Maintain pressure on reforms to protect NHSRCP calls for ban on smoking in cars
The chairman of the Royal College of Physicians has said he would recommend a ban on smoking in cars after they found links between second-hand smoking outside the home and childhood illness.
The report, published by the RCP, shows that around 22,000 cases of asthma and wheezing in young children occur every year in the UK due to the effects of passive smoking, in addition to 20,000 chest infections, 120,000 cases of middle ear disease and 200 cases of meningitis.
The RCP said passive smoking also leads to the death of 40 babies from sudden death syndrome (SIDs) - around 20% of all SIDs deaths.
As a result, the group has called for a ban on drivers smoking in their vehicles to be introduced.
Professor John Britton, chairman of the RCP’s tobacco advisory group, said legislation to ban smoking in the home would be unenforceable so instead views of “what is acceptable” had to be changed to protect the two million children who live in homes which allow smoking.
But a total ban on smoking in cars and vans would be easier to police than the current situation, which expects enforcement officers to differentiate between business and private vehicles, he said.
“We would recommend a ban on smoking in all vehicles,” he said.
Prof Britton said even drivers who never had child passengers should get out of their cars before lighting up for reasons of road safety.
Current smoke-free legislation is due for review this year and Prof Britton said it was an opportunity to “close remaining gaps”.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Online training units, written and reviewed by experts. Earn two hours' CPD and a personalised certificate for your portfolio.
Subscribers get five FREE learning units and non-subscribers can access each learning unit for £10 + VAT.
Share
Readers' comments (15)
Anonymous | 24-Mar-2010 2:06 pm
I smoke, have never smoked with my children in the car, I have never had an accident or a near miss while having a smoke in my car. You don't hear in the news of fatal road accidents where the driver caused the accident because he/she was smoking. I am sorry but there are far more dangerous activities that people do in cars that cause accidents, the powers that be haven't stopped people from using mobile phones while driving. You see ladies putting on makeup while driving, you see kids not strapped in and climbing over the parcel shelf. This smacks of yet another nanny state demand. I appreciate that there are some smokers who do smoke with their children in their car, but I am fed up of being told when and where I can have a ciggie.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 24-Mar-2010 2:43 pm
About time too. I am amazed this hasn't been put forward before now. It might be seen as a nanny state thing to do but sadly selfish people need to be nannied. They are just children who haven't grown up I'm afraid so need the same handling. Anything that hampers the health against the will of another shouldn't be allowed. Passive smoking comes into that category. My daughter and I witnessed a serious RTA caused by the male driver lighting up. Him and his faultless partner ended up trapped in their upside down vechicle. A split seconds distraction can cost lives so it is no excuse to point the finger at other reasons for accidents. Take responsibility for your own. Any deterent for risky activities has got to be a good thing. Besides, smokers are costing the health service millions by doing something they know is a serious health risk to themselves and others. No win situation human rights or not. Oh, and I'm not sorry for my opinion.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Thomas Laprade | 24-Mar-2010 2:44 pm
Parents know best
I'm afraid that the proposal to ban smoking in cars occupied by children represents an
unwarranted intrusion into the privacy and autonomy of parenthood. The autonomy to
make one's own decision about risks to subject a child to is not to be interfered with lightly.
It should only be done in cases where there is a substantial threat of severe harm
to the child. Interfering with parental autonomy in a case where there is only minor
risk involved is unwarranted.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 24-Mar-2010 5:45 pm
Anonymous 12:43, do you not turn your car radio down/up or change the channel? perhaps we should ban car radios too, at least people would hear ambulances coming then I guess. all I am saying is that if I don't have others in the car, by having a smoke I am not putting anyone at any more risk than if I took my eye off the road for a moment to change radio channel. I am not trivialising I work in the ED and am only too aware of what can happen from RTC's but I think there are far more dangerous causes of accidents. You are right each and everyone of us needs to take responsibility for our own failings, I guess we are not all perfect.
Unsuitable or offensive?
mike | 24-Mar-2010 7:18 pm
About bloody time! But it doesn't go far enough. In my opinion they should call for an all out ban. Simply make it illegal to sell them, buy them or smoke them.
I remember being subjected to cigarette smoke in the car and in my home as a child by selfish parents and their friends who lit up without a thought or a care for anyone else. It DID affect my health, I developed asthma and still suffer from recurrent chest infections now. It is a disgusting, horrible and selfish habit and those idiots who continue to smoke should be either criminalised by making them illegal, or refused treatment on the NHS for a self inflicted illness.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 24-Mar-2010 8:46 pm
Of course trying to light a cigarette when you are moving is dangerous. The danger of smoking when driving is debatable when you see the other distractions such as tuning the radio or eating a sandwich. I agree that smoking when children are present is wrong but I see no need to get out of the car to smoke if you are parked up and no one else is in the car.
Why a blanket ban and not just a ban on smoking when children are present?
As for the connection between smoking in the car and asthma I would need to see the evidence of the studies as I cannot take anything the anti-smoking lobby say at face value any more.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 25-Mar-2010 3:18 pm
Car - very small confined space - proven passive smoking research - not rocket science. Thomas with respect if all parents knew best: 1. there would be no need for social services intervention and 2. smokers are killing themselves so why would we automatically expect them to be responsible with their children's health on this issue? To imply that smoking in a car with children is a 'minor risk' is irresponsible.
