Smokers banned from fostering

[Peikko 1,575]

We all know smoking is bad for you. We all know smoking is bad for others (second-hand smoke). If you are fostering, presumably you are putting the needs of a child before your own, therefore quitting in order to foster shouldn't be an issue. Most people quit during pregnancy for the sake of the child, why not do so for the sake of fostering?

If smoking is that important, then don't foster.

Now, that being said, it's discrimination plain and simple. There are too many unsafe and despicable foster homes already, so I say focus on fixing the foster care system and worry about smokers after you get the abusers, the alcoholics, and those who foster for the wrong reasons out of there.

But still....if you want to foster that badly, and you can't stop smoking long enough to do so, then you have greater issues, IMHO.

And yeah, I used to be a smoker. Deal with it.

ETA: I was also a foster child when I was 4 and 5.

There is nothing wrong with 'discriminating' against bad parenting traits and habits when it comes to fostering and adoption.

ITA, but let's also fix the problems already in existence in the foster care system.

Do we know that in the case cited in the OP's article that they haven't?

I know if I was a smoker my initial reaction would be 'how dare they'. However, on closer inspection one has to say that most carers would in fact say "You know what? That's a good idea. I need to stop - it's wrong to smoke when I am fostering children - that's just the incentive I need".

No one can monitor a person 100% of the time and so long as this ensures that the home of the foster child is smoke free, everyone wins, no?

[IAMX 3,055]

We all know smoking is bad for you. We all know smoking is bad for others (second-hand smoke). If you are fostering, presumably you are putting the needs of a child before your own, therefore quitting in order to foster shouldn't be an issue. Most people quit during pregnancy for the sake of the child, why not do so for the sake of fostering?

If smoking is that important, then don't foster.

Now, that being said, it's discrimination plain and simple. There are too many unsafe and despicable foster homes already, so I say focus on fixing the foster care system and worry about smokers after you get the abusers, the alcoholics, and those who foster for the wrong reasons out of there.

But still....if you want to foster that badly, and you can't stop smoking long enough to do so, then you have greater issues, IMHO.

And yeah, I used to be a smoker. Deal with it.

ETA: I was also a foster child when I was 4 and 5.

There is nothing wrong with 'discriminating' against bad parenting traits and habits when it comes to fostering and adoption.

ITA, but let's also fix the problems already in existence in the foster care system.

Do we know that in the case cited in the OP's article that they haven't?

I know if I was a smoker my initial reaction would be 'how dare they'. However, on closer inspection one has to say that most carers would in fact say "You know what? That's a good idea. I need to stop - it's wrong to smoke when I am fostering children - that's just the incentive I need".

No one can monitor a person 100% of the time and so long as this ensures that the home of the foster child is smoke free, everyone wins, no?

Might be some inspection similar to welfare, short announcement or none, to see if the environment looks safe. A bunch of cigarette butts and ash trays lying around might arouse some suspicion. Hell, half of my family, in their house, even if they hid it, you only need to take a stick and hit the couch with it to see all kinds of smoke come out.

[sj5 4]

They should focus how to protect children from molesters. I think, smoking its okay as long they don't smoke around children.

Personally, I don't smoke and I don't have plan to adopt children.

[Peikko 1,575]

We all know smoking is bad for you. We all know smoking is bad for others (second-hand smoke). If you are fostering, presumably you are putting the needs of a child before your own, therefore quitting in order to foster shouldn't be an issue. Most people quit during pregnancy for the sake of the child, why not do so for the sake of fostering?

If smoking is that important, then don't foster.

Now, that being said, it's discrimination plain and simple. There are too many unsafe and despicable foster homes already, so I say focus on fixing the foster care system and worry about smokers after you get the abusers, the alcoholics, and those who foster for the wrong reasons out of there.

But still....if you want to foster that badly, and you can't stop smoking long enough to do so, then you have greater issues, IMHO.

And yeah, I used to be a smoker. Deal with it.

ETA: I was also a foster child when I was 4 and 5.

There is nothing wrong with 'discriminating' against bad parenting traits and habits when it comes to fostering and adoption.

ITA, but let's also fix the problems already in existence in the foster care system.

Do we know that in the case cited in the OP's article that they haven't?

I know if I was a smoker my initial reaction would be 'how dare they'. However, on closer inspection one has to say that most carers would in fact say "You know what? That's a good idea. I need to stop - it's wrong to smoke when I am fostering children - that's just the incentive I need".

No one can monitor a person 100% of the time and so long as this ensures that the home of the foster child is smoke free, everyone wins, no?

Might be some inspection similar to welfare, short announcement or none, to see if the environment looks safe. A bunch of cigarette butts and ash trays lying around might arouse some suspicion. Hell, half of my family, in their house, even if they hid it, you only need to take a stick and hit the couch with it to see all kinds of smoke come out.

It just seems to me like the aim of the idea is spot on. A child's environment should be as healthy as possible and as a proxy parent it is their job to look out for preventable hazards. Second hand smoking is fair game in my book.

I am sure the UK social services are well aware of the dangers of 'molesters' I am quite sure they are not sat around thinking up stupid schemes simply to sweep the problems of abuse under the carpet. Sheesh, talk about idiotic.

Edited November 10, 2008 by Madame Cleo

[IAMX 3,055]

It just seems to me like the aim of the idea is spot on. A child's environment should be as healthy as possible and as a proxy parent it is their job to look out for preventable hazards. Second hand smoking is fair game in my book.

I dunno. I'm actually not really decided on the issue. I grew up in a clearly smoking environment, and all it ended up doing was making me educated, and also hate the ####. But there are other cases of clear unhealthiness, as it occasionally caused asthma-like symptoms in me, amongst several other things. I mean, with what people know today about smoking, if they still feel a need to smoke all around their kid, they probably need that cigarette jammed down their throat.

