Disturbing

[velvetpage]

http://www.alternet.org/story/39075/?cID=157565#c157565

This is an article about an attempt to make smoking illegal - but only if you happen to be pregnant.

My first response was that this made sense. Then I thought about a few things, like the nature of addiction, the lack of access to health care in general and addiction recovery programs in particular, and the general demonization of moms-to-be who may end up avoiding prenatal care as a result. Call me a socialist, but wouldn't they be better off making anti-addiction programs and decent prenatal care available to help women become good moms, rather than criminalizing their risky but legal behaviours?

Comments

[michellinator.livejournal.com]

I'd be happy if they made ALL smoking illegal. But, I feel the need to point out that damage to an unborn child can also be caused by the father's smoking or consuming alcohol or drugs around the time of conception. I'll send the link next time I run across it... it's not very well-publicized... no money to be made in knocking the boys onto the wagon, too, I guess.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

I didn't know that - I thought the danger was that they wouldn't be able to father a child at all, not that they'd cause birth defects.

[michellinator.livejournal.com]

I think the last time I ran across it, I was researching FAS. I was surprised, too, but the sperm brings half the genetic code to the party. It makes sense: damaged code or code-carriers = damaged kid.

The circulatory problems that come with smoking would make it harder to conceive... but I find it convenient that the lawmakers are still ignoring the effect of second-hand smoke, even on pregnant women. If a woman is going to be fined for bringing tobacco smoke and tar into her pregnant body, then anyone else forcing it in, with or without her consent, is also guilty.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

The thing with the sperm is that, generally, it takes an undamaged specimen to get to the point where fertilisation usually occurs. Smoking wouldn't change the actual genetic code so much as the health of the sperm. I would find it more logical that smoking = lower sperm count = male infertility.

And seeing as how neither of us has any real specialised knowledge here, I suppose we'll have to wait for more information. :)