Should pregnant women be banned from smoking in light of new research?

[hunkermunker]

See here

"Nine out of 10 mothers whose babies suffered cot death smoked during pregnancy, according to a scientific study to be published this week. The study, thought to be one of the most authoritative to date on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), says women who smoke during pregnancy are four times more likely than non-smokers to see their child fall victim to cot death."

Personally, I find it very, very hard to understand why anybody smokes while knowingly pregnant. And yes, I know it's addictive. I speak as an ex-smoker, not somebody who has no idea what it's like to have a love affair with the evil weed.

i thought they were talking about taxing junk food, weren't they? presumably after today's obesity is a worse problem than global warming story that will be back on the table?

Edam - I PERSONALLY thank you for smoking and for the input your fags are giving to the economy. (With the caveat that if you drop the butts on the ground you deserve to be filleted with a rusty biro).

I think pointy, that custy is taking something incredibly personally when she really neednt, and is directing her discontent at aitch.

It's diverting the thread somewhat.

Junk food SHOULD be taxed. If only we could have a definitive list of what was 'junk'.

So, all of you who are getting cross, can I ask.... have you seen this?

Could this be the explanation?

Gosh, I'm googling now for the page that says smoking during pregnancy causes nappy rash too!

is custy a smoker?

ye gods, custy. you're allowed to darkly say 'people have pointed out to me', though, so as to bolster your case? i've no idea what's goiing on here.

i don't have the CAT facility either, as it happens, so it looks like we won't be taking this off-board. i've just read all of my posts to you, there not a single so i could hardly be said to be over-using them, and yes i am finding you unnaccountably tetchy this evening, because Nothing that i've said warrants this sort of response from you.

i want to continue discussing this subject, however, because i find it interesting, so can we perhaps just draw this to a close and avoid each other from here on in?

I tend to take a bit of a Darwinian view of junk food. If you eat a lot of it, you'll die sooner, procreate less and eventually that Ronald Mc-bloody-Donald will be out of business.

I don't think you can legislate for humans making choices.

I do think you can teach kids nutrition and cooking and hope. Similarly you can choose the example you set to them regarding other bad habits you might have.

didnt smoke while pregnant agree that its a bad thing to do pissed off with the snobby stereotype being used

Message withdrawn

saintjude, the only thing i am taking personally is the way i which Aitch has negatively worded her posts towards me.

I rather think the overall argument is something we agree on - and i have said as much.

this subject isn't particuarly personal to me, i do think its wrong to smoke when pregnant

Dunno pointy, maybe. Dont especially care. It takes the emphasis of a rather important discussion in any case and shouldnt be diverted to be about one poster.

blazing...you are making me larf

Having skimmed this thread I am really surprised that nobody has commented on the corelation between poverty and smoking and the impact of this on SIDS rates - i.e. if you are a smoker you are more likely to be in a low-income group, if you are in a low-income group your diet, accomodation and life style are potentially less than healthy etc. etc.

I have tried to have a quick look at some of the original research but am (a) thinking about a 2nd bottle of wine and (b) head sore from lots of research earlier but in essence I think the real issue is if you have less money (and so smoke, eat shit food,live in shit housing, don't exercise, have crap/dangeroue/physical work) then your baby has a higher probability of suffering a SIDS outcome. You can't isolate these factors really.

As an aside banning pregnant woman from smoking is the thin end of the wedge - jesus do you really want to live in a society where that happens? Think of the impact on other freedoms - particularly for woman.

oh, I know the 192 bus, Doodle, think at some point it had an alluring effect on me too, luckily that was quite some time ago...

Cant say I've read it that way at all custy.

Seems you have taken responses to your posts as a personal attack when they havent been.

FWIW, I think you owe aitch an apology. I doubt she'll get it though. But as i just said, this all diverts away from the discussion at hand.

ok, fair point, jude.

To op, no.

Message withdrawn

In California, HIV testing is MANDATORY in pregnancy and very often bar staff will refuse to serve an obviously pregnant women alcohol. Now one might say that the former is sensible - the mother will get better care if it's known she is HIV positive. But this is the end result of legislating in these areas, it becomes oppressive.

Gomez, I did try to allude to this earlier but I'm a snob apparently (see how duly chastened I am )

I have been HIV tested in both my pregnancies. I think it is mandatory here too? If it isnt, I wonder why I was told to have the test, hmmm....

Fighty fighty, how dull.

Don't legislate - educate. That's all I have to say.

SSN - its like lots of the blood tests...you are ushered through for them, but in fact, you dont have to have them. You just arent told that.

Scandalous, they won't give you a pot to pee in at our maternity unit - you have to get one from your GP and reuse it (after washing) yet they'll give us ficking diagnostic tests without saying they are optional. Blimey! Thanks SaintJude, will be saying 'away with your pointy needles' next pregnancy!

I think it's possible that some people are getting a little bit confused. 9 of 10 cot death victims had parents who were smokers is not the same as 9 out of 10 smokers will lose their babies to cot death. If the latter were true the population of the western world would be a lot smaller.
THere's no dispute about the fact that smoking is bad for you (and the people who live with you and spend time with you) but the idea of asmoking ban for pregnant women is a very bad one for two big reasons. One is the treating of pregnant women as not quite human, but creatures to be policed and controlled (don't smoke, don't drink, don't work with potentially harmful chemicals, don't be exposed to traffic fumes or over-exert yourselves) which, should it be made a legal requirement, would very rapidly be extended to all women of fertile age... just in case. Don't forget the substantial number of pregnancies (possibly even the majority) are not expected, or not planned for: women get pregnant when they are not trying at all, or when they are sort of vaguely trying but not seriously - or due to rape, in some cases.

Also, it's quite convenient for an overstretched welfare system to blame cot death and children's health or behavioural problems on what their mothers did during pregnancy (despite evidence suggesting that at least in some cases there is a genetic componoent to cot death). 'We don't need more funding, it's the silly bitches' own fault, they dared to think of themselves as human beings rather than incubators'.

No I would have them, anything to keep baby safe, right?

For the wabbit