Why are women allowed to smoke while pregnant?

Stab*City wrote: »

I actually think there are campaigns out there already.

Still irrelevant to why women are treated like free people even when pregnant though.

What a very fulsome way you chose to show you did not understand my post. Or, indeed, your own. Bless. How much did your mother drink and smoke before you were born? I'm guessing a LOT.

volchitsa wrote: »

Eh no, it's not the same thing at all.

In the context of my post, what is so different, so as to say that "it's not the same thing at all" ? Both adults are choosing to smoke and both are deliberately and knowing causing harm to another human by choosing to smoke. The only difference is that one is inside a womb.

Why would this only apply to smoking by the way? It's about far more than smoking, everything the pregnant woman does affects her unborn baby's development.

The OP asked about pregnant women smoking. That's why we are talking about it.

One who eats a poor diet is harming her baby as much as one who smokes - so should she be forced to eat more fresh fruit and vegetables, and of course dairy products, and if so, why don't we just give these things to poor pregnant women to ensure they can do this easily, rather than just blaming them for not managing it?

Food is a basic human need. Cigarettes are not. Going further into this would just be a mine field. The ultimate decision is down to the woman. She can either eat healthily for herself and her unborn child, or she can choose not to.

bingbong500 wrote: »

Did you not see the post I was replying to? The tone and content were worse in that, so why am I the one singled out and HE isn't mentioned at all?
Almost as if there were some kind of bias....

Quite a difference between a play on a username and nasty comments about a persons mother. Any tone taken from my post is your own perception, but none the less, I extend my sincerest apologies for your misunderstanding of my posts and will make every effort in the future to provide greater clarity on what I write.

volchitsa wrote: »

No, one person is choosing to blow smoke into someone else's face, completely unnecessarily. It is a completely separate and voluntary action from that person smoking.

The other person, the pregnant woman, is merely continuing to do what she did when not pregnant, ie, smoke. She may want desperately to stop and just not be able. The fact that this also affects her fetus is completely involuntary, she cannot smoke without this happening. Unlike the guy who blows smoke into someone's face.

Actually, both people are choosing to harm another human being with an unnecessary and destructive habit. It is facetious to write off the pregnant womans behaviour as simply something that she continues to do what she did when not pregnant.

While it may be difficult to stop smoking in general, it is easier to stop smoking when pregnant. I have worked extensively with addictions and can attest to this. There is nothing involuntary about smoking. Habit, routine and addiction have a role here, but make no mistake....every single cigarette is a voluntary choice. If anyone says otherwise, they are only codding you, or themselves.

You are avoiding the point. Everything a pregnant woman does affects her unborn child. The fact that the OP chose to ask about just one of them doesn't automatically make all other aspects irrelevant to the discussion.

Food is of course a necessity, but we could easily ban particular foods without needing leaving the woman in danger of starving! So why shouldn't we ban women from eating blue cheese or McDonalds burgers?

Lots of sports can be dangerous to the pregnant woman too, but we don't ban them from cycling or horse riding or even martial arts. We allow them to make up their own minds. And those are a lot easier to give up than smoking which is an addiction.

If I was avoiding the point, I would have ignored it entirely. I simply did not want to get into an endless debate about legality and bodily rights which I am not adequately informed of.

What I will say is that there should be a balance. Everything of danger should be considered and weighed up within reason.

Food is, as you admit, a necessity. It would take up a whole thread to debate the good and bad of certain foods. One day, eggs are great...the next, they are carcinogenic. Take things further and we should move pregnant women to a rural part of the country where there is no pollution and only allow them to eat from a meal plan put together by a nutritionist. Balance is a better approach.

Exercise and hobbies are necessities for a healthy body and a healthy mind. Taking extra precautions is a better approach than cutting out either. It would not be healthy to restrict a pregnant woman from carrying out reasonable tasks, like driving, or hiking. I would however not be keen on the idea of a pregnant woman taking part in a motor rally, or scaling Mount Everest for example.

Smoking is just a disgusting habit and is harmful not only to the pregnant woman, but also the unborn child. There are no benefits to smoking and it's a wilful choice every person can make. I also hold a dim view on people who smoke in the home with children, or any other person for that matter.

I've tried to answer your points. Hopefully they help you to understand my view on the subject.

volchitsa wrote: »

But the problem is that this (in bold) is the essential difference between pregnancy and any other human action or condition you might wish to compare it with.

There simply is no other human state which is directly comparable. In many ways pregnancy is closer to a human life support machine. That's why I said your blowing smoke comparison was wrong - because it ignores this. If that is because you are insufficiently informed on that, then it just means that your opinion on pregnancy is not a fully-informed one.

As for each cigarette being a choice, so is each injection of heroin, but so what? That doesn't actually make it any easier for the addict to stop, it's just a way of saying that it is possible to stop. Not that it is easy. Some women will fail, even in pregnancy. Making smoking illegal for them is unlikely to help IMO.

I was talking about food/nutrition, so the part you bolded was done so out of a misunderstanding of my post. This is exactly why I did not want to get into a food debate, or about other substances. It muddies the waters. Seafood (especially shell-fish) being a great example. Some doctors insist it's dangerous for pregnant women, while others say it's very healthy.

Whether being a pregnant woman, or a person smoking around a child (or blowing smoke directly at said child), it IS a choice the smoker makes for themselves which affects others. I mentioned already that I have worked with addictions. Smoking cigarettes and shooting heroin are apples and oranges. Compare the withdrawal symptoms and intensity and you'll see why it's not even in the same ball park. That said, would you be OK with a pregnant woman shooting heroin into her body? Her choice, right?

I also never suggested making smoking illegal. I just gave my view on the topic, not the legality.