[Marilyn. 340]

even if you smoke outside you still carry some of that smoke on you.. it seeps into your clothes etc.. I know, I live with a smoker

tell him to smoke naked.

he might get funny looks at work then

[S and S 12]

I feel sad smoking is their top agenda. I really do. My brother was in the system for awhile. I was lucky that some people I babysat for one summer took me in when I was left on the streets one winter with no where to go. My brother on the other hand didn't have that advantage. They shipped him around to different shelters until the time limit ran out on each one. They wouldn't even let me see my brother for Christmas when I tried while he was in one shelter. No one would take in a 14 year old boy at that time so eventually they ran out of options. They sent my brother to Juvenile Hall as that was all that was left to put him in. While he was there he got raped by his roomate. Personally, I would rather he had been in a smokers home, but that is just me. Perhaps you all would prefer what did happen to him.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I think SandS and jundp make excellent points --- they KNOW what it is like to be swept away and taken care off by a system that cares more about perpetuating itself than about the wholeness of children.

And this whole "oh dear mother of god let's lynch smokers and take their imagined or real children away" is absolute cr@p. Like jundp said: let's fix the already broken system before focusing on less important issues like whether foster dad smokes. Give me a fvcking break. And it has nothing to do with me and the redhead smoking people - it has to do with what really matters in a child's life: and I sustain that healthy foods, a clean house, good education, clean clothes, love, music and reading and all things artsy, active lifestyle, etc; are way more important than this #######.

But then again, I know I would be way a better parent and role model than a (don't read if you are faint of heart) 300 pound foster mom that snacks on Cheetos and thinks Budweiser is part of the major food groups --- who reads the National Enquirer as newsworthy and thinks Stormfront is a good source for news; who gets hubby his joints (which he prudently smokes outside, god forbid little Foster Johhny sees him smoking dope), but is very careful to keep the "E" under lock and key; who thinks Kool-Aid has indeed vitamins + minerals; who lives off the system while Foster Johnny is being beaten up at school cuz the b1tch forgot to get him new sneakers and the ones he has he has had for 5 years. Someone who thinks family time is spending 5 hours in front of the tube and who thinks learning to play the violin, learning Italian, play chess, run hoops, watch National Geographic is a waster of time for her foster kids ---they are enough trouble already.

I would be a much better mother than her -- smoking or not. And it is people like that who should be banned from not only fostering, but breeding. I think this whole discussion is bullsh1t. If you are a good parent, good for you and for your kids. I mean that. If you are not, improve. The children deserve that.

Peace out y'all.

[Danno 1,228]

If these rules were honest about protecting a childs health, they would worry more about his/her weight than if someone is smoking out on the porch.

I and most people I know smoked at one time and quit, rarely does a fat kid do anything but get fatter. A whole host of health problems await overweight people.

I wonder how many people posting about smoking have a chubby kid?

You better get off your high-horse and face the certain health problems your kid will deal with and thats on you.

I would much rather my kid smoke than be over weight. (much greater odds of him stopping smoking than slimming down).

If there were an over abundance of homes for these kids, than I would agree... we could be more picky about trivial issues and place them in the best possible environment, but thats clearly not the case.

This is like allowing a kid to down because the life boat does not the proper child-seat.

*also the child of a chain-smoker with no health problems, my brother competed with world class long distance runners.

[JVKn'CVO 11]

Existing smokers will be told of the new policy and given help to quit.

The Fostering Network, a charity which represents groups involved in fostering, said it believed no child under five should be placed with carers who smoked.

Is it for all ages, or only for children under 5?

Seems controversial...but fair. Specially for young children.

Saludos,

Caro

[Peikko 1,575]

A lot of silly assumptions are made about the original article - the most glaring that a 'no smoking' policy is being promoted at the EXPENSE of all other sensible rules and precautions. There is no suggestion that fat, beer swilling, feckless parents are fostering while nice, quiet, clean smoking parents are being denied. How silly.

The more likely scenario is that many caring foster parents are quite willing to quit smoking in order to continue to provide even better conditions for their charges. It's a real shame that some people are looking at this from a denial of personal rights rather than an improvement in the conditions that foster children are placed in. Yes, it can be hard to be 'told' what to do - but then again I am sure there are many rules that foster parents have to follow in order to provide acceptable conditions. It's really just a matter of how one approaches this question. I am sure not one person who is upset about the idea of being 'denied' the right to smoke, is actually suggesting that a child should live in a smokey environment.

Oh well, never mind...

[Jenn! 918]

Well, the article did state that there is a shortfall of 10,000 caregivers. And I also don't believe that anyone is suggesting that it is in any way ideal for a child, especially one under five, to be in a smoky environment. But the article fails to go into what the alternative is.

[Amby 490]

Let's just ban smoking all together

[Peikko 1,575]

I just don't believe that anyone who is really keen on being a foster parent is going to get particularly upset by this requirement. I am sure that they will be told that the aim of the idea is to ensure that there is no smoking in the home that the foster child is living in as apposed to some draconian requirement that foster parents must take a 'smoking' test to ensure that they don't sneak out and have a ** in the park. I can't really see how they could actually ensure that an 'occaisional' smoker didn't smoke outside the home.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I just don't believe that anyone who is really keen on being a foster parent is going to get particularly upset by this requirement. I am sure that they will be told that the aim of the idea is to ensure that there is no smoking in the home that the foster child is living in as apposed to some draconian requirement that foster parents must take a 'smoking' test to ensure that they don't sneak out and have a ** in the park. I can't really see how they could actually ensure that an 'occaisional' smoker didn't smoke outside the home.

well you know them cameras they got everywhere...........