smoking in-laws and our three children

[cba]

ok, dh thinks i need to relax a little. Would like your honest opinions.

Ok, fil very good when he needs to smoke he will go to the kitchen in his house shut the door and smoke.

Mil says she will not be treat like a school girl and will do it wherever she wants.

Yesterday we were at her house and in her kitchen so she went to the living room to smoke, but then came in the kitchen opened the window and continued to smoke and lit another. The children were eating so couldnt take them to the living room as they dont eat in there.

dh thinks i need to relax and says the issue is more to do with me and her. She is very controlling and caused alot of probkems between me and dh. I do have an issue in forgetting what she has done, e.g. blaming me when dh had a two year affair and generally just causing trouble for me.

So, if you are were in this situation what would you do? I have had a massive row with dh as he says she might be trying to change and get involved a little more. I think after ten years of giving into her and trying to make her happy I have had enough and have reached breaking point.

What is the best thing I can do? Even on the rare time she comes to our house she moans about going outside for a cigarette.

moondog, yes afraid so. Have had a really bad time with her at times.

Just like to keep my distance with her now. Have tried really hard, most women would probably told her to fuck off well before now.

But i will be civil and kind for the sake of dh and the children. But, boy oh boy when our kids are teens and can start to see things for themselves then I feel i will probably blow.

You sound very dignified.

I wont tolerate ANYONE smoking near my children, never have. I absolultely will not budge on the issue!

My parents both smoked but knew that if they expected to still have a relationship with their grandchildren then they would have to smoke outside (even in their own homes)

Passive smoking is a huge health problem and you are right to have issues with it. I think that your DH should stop trying to associate this with a poor MIL/DIL relationship and instead concentrate purely on the facts.

Why is HE happy for his children to be exposed to passive smoking?

thank you moondog, my mil sees diginified as being boring and a school teacher which i get called often.

polly, i have said this to dh, why would he want his kids round smoke. He said he doesent agree with it but for the sake of 1 hour once a fortnight is it such a big deal. I have said yes, as i feel i cannot even have a say on what is good for our children and what is not because it dosent fit in with mil habits.

moondog, you dont know how lovely your words are at this time, feel quite low about the whole thing really. Thank you

Poor you.
It's so horrid to have unresolved tensions like this in your life. it is so mean and thoguhtless of her.

Sorry to disagree with some but I wouldn't call even infrequent exposure to smoke harmless. She choses to smoke, fair enough, I'd chose to not take my children there. Simple really. What comes first? Children or an adult's ego? She needs to grow up and if she sees them less because she refuses to stop snoking around them then it's her loss.

You are not being precious at all, second hand smoke kills and remember they are children with smaller lungs and so will feel the effects more than an adult. It's not worth the risk at all.

Also, it stinks and I woudln't want my children stinking of manky smoke.

DH's family all smoke and when we visited them over xmas they would go into a different room to smoke (kitchen), but with the doors being constantly opened and shut it was pointless. Couldn't escape to the car as had no heating in there, have vowed not to go back. Can't believe they're all still puffing away like chimneys when MIL died last year of lung cancer.

thanks moondog, yes it is not nice having such tensions. I have started to get really emotional about it.

I have explained fully to dh why it is such a big issue, and how unfair it is that a: i should not be able to say what is good and what is not good for the kids and b: mil can not make an effort, everything is on her terms and there is no compromise. I am not backing down anymore, I have even offered to buy a patio heater for when she comes here.

Jodie, i totally agree with you and thanks for saying i am not precious.

pixi, I had that six years ago and I never went back to mil for christmas until this christmas when she vowed she wouldnt smoke. But hold and behold she did what your in-laws did, never again.

Hear, hear, mankyscot, I second that. What a selfish, childish woman. (Here comes the authoritative Nigerian accent) Send her to me. I will give dis woman a hefty slap dat will knock some common sense into her little brain.

cbs, stick to your guns. If it is only half an hour once a fortnight then surely they can take it outside! They are trying to manipulate you (sorry)and as for your DH - well what can I say?

A 2 year affair? he should be bending over backwards to appease you. Just exactly when does he plan on acting responsibly and putting the needs of his wife and children first?

Passive smoking is harmful and no reasonable or sane adult would try to deny this. Your inlaws and dh clearly have other underlying issues but I think you should leave them to it aqnd step in on behalf of your children. You would be 100% justified in doing this.

Oh! and tell your dh that unless he gets his arse into gear and starts acting like a proper dad/husband then it wont just be the inlaws who only get to see the kids once a fortnight.

any more news cba?

hi everyone, no major news. I have told dh exactly how i feel and that smoking round the kids is non negotiable.

He agrees with me, so i have said to him it is up to him to sort it. If I say anything I am strange or being a school teacher.

Will wait and see, I am not visiting this weekend so will not be until next week.

Dont know whether to invite them here next week, only thing with that is she says she cannot commit to a time. But if i offer to cook then suddenly she can come any time I say!

Well done for dealing with it so well and getting a good result with your DH. Best of luck!

I'd rather be called a school teacher than behave like a nasty, selfish idiot. What's wrong with being a teacher anyway? Next time she says it, smile sweetly and say 'thank you, that's a HUGE compliment'.

Stick to your guns!! don't give up!!

