Should smokers be allowed to adopt or foster kids?

[Jabberwocky]

Good job you didn't cut it, Smoking stops your blood coagulating properly. Did you know that?

 

A perfect reason for people with blood clots to smoke then!

[DragonofAna]

Good job you didn't cut it, Smoking stops your blood coagulating properly. Did you know that?

 

Never had any problems with my blood doing that. Must be cos I smoke less than 100 a day or something.

[rubydazzler]

A perfect reason for people with blood clots to smoke then!

I think I just made it up actually

[DragonofAna]

I think I just made it up actually

 

Damn! That's another excuse for a quick smoke gone down the toilet.

 

Plus - you had all these people googling it who were going to ask you for references to prove it.

 

Such a disappointment all round Rubydazzler.

[rubydazzler]

Damn! That's another excuse for a quick smoke gone down the toilet. Plus - you had all these people googling it who were going to ask you for references to prove it. Such a disappointment all round Rubydazzler.

So sowwy! It's the devil in me makes me say these things, I'm not to blame.

 

You know there are subliminal messages in all my posts, don't you? Telling you to pack it in ...

[GothicCharm]

Far to simplistic.

 

If you smoke then your children are more likely to become smokers.

If you drink then I'm not aware of any evidence that your children are more likely to be problem drinkers (drinking in moderation is actually good for you, unlike smoking).

 

Driving is promoting pollution? You've lost me there.

Drug use (illegal drug use) would already disqualify you from fostering. And a link between medicine and drug abuse I'm pretty sure is you just making things up.

 

Studies can show the link between parental smoking and the likelihood of children smoking, you can't just make things up about medical treatment and drug abuse and expect to use that to support an argument.

 

Cyclone, I wasnt refering to illegal drug use it doesnt say that in my post. You can misuse prescription drugs, how is driving not promoting polution? If you drive you know for a fact that you are poluting the atmosphere in which case you can hardly blame smokers for doing it when you contribute to it.

 

How many alcoholics can you say never ever saw their parents have a drink?

 

Just because parents smoke it doesnt mean their kids will.

 

As for numbers, well, people have a funny way of picking the ones that help their point whilst pretending the others aren't there.

 

I'm just saying if its one rule for one why not for them all. Go the whole hog and say unless you're tetotal you can't have any kids.

[Cyclone]

The standard line by smokers about pollution is regarding driving and pollution. It's a complete red herring though unless you are addicted to driving and pop out for a drive several times a day with no other purpose to achieve. Of course this doesn't happen and driving is a means of transport that is a necessity for most people. It's causing pollution, which is not the same as promoting pollution (your words), and the fact that multiple sources of pollution exist doesn't mean that you can't tackle one of them first.

 

Studies show that the children of smokers are more likely to smoke themselves. More likely is key to that sentence.

 

Being teetotal is less healthy than drinking in moderation, why would you 'go the whole hog' and set a rule that selected less healthy people. Better to say that the rule would be that fosters drink in moderation, but then being TT or drinking in moderation are both fine, neither are likely to harm a child.

 

And if you weren't referring to illegal drug use then you were indeed just making stuff up.

[Cyclone]

What? A who in a what?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

 

One of these, where you present two options and try to force someone to say which is preferable, when in the real world those are not related or not the only two options.

 

Well, which is it, kill all the babies or unleash nuclear war?

[DragonofAna]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

 

One of these, where you present two options and try to force someone to say which is preferable, when in the real world those are not related or not the only two options.

 

Well, which is it, kill all the babies or unleash nuclear war?

 

As usual - talking garbage aint ya.

I bet there are more than 50 families out there who want to adopt but cannot because one or both parents smoke. Therefore what I said is relevant.

You just cannot admit it because then it would make your arguement look bad.

 

I would imagine that the people who want to kill all babies or release nuclear war are very very few, and that question has no relevance to the topic unless you are suggesting that these people wish to adopt.

[funkymiss]

The couples I know who are trying to adopt would do or give up anything to achieve it. You would need to give up smoking if you were pregnant so why would you not expect to have to do this to adopt or foster?