To judge this woman?

[moralberyll]

Leaving the local maternity unit today and a heavily pregnant woman who is obviously a patient as she was wearing a dressing gown, slippers and pyjamas was standing right near the doorway smoking a cigarette, there is a big sign up saying 'no smoking on campus'. Aibu to judge her that she is not only putting her own baby at risk but she wants to put other people's baby's at risk from secondhand smoke as well? I would definitely have said something if i were leaving the unit with my newborn baby!

The NHS already requires obese people to slim down before certain treatments are offered.

This is due to the risk of the anaesthetic or the lower success rate of the procedure at higher weights. It's not a judgement/punishment for them being obese.

I know why don't we take the child off the parent who smokes?!?
People do daft and harmful things for various reasons all the time.
You try and educate and pick up the pieces because we are a civilised society (relatively speaking).
The mother probably doesn't have a clue and neither did her mother.
It doesn't make her a bad person.

AtHomeDadGlos you know that asthma can be fatal don't you? You would seriously sanction doctors just standing back and watching a child die because their mother smoked in pregnancy?

Purple no. I advocate support and possibly fines for those mothers who don't stop smoking to ensure that potentially fatal diseases such as asthma aren't forced upon helpless children through no fault or decision of their own.

Apparently that is an outrageous statement that offended many on here.

I then suggested that, if women can't be bothered to stop smoking during the limited time of their pregnancy and are happy to potentially pass on life-long health issues to their offspring, the NHS shouldn't necessarily have a responsibility to care for them when their own mother couldn't be arsed.

It wasn't you who wrote this then
AtHomeDadGlos?

Failing that, perhaps the NHS should refuse to help the child with asthma related illnesses; if the mother couldn't give a shit to stop smoking why should the NHS pick up the tab?

Yes. I wrote that. That's in line with my second statement above. You can read, can't you?

Yes I can read. Your second post appeared as I was typing mine. Clearly your reason skills are lacking.

'Your second post appeared as I was typing mine.'

Fair enough

How about we fine mothers who keep pets when their kids are allergic to them? Or keep such a filthy house that the dust exacerbates their asthma?!!!!
You cannot fine people for this.
Anyway this demographic is unlikely to be able to pay the fines without the kids suffering.

That's a hugely class-based statement. And why would any parent keep a pet if their child were allergic?

I then suggested that, if women can't be bothered to stop smoking during the limited time of their pregnancy and are happy to potentially pass on life-long health issues to their offspring, the NHS shouldn't necessarily have a responsibility to care for them when their own mother couldn't be arsed.

Where does this stop? Parents with genetic diseases who have children? People who give their children poor diets? Families who don't exercise enough?

Since my last comment more women have bravely shared that they smoked while visibly pregnant, outside a hospital because they had been told their baby wouldn't make it. Yet still vile comments being made about how horrible all women smoking while pregnant are. Do you people have no shame? Such a lack of compassion, basic human decency and manners is truly despicable. Much love to user, ellie and lolly for being brave enough to share in such a hostile space and I'm sorry for your loss.

I totally agree with bisquick about the classism on this thread, mumsnet can be really supportive sometimes but often it is just vile and classism is one of the worst problems here.

Thanks to pencils for bringing pragmatic common sense to this thread with actually useful information instead of nasty shaming that it's been far too full of. Will definitely support your calls for an expert web chat. I do sometimes wish MNHQ would stop all threads attacking pregnant women, they're really unhelpful and harm so many women. Threads about the Mccanns get shut down quickly enough and the judgement there is only harming one family.

Purple surely feeding your child a poor diet is a form of child abuse isn't it? I'm not talking here about a chocolate bar now and then etc but those kids who are clearly clinically obese. In that case, yes education and fines for the parent would be a reasonable response. It's a bit like the parent being fined if their child is truant from school. Let me guess, you vehemently oppose that too right?

"injuries happen in other sports (rugby, football etc) but these are less 'extreme' in nature and make up part of a general healthy lifestyle. Therefore they should be covered by the NHS"

Actually, rugby is a violent contact sport where people are very likely to get hurt one way or another in the long term. Skiing isn't. What you consider normal & part of a "general healthy lifestyle" is not universal.

"Self harming / eating disorders are diagnosable mental illnesses and therefore clearly should be treated."

Smoking is an addiction. Do you understand what that means? Some people try to quit many times before they succeed (or die). It's not like "oh I quit eating bread" or whatever. Smoking alters brain chemistry. It's extremely difficult to stop smoking when one is properly addicted, especially if since early teens.

We're not talking about fines/education. I'm asking you about how your suggestion that the NHS should not care for the children of smokers.

^rogue "how" there

purple I feel I've made myself clear on this issue. I don't personally believe that to be the best way forward, rather I pose the larger question of personal vs state responsibility.

Too many people rely too greatly on the state. Our NHS is already overworked and at breaking point. People need to take personal responsibility.

Cote Then perhaps if they are unable to quit smoking when they have such an important reason to do so (the health of their child) they shouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place? If you can't put the needs of your child before your own then parenthood probably isn't for you.

.....and not only will the state treat a smoker's child for asthma, they'll then be sent home to marinate their lungs in smoke some more til the next attack. Cause, you know, mum and dad know best.

"they shouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place?"

You call yourself "Dad" so presumably know how pregnancies come about? You should also know by now that many are not planned.

Maybe you would like to force abortions on pregnant women who "couldn't be bothered" to quit before their bodies "stopped being their own"?

Why not? Once you start telling women they don't have bodily autonomy & proposing punishment for not being optimum incubators, there's no end to the slippery slope.

cote here we go, yet another hysterical reaction.

Really? Hysterical, no less.

It is a bit pathetic that you feel you need to call women "hysterical" when you can't answer a post.

That word has been use to silence women through history, but it doesn't work as well these days for that purpose.

It does work to out the man who uses it as a misogynist, though.

Your choosing to see my use of the word 'hysterical' through the prism of misogyny reflects only your own issues regarding sexism. Rather I was pointing your hysterical overreaction to my earlier comment.

Many pregancies may well not be planned. That doesn't negate my earlier point about women being responsible for the health of the foetus while they are.

If a pregnant woman's desire to smoke outweigh their wishes for the child to be healthy then they may, in fact, be better off having a termination.

Furthermore your username, nor that of many others debating on here, give any clue as to your gender.