# Cannot bedshare if Dad is a smoker?



## MariaSangria (Aug 19, 2009)

I was just reading in McKenna's "Sleeping with Your Baby" book that you should not bedshare with your infant if one parent is a smoker, no matter where they do so, but it doesn't say why. My partner smokes but only outside, never in the house. I do not smoke.

I can't imagine not bedsharing with our baby ... we've already ordered our king size bed! Does anyone know why one parent being a smoker poses a greater risk, if no one is actually smoking around the baby? I would encourage DP to wash hands, etc., and not smoke right before bedtime.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Wow. That's tough. I would have a lot of doubts about bedsharing with a smoker if it could be avoided, at least for the first few months (up to 4 months SIDS is at the greatest risk). But then, I did not buy a king-sized bed! Not that it's the money- it's the level of commitment you've put into it I'm referring to.

Here are my issues (and I say this as someone who gave birth in a home where a smoker lived- she "only" smoked outside, wore a smoking jacket, and washed her hands and brushed her teeth, but I still felt bad- she was my mom, though, and DH is military, so what could I do???):

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/he...h/03smoke.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/CancerP...6586810&page=2

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1229105037.htm

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ird-hand-smoke

I would say, show these to your husband. Let him know that he needs to take a full shower, wash his hair, brush and floss, and keep his nails clipped. Baby should sleep on your side of the bed. Make sure you change the sheets often and if he ever takes a nap there without showering, change them.

I am sorry. My husband quit smoking (it's been two years, bless his soul) after ten years of smoking, for our kids. I'm so proud of him. He used "The Easy Way to Stop Smoking". Maybe your DH could at least try- it's only a book, and basically self-re-programming. It's cheap, it's fast, and if it doesn't work, he's lost $7 or something. Less than a pack of cigarrettes.


----------



## MLA (May 22, 2008)

Cigarette residue increases the risk for SIDS -- so the advice below is good.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EdnaMarie* 
Let him know that he needs to take a full shower, wash his hair, brush and floss, and keep his nails clipped. Baby should sleep on your side of the bed. Make sure you change the sheets often and if he ever takes a nap there without showering, change them.

I wouldn't co-sleep w/a smoker unless he was absolutely clean before getting into bed every time. If he couldn't guarantee that, I'd not cosleep.


----------



## Bokonon (Aug 29, 2009)

I agree with the PPs, and even after the SIDS risk has passed, the residue from dad's clothes, hair, etc. can get into baby's lungs and cause respiratory issues.


----------



## SubliminalDarkness (Sep 9, 2009)

I agree with others. It's not safe. And I, personally, wouldn't be comfortable with a smoker regularly holding my child, either.


----------



## nummies (Jun 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SubliminalDarkness* 
I agree with others. It's not safe. And I, personally, wouldn't be comfortable with a smoker regularly holding my child, either.

I have to agree. I remember back when DS was small, I did NOT want my FIL holding him because he is a smoker and it grossed me out to think about all that residue getting near my sweet, fresh newborn. I would not want him sleeping near a smoker.


----------



## plunky (Aug 23, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MariaSangria* 
I was just reading in McKenna's "Sleeping with Your Baby" book that you should not bedshare with your infant if one parent is a smoker, no matter where they do so, but it doesn't say why. My partner smokes but only outside, never in the house. I do not smoke.

I can't imagine not bedsharing with our baby ... we've already ordered our king size bed! Does anyone know why one parent being a smoker poses a greater risk, if no one is actually smoking around the baby? I would encourage DP to wash hands, etc., and not smoke right before bedtime.

Ridiculous, IMO. Smoking is harmful, perhaps there are toxins involved like previous posters alluded to, but it is ridiculous to cut Daddy out because of "third hand smoke" residue. I'd like to see a comparison between third hand smoke and living in and breathing the air someplace like LA or Detroit.

I am not a smoker, but the demonization of smokers is out of hand.


----------



## nummies (Jun 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *plunky* 
Ridiculous, IMO. Smoking is harmful, perhaps there are toxins involved like previous posters alluded to, but it is ridiculous to cut Daddy out because of "third hand smoke" residue. I'd like to see a comparison between third hand smoke and living in and breathing the air someplace like LA or Detroit.

I am not a smoker, but the demonization of smokers is out of hand.

I don't think anyone is demonizing smokers. But I do think that the research shows that sleeping with a smoker increases the risks for SIDS. I just won't take that risk.

Of course I would want daddy to be involved, holding, etc. But sleeping with him would not be happening.