Unsuitable or offensive?
mike | 25-Mar-2010 3:50 pm
Anonymous | 24-Mar-2010 8:46 pm
1. There is a whole load of clinical evidence showing the damage smoking does to you.
2. There is a whole load of clinical evidence showing the damage PASSIVE smoking does to you.
If you breath in cigarette smoke, regardless of what idiot is holding the cigarette, it will damage you, like the person above me said it is not rocket science to try and figure this out is it?
3. For smoking in the car, read smoking in ANY CONFINED SPACE!!!!!!!!!!!!
4. There is no reason other than the sheer greed of the government and the tobacco companies that this disgusting, selfish and irresponsible habit should not have a blanket ban and be made illegal now.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 26-Mar-2010 10:58 am
Mike - nice to see you agree with me on something after all. I'm the one duelling with you on the sexualising of nurses post. That's if you are the same Mike of course!!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
mike | 29-Mar-2010 5:50 pm
That is me anonymous, and yes some things we can agree on! I hope this doesn't stop any future debates though I was enjoying that! haha!
Seriously though I think this is one of the extremely few areas where I find it impossible to respect the opinions of those on the other side of this argument.
Smoking is a disgusting, selfish habit and should be made illegal.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 30-Mar-2010 1:21 am
Somehow I dont think making smoking completely illegal is going to work - it doesnt work for heroin, cocaine, and countless other drugs. Plus of course the government make a lot of money from the tax on tobacco, whether or not it covers the cost of smoking related disease is another debate.
That said, I dont see why someone cant smoke in their own car, if there are no children in there. Maybe if it was illegal to smoke while driving and while there are kids in the car. That way the only damage would be to the person smoking. We all have the right to make bad decisions.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 30-Mar-2010 5:38 pm
i think smoking with children in the car should be banned completley however to make a total ban is an infringement of peoples rights - kill their own bodies but leave other peoples alone.
i think the debate of cost of disease and whether we should treat people with self inflicted injury/disease is a very deep and ethical one - i am a non-smoker and i totally believe we should should be treating everyone equally and fairly - and supporting them if they wish to continue smoking - its personal choice. if people are educated they know the risk let them do it but not to other people or their kids - not fair
Unsuitable or offensive?
mike | 30-Mar-2010 6:39 pm
Anonymous | 30-Mar-2010 1:21 am and Anonymous | 30-Mar-2010 5:38 pm, there are a few points I would like to take issue with if I may?
First of all, you say that a total ban is an infringement of peoples rights - kill their own bodies but leave other peoples alone. This is a ridiculous fallicy, smokers do not leave other peoples bodies alone, that is the point. What about other peoples 'rights' to clean air? To walk through a town centre without some selfish idiot walking in front and blowing cigarette smoke in our faces, or to walk through doorways of public buildings without having to subject ourselves to a cloud of disgusting and lethal cigarette smoke every time?
Second, you dont think that making smoking completely illegal is going to work - it doesnt work for heroin, cocaine, and countless other drugs. Now on this issue you do have a point, it hasn't worked completely. But by making tobacco illegal and making it illegal to sell or buy it, then it may drastically reduce the numbers of people who smoke. It will also send out the message that it is a disgusting, unwanted habit in society and those who indulge will be ostracised and criminalised. Now I agree there may be people who continue to smoke, just as there are those who continue to take drugs. Persoanlly I think we should start removing the safety net of the NHS for long term abusers. If they want to kill themselves, fine. Why should we spend billions of pounds and countless amounts of energy bringing them back every time?
Finally, you say the government make a lot of money from the tax on tobacco, whether or not it covers the cost of smoking related disease is another debate.
You are right, they do make a hell of a lot of money, but greed is no excuse for allowing this to continue. And the money they do make in no way covers the expense of smoking related diseases.
Unsuitable or offensive?
P. Damien | 31-Mar-2010 1:02 pm
ban smoking? Are you mad?
They'll never ban smoking or for that matter alcohol. The taxes gained from these are enormous. And go some considerable way to funding the NHS!
Without smoking the NHS just wouldn't be the same.
A ban on smoking in cars is quite frankly ridiculous and discriminatory. What about banning eating in cars or drinking in cars or listening to music in cars.
To say being subjected to the odd puff of cigarette smoke on the street is lethal is ludicrous!
Unsuitable or offensive?
mike | 1-Apr-2010 5:20 am
P.Damian, like I said, yes they do get a lot of taxes from tobacco, but greed and money alone should never be an excuse to continue to allow this disgusting drug to be sold legally. AND I WILL REPEAT TO ALL THOSE BLINDED BY YOUR CLOUDS OF SMOKE, THE TOBACCO TAX DOES NOT FUND THE NHS, YOUR SELFISH IRRESPONSIBLE HABIT COSTS FAR FAR FAR MORE THAN IT WILL EVER PUT IN!!!!!!!!
But you are right, without smoking the NHS wouldn't be the same, we would have a lot less patients with COPD, lung disease, cancers, etc etc etc etc.
And I'm glad you think banning smoking is discriminatory, it should be. It is about time we did discriminate against the selfish, inconsiderate smokers out there!
And finally, it isn't just the odd puff on the street is it? It is constantly over a long period of time. Ever heard of cumulative effects? And how would you like it if I poured my can of Coke over your head as I passed you in the street? Or threw my half eaten sandwich in your face? You wouldn't? Then don't blow your smoke anywhere you please!!! At least those things wouldn't have any long lasting and serious health risks.
Unsuitable or offensive?