I once read a report that said that if someone had a smoke outside and then came in and picked up a baby the oxygen sats in the baby would drop, and several cancer causing toxins could then be picked up in in the baby just from the adults breath and clothes.

Its more dangerous than people think. My friend was telling me a few months ago that her parents smoked when she was litle and it never did her any harm - she has bad asthma all her life and she has just had a cancer scare.

Its not a joking matter.

Just don't go round there - it sounds to me as though she is partly doing this because she feels inferior to you for being a school teacher, celebrate your intellegence and stay away!!

If she is willing to put your childrens health at risk how important is she really?

Good Luck.

I once read a report that said that if someone had a smoke outside and then came in and picked up a baby the oxygen sats in the baby would drop, and several cancer causing toxins could then be picked up in in the baby just from the adults breath and clothes.>>

If it were that bad all children of smokers would be dead in the first week. At one time just about everyone lived with at least one smoker so the human race would be extinct. Not to mention that it would be an arrestable offence.

By all means object to smoking - that's your right, but it's not bubonic plague.

Onager - You have obviously never seen anyone dye a long slow painful death from passive smoking.

Problems caused by passive smoking are well known and documented it just takes a long time for people to get sick and so people don't see the link between the 2 or prefer not to think about it.

The grandchildren of people who smoked in the 70's are now being born with cancers that were never seen before, the number of people who are diagnosed with cancer every week is going up and a large part of that has been caused by the simple cigarette. There are specific cancers seen in children who have passive smoked.

Everyone knows it will kill you eventually, they just don't think it will happen to them or theirs. Its simple, If you don't want to get burnt don't play with fire.

And by the way - if you smoke in the wrong place now you will get arrested. Because it is dangerous!!!!

What does it matter if I do object? I don't want to passive smoke and I don't want my children too either, but I can't walk out of the main doors at Asda without getting a faceful. The problem is that those who want to do it to themselves are inflicting it on other people too.

There is a simple cure now for the bubonic plague Onager and no such cure availiable for cancer.

I agree that I have never seen anyone die a long slow painful death from passive smoking.

Can you produce a death certificate with that on?

And "Everyone knows" that Reiki healing works. That little pyramids keep your razor blades sharp, talking to plants makes them flourish, holding colored stones cures arthritis, that mediums can talk to dead people, that black cats and the number 13 are unlucky, that there is a god that answers prayers and that 1/12th of the population will meet a tall dark stranger on thursday because they share the same sign.

Next time you walk out of Asda carry a stone in one hand, a mystic pyramid in the other and wear a crucifix. You will be fine.

If you believed most of the lies peddled about passive smoking we should have all died from it by now.

People believe what they want to and the anti smoking brigade, of which there are many nowadays, want to believe that passive smoking will kill themselves and their families, even though its obviously exaggerated.

If you don't like the smell which isn't that bad tbh then keep your children away from anyone who smokes.

Don't go to Asda if they allow smoking outside in fact don't go anywhere where smokers are forced to smoke outside.

I'm an ex smoker btw given up because I felt persecuted.

Onager I think you are heartless.

When a person dies from lung cancer of a type only seen in heavy smokers and yet has never smoked - just lived with a smoker?

You clearly feel very threatened by having your belief system challenged. Maybe you should just put your head back in the sand, and ignore scientific research - stick with your mumbo jumbo - maybe if you were to stick a cigarette in each ear and closed your eyes you would be less bothered by the truth.

Alternativley think of somewhere else to shove em!!

If anyone reads my last post I do apologies for the tone. In a bad mood today, not it's not nicotine withdrawal.

It's a dilemma for everyone this smoking lark, there is no live and let live on it. In some ways I wish the government would just ban in and stop taking the hugh tax revenue then people could buy it black market and cheaper and smoke it in the privacy of there own homes. It might help to dehook them of what is an addiction.

kitkatqueen, I see you've now gone back to talking about people who live with smokers. Are you giving up then on the proposition that you pass a smoker in the street and 'catch it'?

Examine someone who has lived with a smoking partner for 30 years and I'll bet you find some of the chemicals in their lungs. I've never claimed that smoking was good for you.

However the notion that passing a smoker gives you cancer is just one of those things that gets posted and repeated. Next week someone will use your post as their proof.

There is disinformation on both sides of course. The tobacco companies spend a fortune on research. Research on passive smoking is rewarding these days since whatever you report someone will buy it.

Some of it is misunderstanding though. You read in your paper that 10,000 people died from smoking over x number of years and that's awful. You turn the page and find 10,000 people died from obesity and another 10,000 people died from heart disease. What you may not realise is that they are usually the same 10,000 people.

It's the way they measure things. If they said 'contributed to' that would be a bit clearer.

It's more deceptive than that really since they don't mean 10,000 specific people. They mean they worked the number out on paper. So if 1000 die in an earthquake it won't mean they will deduct those from the number who would have died from heart disease.

The scientists are not lying (mostly), but you get to hear a reporters understanding of the subject and "10,000 die" fits on the page better anyway.

"the grandchildren of people who smoked in the 70's are now being born with cancers that were never seen before" Really? Doubt that very much and doubt even if new cancers were emerging it would have anything to do with smoking. The cigarette was not invented in 1970, you know.

The health risks of smoking are well-established, you don't need to make stuff up to 'prove' your case.