----------



## plunky (Aug 23, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nummies* 
I don't think anyone is demonizing smokers. But I do think that the research shows that sleeping with a smoker increases the risks for SIDS. I just won't take that risk.

Of course I would want daddy to be involved, holding, etc. But sleeping with him would not be happening.

I disagree. They've studied it, so they "know" that smoking is worse than not smoking. What about other factors like what city you live in? Whether Dad drank a beer with dinner? Whether Mom drank a beer with dinner? Whether Dad or Mom is obese and might roll over on the baby? Maybe there should be a study that shows whether Dads can have a certain BMI to safely co-sleep.

At some point this kind of stuff gets ridiculous. And worrying about whether Dad smoked outside and then took a shower before bed is over that line. The scenario is never going to be ideal for every night you co-sleep.


----------



## vegemamato (Jul 4, 2007)

Maybe I'm a weirdo, but I'd be much more worried about the chemicals in the mattress and pollution than I would be about third-hand smoking.

That doesn't mean that you shouldn't be concerned but I do agree that some of the pp are going overboard, especially about limiting dad's contact.

My opinion is that he should wash hands, possibly shower, and that baby should sleep on your side (though I _usually_ recommend that- since mom is typically more aware and less likely to roll onto the little one...not that dad can't be aware too







).


----------



## SubliminalDarkness (Sep 9, 2009)

IMO, it's not just a SIDS risk, but a health risk for the baby otherwise. Third hand smoke still contains carcinogens, and I would not want my child exposed to those.
There may be dangers in the air around us as well, but why would I want to compound that problem with third-hand smoke?

I am not saying that the father should be cut out of the picture. I AM saying that the father(or mother, or whoever) has the option to not smoke and therefore not endanger the health of the child in that way.


----------



## mommy2two babes (Feb 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nummies* 
I don't think anyone is demonizing smokers. But I do think that the research shows that sleeping with a smoker increases the risks for SIDS. I just won't take that risk.

Of course I would want daddy to be involved, holding, etc. But sleeping with him would not be happening.

Wow.

I just wanted to play devils advocate here and say that there has also been research to say that if you give your baby a soother than it decreases the risk of sids. This is something that many of us would not do.

I wouldn't not sleep with my baby becasue one or both parents smoke although I would do my best to clean up before joining a baby in bed.
They don't really know what causes sids other than things that seem to decrease the risk. ( which many would argue would be baby sleeping in crib with no soft andything on thier backs)

As a PP said there are other things to worry about than 3rd hand smoke.
Everyone in My family and DH's family smokes. I cannot imagine singling them out of our childrens lives as long as they are not smoking around the kids.
The way many speak of this the Dad in the OP should never hold his baby either because he is a smoker







ridiculous!


----------



## LemonPie (Sep 18, 2006)

I sat in a live conference session that McKenna presented (LLLI in Chicago) and he reiterated the advice that smokers should not co-sleep. It's been a couple of years, but I seem to recall he said that smokers exhale carbon monoxide, even when they aren't actively smoking and that is why it's suggested that you don't co-sleep.


----------



## nummies (Jun 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommy2two babes* 
Wow.

I just wanted to play devils advocate here and say that there has also been research to say that if you give your baby a soother than it decreases the risk of sids. This is something that many of us would not do.

I wouldn't not sleep with my baby becasue one or both parents smoke although I would do my best to clean up before joining a baby in bed.
They don't really know what causes sids other than things that seem to decrease the risk. ( which many would argue would be baby sleeping in crib with no soft andything on thier backs)

As a PP said there are other things to worry about than 3rd hand smoke.
Everyone in My family and DH's family smokes. I cannot imagine singling them out of our childrens lives as long as they are not smoking around the kids.
The way many speak of this the Dad in the OP should never hold his baby either because he is a smoker







ridiculous!

Not sure why you said "Wow." But ok.

Look, I am not going to argue the point. If you want to smoke or have your partner smoke and sleep with your baby then go for it. I am just saying for me and our family that if my husband was a smoker, he would not be sleeping in bed with us, period. (I also would probably gag from just smelling him). Not co-sleeping with our son will not damage their bond in any way.


----------



## ghostlykisses (Sep 27, 2007)

Hmmm never heard that one. My husband is a smoker and we co-slept with our son. He slept on my side of the bed because I was nervous my husband (a big guy) might roll on him but smoke resdue never crossed my mind.

My son is 6 and has a nice healthy respritory system. If you have a delicate child or respritory problems run in the family I guess you might worry more about this than I would. I think it is probably more dangerous to step outside into the polluted air of most cities or towns than it is to co-sleep with a smoker who might not have properly sanitized himself before bed!


