Pregnant pause for reflection
Wednesday, June 23, 2010 The Daily Mail has been in touch for a quote. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) is suggesting that midwives ask pregnant women to take a breath test to check whether or not they've been smoking. The story will appear in tomorrow's paper.
This was my response:
"People need to be educated not coerced and this seems unnecessarily intrusive.
"No-one likes being lectured and it could encourage pregnant women to reach for their fags in defiance.
"We encourage pregnant women to take their GP's advice on matters such as smoking and drinking, but we wouldn't condemn anyone who refused a breath test in these circumstances.
"I'm sure there are plenty of people who will be telling midwives to mind their own business. NICE should butt out too."
As it happens, breath tests on smokers are nothing new. They first came to our attention several years ago when a Radio 4 programme revealed that some American companies breathalyse their staff when they arrive at work - not to see if they have been drinking but to check whether they have been smoking on their way to work.
And I'm sure that there have been reports of women in some US states being apprehended for smoking whilst pregnant. (Or did I dream it?)
PS. It's 18:50 and I have just sat down to write a short speech for tomorrow night's Free Society debate on "Hyper-regulation and the Bully State". I don't know about you, but I reckon this is a pretty good example of the bully state in action.
Simon Clark
The Sunday Mirror ran this report at the weekend: Smoking tests for pregnant women. Same story, clearly.
Simon Clark
The Mail has the story, including my quote, HERE.
Reader Comments (19)
I remember a pregnant woman being refused service of an alcoholic drink in Hove and asked to leave the pub - see link.
Have we now got to the stage where people are not enjoy the courtesy of simply being asked ? A breath test implies that people are not to be trusted if asked, that smokers, in fact, are liars (although in comparison to the charge of murder of non-smokers, it's a small accusation). I suspect that the test is designed to simply humiliate the smoker (who might as well have "Kick Me" tattooed on the forehead) - we expect no more these days. The midwives, though, will have to deal with the outrage of non-smokers who are unaccustomed to being treated with contempt.
And what does NICE suggest should happen if the test proves positive? Will the pregnant smoker be threatened with denial of antenatal treatment? Made to stand in the naughty corner with her crime published on a sign? Thrown into the stocks beside a bucket of rotting fruit?
I really, really feel like jacking in the towel. This feels like the war that we just won't win - we lose every battle and they just keep coming.
Just make sure they have gargled some whiskey before the appointment, surely mask any fag breath eh?
What do NICE suggest midwives do if pregnant women have been smoking? Do they have any "punishment" in mind? An ash-tray at the side of the delivery table would be extremely helpful, as it was the first thing I needed after I'd given birth!
Isn't there already a shortage of midwives and aren't they already over-stretched in their roles?
How NICE can get this onto the front pages of the media demonstrates which organisations/quangos/companies actually run this country.
This suggestion is beyond belief and shows NICE up for who and what they actually are.
I well understand Joyce’s despair. It seems that every day there is a fresh attack on smokers (and drinkers, and fat people) from every side.
But we should not despair, Joyce. We must always bear in mind that the more necessary it is for the powers-that-be to build the edifice of anti-smoking higher and higher, the less substantial the foundations become. Put simply, if the argument against smoking was so conclusive, there would be no need for all this agro.
The fact that they (ASH, CRUK, BHF, RCP and now NICE), orchestrated by the DoH, have to keep going on and on and on about the matter shows that they are failing. Just one little push could cause the whole edifice to collapse. However, at the moment, we seek in vain for that which will provide the push. It is my opinion that the truth about the prevalence of lung and heart disease in the 1970s, 80s and 90s will turn out to have resulted from the foul atmospheric conditions in the 1940s, 50s and 60s (prior to the Clean Air Acts of the 1960s), but that is only my own personal belief.
I took the opportunity to click onto the lead that Simon provided re the ‘smoking and pregnancy’ article in the Mirror. Oddly enough, this article was dated 20th June – three days ago. It is odd that it seems to have gained no traction at all elsewhere. In fact, I noticed that there was only one comment. I have just tried to post a comment, but I am getting a permanent message, “Please wait while we add your comment”. Clearly, comments on the article are closed, but I do not know why they do not just say so – perhaps the Mirror simply do not give a shit – which is to be expected. (Just checked again – same thing – closed it – what a waste of my time!).
What is important is that people are becoming more and more inured against all this scaremongering. The antis have to raise their game and find even sillier reasons to perpetuate their existence.
I applaud Simon for his reticence. I note that there is an implicit argument in his statements for individual freedom – even when kids are involved. “Parents should rightly decide what is good for their children” kind of statements. Simon is threading his way through the minefield of public opinion very skilfully.
But the same thing has happened in relation to the DT report re “40,000 unnecessary deaths…” Again, my attempt to comment was not getting through (within hours, on this occasion). But other comments were getting through both for and against. Very weird. I have asked the DT to investigate. I am sure that I am doing nothing wrong. We shall have to wait and see what the DT says.
