To ask your views on smoking before holding babies

[LloydColeandtheCoconuts]

My DD is 4 months old. I sometimes meet up with a work colleague for a hot chocolate and i ask not to smoke at all that day until she leaves. I know this is potential CF behaviour but she knows that I won’t let her hold DD if she does. My friend has been fine with this and doesn’t mind not smoking for a few hours because she gets to hold DD. Then she can smoke all she wants when she leaves.
Tomorrow I’m meeting some other work colleagues - 2 of whom are smokers. I am not close enough to them to ask them not to smoke beforehand but I won’t let them hold DD if they have been.
My DP thinks IABU to tell them this as they’re coming to see the baby and probably would want to hold her. He thinks I’m being a little OTT as it’ll only be for a few hours and they won’t be smoking whilst holding her.
I’m just wondering whether IABU or not.
Thanks

The smell isn't dangerous is it? I can understand not wanting someone who is actually smoking near a baby (or near me, quite honestly) but once they've stopped, not really a problem.

Second hand smoke has been shown to be harmful, but I don't think anyone has shown the stale smell is dangerous to health.

No smoker ever held my son ever - you are right not to allow them to hold your baby

I’m a nonsmoker,but I’d expect a smoker to wash hands before handle baby
ignore the in my day rubbish.back in the day many things were unsafe and caused fatalities
Backin the day medicines didn’t have safety caps.children ingested the meds and died
Introduction of safety caps has seen rate of accidental ingestion of meds plummet

Go for self-deprecating honesty?

‘Look, this is probably eye-rolling precious and I can only apologise for that but we’re trying to keep baby away from cigarette chemicals. If you want to hold her, can you not smoke for a hour or so before? I understand that you may not want to hold her though, in which case there’s no worries about refraining. I know it’s a bit indulgent for me to ask, sorry again’.

1st,2nd,3rd degree all exist all the poisonous shit from cigarettes cling to clothes and hair even after being washed and showered. If you are not comfortable don't let it happen. I didn't.

Lipstick- I am guessing that comment was aimed at me? How arrogant you sound.
FWIW, comparing the danger of accessible medicines to the faint smell of smoke on someone's clothes is plain stupid.
There have been many advances over the years in child safety and I would never advocate going back to the days of no car seats, front sleeping or a dash of whisky in a bottle to help baby sleep, obviously.
But it's almost as if all major concerns have been dealt with, and today's parents are hunting out new ones to cause a drama over!

And how v predictable and lame you sound,minimising any justifiable concern as a drama
I’ll leave to harrumph at your perceived ridiculousness of it all.safety & all that

YABU IMO.

But it's not the smell that's the issue, it's the fact that some of the toxic chemicals cling to clothes and newborns are particularly vulnerable.

The smokers can just as easily not request a cuddle- you can coo over a baby from a bit further away.

I do not think it is a justifiable concern though, that's where we differ.
If not getting myself into a state of panic over every slight non issue makes me lame, so be it.
I do wonder, as I said, how these hyper-sensitive families exist in the real world. They must be terrified of leaving their homes.

YANBU.
Smoking seems to be one of the things we still have a societal blind spot about. The world was set up for the convenience of smokers for a long time and vestiges of that are still around. The wants of a smoker trump the potential health impact on a baby and the mother is told she's hysterical.

Yes, the effect of one smoker holding the baby briefly may be small. But what about when the next one wants 'their turn' ('because you let X'), and then the overbearing MIL, and then the next person?

And however small (or not - we don't actually know yet*) the risk, I don't want my child exposed to it, and I get to decide that.

*30 years ago I expect parents who did not want others to smoke around their babies were being told they were hysterical.

Some of the toxic chemicals..., how much? What's the toxicity of "some"? Babies exhale VOCs, as we all do, including formaldehyde, that's toxic isn't it?
Infection is probably of most concern to small babies yet no one ever asks if the prospective baby handler washed their hands after their last shit.

Oh, and all these people talking about 'a smell' - what exactly do you think the smell comes from?

Thanks for your comments. I wouldn’t call myself “hyper sensitive” or even panicked and have no fear leaving my home, I’m just trying to do my best.
The smell of smoke was never an issue but the fumes. I can’t control the London traffic but if I can do something to prevent the cigarette smoke exposed to my DD then I’ll try.
Thanks again all

Maidofstars is totally right. I'm an ex smoker, we are highly aware of other people's feelings about cig smoke. It will not come as a shock. Being shady and dodging the subject is more annoying. Just ask!

I can't find any direct evidence that this would be harmful. There is research showing that a build-up of smoking residues on furniture / car interiors contains substances which can be harmful, but this has been raised in the context of the home environment with a build-up of smoke, not clothing worn for a few hours. I have not seen any suggestion that very short-term exposure to the clothing of a smoker could be harmful. See www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/concern-over-third-hand-smoke/

In addition, we know that smokers' breath can contain higher levels of carbon monoxide and this may explain part of the increased risk of SIDS when a smoker co-sleeps with a baby, but I have not found any reputable healthcare sources suggesting that one-off short-term exposure in an open room might be a risk. The situation where a smoker parent is breathing over a baby all night long is clearly quite different.

Realistically, as others have said, air pollution is a much more apparent threat. One study suggested that babies of non-smokers living in a polluted part of Scotland were only marginally better off than babies of smokers living in cleaner air.

"Lead scientist Dr Tom Clemens explained that his team’s findings showed that “a foetus with a non-smoking mother exposed to high pollution levels is only slightly better off than one with a smoking mother exposed to low levels of pollution”

www.euractiv.com/section/air-pollution/news/air-pollution-almost-as-bad-for-babies-as-smoking-during-pregnancy/

That's talking about parents who are actually smoking while pregnant, not just holding a baby for a few minutes.

Realistically, the risk to your baby from this is going to be too small to measure. As others have said, if you're really worried about minimising risks then perhaps moving to the countryside would be something for your family to consider. But let's hope the visitors don't ask to hold baby, so you don't have to worry. Good luck.

"I can't allow my baby to breathe in your smoke, so you can't hold her."

Idfwu - would you really say that? Really? Do you have any friends?
My goodness, there's some serious power-trip behaviour on this thread.
I am assuming this is a first baby. Is it the first time you feel you have some control over people?

I speak like that to my own parents. Poison yourselves all you like, I don't care. Not my baby however:

Well it must make you feel very important.

I'm not sure you can feel important by not wanting your baby to breathe in second hand smoke. Are you a smoker @katyppp? Or do you just smell like one?

Posted too soon.
It must also do wonder for your parent's relationships with their grandchild.
Seriously, it everyone completely devoid of common sense and risk assessment now?

I'd just be honest and say "I'd prefer you didn't hold her as I can smell smoke on you". It's their choice to smoke, just as it is yours not to poison your baby from it. You don't need to apologise for it.