----------



## SubliminalDarkness (Sep 9, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ghostlykisses* 
Hmmm never heard that one. My husband is a smoker and we co-slept with our son. He slept on my side of the bed because I was nervous my husband (a big guy) might roll on him but smoke resdue never crossed my mind.

My son is 6 and has a nice healthy respritory system. If you have a delicate child or respritory problems run in the family I guess you might worry more about this than I would. I think it is probably more dangerous to step outside into the polluted air of most cities or towns than it is to co-sleep with a smoker who might not have properly sanitized himself before bed!

But why add to that?

Also, lots of adults who were exposed to second hand smoke as children didn't have immediate health problems, but did later down the line. I think it's premature to say there was NO harm done by your son cosleeping with your husband, or for that matter, being in close contact with him. You don't know yet.


----------



## grumpybear (Oct 5, 2006)

I guess I get tired of the "well, there are far larger things than 'x' to be worrying about"

If that were the case, then why should we even bother spending more for organic, healthy food? I'm sure there are far larger things to worry about.

Why stop smoking when the air is so polluted anyway? Why not give vaccines when the water is polluted anyway? Why bother escorting your child to the bus stop when your child can be grabbed by someone else elsewhere? Of course there will always be far larger things to be worrying about.

It's a very asinine argument.

We try to minimize risks as much as we can, where we can. Smoking is something that is so within one's control. Yes, the air is polluted anyway, do we want to add smoking to the pollution of our lungs?


----------



## Natsuki (May 4, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *plunky* 
Whether Dad or Mom is obese and might roll over on the baby? Maybe there should be a study that shows whether Dads can have a certain BMI to safely co-sleep.

Actually they have studied that and I believe in McKenna's book he talks about the fact that people who are classified as 'obese' have a higher rate of infant death while cosleeping due to their size.


----------



## mandica (May 14, 2009)

My DH is a bit of a closet smoker. He knows I dont like smoking so I think he just smokes a few times on breaks at work. I haven't seen him with a cigerette or a cigerette pack in months and months.

We will be cosleeping our baby due in March. Though I will mention it to him, in hopes of it being the right push for him to be ready to quit, I will not be kicking him out of our family bed. I think the benefits of having us all sleeping together as a family out weight the risks involved. I am interested in the breathing out carbon monoxide as a PP heard, and will do some googling.

Its a very sensitive issue for me as I grew up in a very serious 'NO SMOKING' house. My MIL smokes and I am not looking forward to the feelings I'll have when she visits, and will not have her babysit because of it. (well, and becasue they eat crappy food/watch a lot of tv/etc.

For the OP - I would just cosleep your baby on your side, let DH have his own blanket and pillow and do a lot of laundry. Though showering may not always happen, handwashing and teethbrushing seems a must to me.


----------



## Rico'sAlice (Mar 19, 2006)

I thought that (part) of the reason not to cosleep with a smoker was that they had different sleep patterns which made overlay (rolling onto baby) more of a risk. Like with people with sleep apnea and such.


----------



## plunky (Aug 23, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *grumpybear* 
I guess I get tired of the "well, there are far larger things than 'x' to be worrying about"

If that were the case, then why should we even bother spending more for organic, healthy food? I'm sure there are far larger things to worry about.

Why stop smoking when the air is so polluted anyway? Why not give vaccines when the water is polluted anyway? Why bother escorting your child to the bus stop when your child can be grabbed by someone else elsewhere? Of course there will always be far larger things to be worrying about.

It's a very asinine argument.

We try to minimize risks as much as we can, where we can. Smoking is something that is so within one's control. Yes, the air is polluted anyway, do we want to add smoking to the pollution of our lungs?

Thanks for rephrasing my argument and calling it asinine. I'm not saying there are other things to worry about more. What I'm saying is that the cost of worrying about this (giving a Dad grief and acting like he's a danger to his family) is very high, and it is roughly equivalent to many other "dangers" that no one cares about or overlooks.

Posters saying that they hate smokers and don't let smokers handle their children are essentially ignoring the OP, who apparently knew that her DP smoked pre-baby. Your personal issues with smoking are not relevant.


----------



## SubliminalDarkness (Sep 9, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *plunky* 
Posters saying that they hate smokers and don't let smokers handle their children are essentially ignoring the OP, who apparently knew that her DP smoked pre-baby. Your personal issues with smoking are not relevant.