Joyce. Be grateful! The more improbable the things they whinge about, the more likely it is that they will get their ‘comeuppance’!
I am slightly heartened by the fact that the Daily Mail did actually ask Forest for a quote - and not run NICE's press release unquestionably.
I wouldn't worry too much about this latest initiative by NICE, as Junican says, the original article was dated 20th June; in other words, it was a stock article, which they had hanging around for when there was no other news worthy of a front page job.
We all know what the Daily Mail is like, even though I admit to be a regular reader (it's like bashing one's self over the head with a hammer on a daily basis...so nice when you stop!) I suppose they could have made up a front page about our "magnificent" win over Slopineka, or was that Slovenia (didn't our millionaire boys do well, can't wait to fall asleep again when they play Germany).
Or they could have made up a front page about tennis, but all we have to do to find out those results is ask the inhabitants of the nearest old people's home, so something to do with the real villains of our time, i.e. the smokers, was most definitely on the cards.
I read the article out to my wife as she was getting ready for work this morning, and was alarmed when she suddenly started laughing. "What the hell are you laughing at?" I asked her. It seems that she took more of it in than I had done, for she pointed out the discrepancies in the figures mentioned, i.e. "NICE points out that around one third of women smoke while pregnant". This is strange, she said, as we are always being told that the smoking ban is so successful that less than one fifth of the population now smoke. Remember that figure! Because the article then goes on to say "Nearly half of all children in the UK are exposed to tobacco smoke at home"
So here we have one fifth, one third, and one half. It's take your pick time ladies and gentlemen....if you guess the right number you win five woodbines.
NICE by the way, was set up by guess who? Yes, you got it, jolly old New Labour, as yet another of their dodgy quangos, but, and I have this on very good authority, the Conservatives are starting to dismantle them. It is very difficult to do this in one fell swoop, as what is left of the disastrous mess that was once Labour, would cause uproar and announce that the Tories were the uncaring party who put business before health (something that Labour did all the time they were in office).
But, be aware NICE's days are numbered.
Actually, you've all got it wrong.
Pregnant women, you see, are Very Stupid, and given to Bouts of Forgetfulness.
Something to do with 'hormones' (which you get when you're having a baby).
The reason for the test, therefore, is simply to help them remember whether they smoke or not.
It's very considerate of NICE, I think - as you'd expect from the acronym - and you lot shouldn't be so mean about the lovely, caring people who staff it.
Any more, and I'll tell Andrew.
Honest.............................
TY for your reassuring and soothing thoughts, Peter and Junican - the sun is shining and I've reverted to my calm, serene self (Ommmmm, Ommmm) - until I read the next piece of sh*t!
Actually, just had a gratifying few minutes hearing a midwife laying into someone from NICE (who, like our Debs, sounded oh so reasonable and caring while justifying this nonsense) - and even the Beeb put it to him that, if the midwives reject NICE's advice, then the reasonable thing to do is drop the idea. Needless to say he disagreed because, although NICE's job is just to recommend, like all "The Righteous" it demands that its recommendations are accepted and implemented.
You see what I mean, Joyce? Besides upsetting smokers in general, they are now upsetting midwifes and pregnant women.
It is just more hysteria. As Peter T said, there are multiple non-sequiturs in their release. Just notice how NICE's "Just trying to help" becomes the DoH's "Smoking in pregnancy is a major public health concern..." I would have thought that even a DoH spokesperson would realise that what an individual pregnant woman does is an entirely private matter and not a public matter at all.
Let us just hope that our leaders are reading this crap and preparing to take the obvious steps to relieve the nation of these financial burdens.
Junican -
Re:
"even a DoH spokesperson would realise that what an individual pregnant woman does is an entirely private matter and not a public matter at all. "
That's the point, of course.
Nowadays, Government thinks that EVERYTHING is a 'matter of public concern' - which makes EVERYTHING a 'matter of governmental concern'.
And whilst people - in their socialist-indoctrinated way - KEEP whining about governmental inaction in the face of EVERY problem, from minor mishap to major tragedy, then so long will Big Government Incorporated - together with all its tax-gobbling subsidiaries - thrive and prosper and grow.
And grow, and grow, and grow.
In medical terms, t's the ONLY cancer that no-one seems interested in finding a cure for.
Perhaps the condition is now too far advanced, anyway............................
And yet, to be realistic (but I hope not despairing, Joyce) I have to recognise that in my part of middle England to criticise the effect of the smoking ban on pubs is met with embarrassed silence at best, a faux pas which it is best that no-one notices. There are, I suspect, people who also dislike the total ban but who prefer to adopt a discreet silence. If any kind of discussion does happen it quickly becomes a row. Friendships and families are threatened. So there is a tacit agreement to avoid it. To call for fair play for smokers and non smokers is to be immediately labelled as 'pro-smoking' and the essentially moral issue - choice - is lost in an orgy of judgmentalism.
How right you are, Norman. I find that any criticism of the ban is met with an expression of bemused incredulity. After the clanger has been dropped the silence speaks volumes.
