Incentive.