I'm afraid that - for now - the only way to get the Petit Bourgeois wing of the Middle Classes off our backs is by inventing a New Sin.
It has to be pleasurable, obviously, but easily castigated for being 'bad' for you in some sense.
Just bad enough to make its avoidance an absolute guarantee of one's continuing tenancy on the Moral High Ground (sheep being especially well-adapted to hilly terrain).
Something akin to not going to church on Sundays, having sex outside of marriage, going out with a Coloured Person, wearing The Wrong Tie etc etc.
But what shall it be ?
Time for some creative thinking....................................
@ Martin V
I do not disagree with what you say, but I am not sure that you (we) are seeing the whole thing.
I have recently read a lot of posts elsewhere about pregnant women smoking. Honestly, the vituperate comments emmenating from 'righteous' nurses, doctors, and other women observers, etc, is untrue! I just get the feeling that the condemnation of pregnant women smoking is not coming from the 'middle classes' but is coming from the 'lower' classes - by that I mean, those people, regardless of 'class', who can only think in emotional terms. One particular comment that I saw was provided by a woman who had had two miscarriages. She was ABSOLUTLY DISGUSTED
what button did I press then? Whatever, to continue........
.........absolutely disgusted that a heavily pregnant woman was smoking. Of course, it never occurred to her that the fag that she was smoking may have been the only fag that she smoked that day.
Class, in the sense of working, middle and upper, is irrelevant. What is important is the 'class' (regardless of wealth and education) who can only think emotionally. This 'class' probably comprises 90% of the population.
We really need to reassess the whole concept of 'class'. It would not be difficult, in a simplistic sense in the first place, to divide the population into 'emotional thinkers' and 'intellectual thinkers'. Of course, THE PEOPLE (the inhabitants of this country) will vary in the way that their minds work.
It seems to me that politicians appeal to those people who can only think emotionally, and that that is the reason that they 'get away' with so many stupid initiatives. Not enough people think intellectually,but, OH MY GOD!, even if there were enough people, they would be shouted down my the emoters!
Joyce! I am in despair! Help!
We'll just have to soldier on Junican and hope that the recession, with the cut backs and less money to come, will put manners on this 'class' of individual, who lost the run of themselves during the free money era and whose emotional illiteracy made them believe they were worth it.
Maybe a bit of economic pressure will put fags back in gobs again when they realise their emotional counsellors are not so readily accessible as before and the fag will become a cheaper and quicker option to the politically correct route!
Junican - my advice is go and have a nice lie down or sit in the sunshine with something alcoholic and a soothing ciggie/cigar/pipe (delete as appropriate)....
Ponder the wise words "What goes around, comes around" and drift into a lovely fantasy involving Debs, Martin, Sheila, Liam, Stanton et al being exposed and booed by smokers as they leave their offices for the last time, this being broadcast around the world. Imagine them having to walk through the wisps of SHS from the thousand cigarettes without being able to hand flap and cough with any credibility. Imagine on the back of their exposure the Prime Minister announcing in the HOC that the ban is repealed forthwith: it was based on a lie, and an unreserved apology made to the smokers of the UK with heartfelt thanks for their contribution to the economy of the country, this also being broadcast around the world. Imagine, as punishment, Debs etc having to go round the country cleaning off the signs from every public place with their itinerary being announced on every local news bulletin. Imagine the publicans getting the ashtrays from the back of the cupboard and welcoming smokers and their friends back into their pubs with a free drink to celebrate. Imagine the zealots sitting next door in their sterile neo-pubs, nursing their mineral water, listening with pursed lips to the laughter coming from the smokers' pub and congratulating themselves that, since they don't have to wash their hair when they get home, they'll have time to whisk round with an anti-bacterial wipe...
Imagine trains re-introducing smoking carriages, with air-conditioning, in which smokers travel quietly, only the occasional remark diverting them from gazing serenely out of the window, reading or the crossword - a little oasis of calm amidst the non-smoking carriages full of whining children, loud mobile conversations
about sales figures and men called Gary tapping feverishly on their laptops.
Imagine (well, you get the picture).........
Junican -
I was, of course, using rather a broad brush when referring to The Middle Class.
It's a crude term at the best of times.
But - or so it seems to me - it's among such people that the latest INTELLECTUAL fashion tends to take root first (even if the majority of those adopting it tend not to have very refined 'intellects' themselves).
But I agree with your more pertinent distinction between the Feelers and the Thinkers - a distinction I believe Jung once made.
And, no matter which 'class' you're considering, I've no doubt as to which category the majority belongs to.
By a long, long way.
This provides an Ace-in-the-hand for the more unscrupulous among Society's movers and shakers.
And will forever do so until we have a PROPER system of education (ie something which involves rather more than memorising somebody else's bullet points).
This causes problems for those of us who are both Passionate (eg about Liberty) AND Questioning (eg about the reasons for destroying it).
It is in this sense that Fashion is both our most irresistible enemy and our most potent ally.
Which way will it go now ?