My DH and I were both smokers. I quit when I got pregnant, and DH quit shortly thereafter. I do not hate smokers. I sympathize. And frankly, in some ways, I miss smoking, even now.
So it's not a "personal issue" with smoking. The smoking becomes a risk to the child in this situation. Therefore, the father shouldn't be removed from the relationship, but smoking should.


----------



## honey-lilac (Jun 30, 2009)

I think there is a difference between bed-sharing with a smoker and, say, letting a baby sit in a smoky room. I refused to take my kids in to see MIL who was a chain smoker, even if she didn't light up in our presence - her apartment reeked of smoke, and it was definitely everywhere. In contrast, DH smokes (he keeps quitting but then starts up again, so it's a sore subject for me) and I felt comfortable enough sleeping in the same bed as him with our babies. It's not like I was going to kick him out of our bed to sleep on the floor. (Like that would have worked, anyway?) He did smell like smoke sometimes (OK, a lot) which was icky, but I just made sure to wash his clothes every day and changed the sheets often. He didn't smoke in the apartment and although clearly a non smoker could pick up the smell of cigarette smoke on him, it was night and day between our apartment and his mom's.


----------



## honey-lilac (Jun 30, 2009)

FWIW, I agree that it's illogical to say to your partner (who you presumably knew smoked before you got pregnant) to say he can't hold his own child unless he stops smoking.


----------



## *Erin* (Mar 18, 2002)

so wouldnt the risks of NOT bedsharing outweigh any risks of bedsharing with a smoker? come on...
dad isnt smoking while he is in the bed, right? i really don't see that it's an issue. my dh and i are smoke free now but both smoked and bedshared with my dd when she was wee, we washed up after smoking, and wore clean bedclothes...

as fas as it goes, i would say it's like any other thing. read the research and decide what youre comfortable with and just do it. no matter what you do, there will ALWAYS be someone around to tell you it's the wrong thing and you need to do it another (their) way...

i would not worry about it.


----------



## mommy2two babes (Feb 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nummies* 
Not sure why you said "Wow." But ok.

Look, I am not going to argue the point. If you want to smoke or have your partner smoke and sleep with your baby then go for it. I am just saying for me and our family that if my husband was a smoker, he would not be sleeping in bed with us, period. (I also would probably gag from just smelling him). Not co-sleeping with our son will not damage their bond in any way.

My Wow was at the directed at those who said they don't even want smokers holding thier babies. I would certinly not have my kids in a home where smoking takes place but to not allow say a grandparent who is smoking outside, washing thier hands changing clothes ect is a bit much at least for me. You would maybe gag from the smell but the OP obviously knew her DH was a smoker and was asking about the safety of co-sleeping not the icky smell of a smoker.
To each thier own I suppose but for me the relationships are more important than the possible risks of 3rd hand smoke.


----------



## SubliminalDarkness (Sep 9, 2009)

I don't think people are grasping that it's not a 'smell' I'm balking at. It's carcinogens and toxins, and things that could literally, actually cause harm. I don't feed my kid organic apples to avoid the icky taste of pesticides, I do it so as not to expose their bodies to harmful chemicals.


----------



## rhiandmoi (Apr 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tiger Lily* 
I sat in a live conference session that McKenna presented (LLLI in Chicago) and he reiterated the advice that smokers should not co-sleep. It's been a couple of years, but I seem to recall he said that smokers exhale carbon monoxide, even when they aren't actively smoking and that is why it's suggested that you don't co-sleep.

Also, smokers excrete nicotine in their sweat. And smokers also have a much higher incidence of sleep disorders (another contraindication for co-sleeping).


----------



## honey-lilac (Jun 30, 2009)

I don't think anyone's assuming that we shouldn't smoke around babies because they smell icky to little babies delicate senses. The whole smell obviously includes toxins, carcinogens, etc.


----------



## ssh (Aug 12, 2007)

Smokers exhale toxins during their sleep. My DH smoked occasionally up until our DD was almost 3. When she was born he smoked 3 to 5 cigarettes a week and by the time he quit it was less than one a month. We still co-slept. When DD was small she slept between me and the wall. By the time she was sleeping in the middle DH was having less than one a week.

I guess how much your DH smokes would determine if I'd suggest co-sleeping or not. My DH was trying to quit and just couldn't do it all at once. Sleeping alone in a crib is probably more dangerous than sleeping with a lite or even a moderate smoker.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kaleanani* 
FWIW, I agree that it's illogical to say to your partner (who you presumably knew smoked before you got pregnant) to say he can't hold his own child unless he stops smoking.

Well, I let smokers hold my kids. They wash their hands, brush their teeth, then they can hold the baby. It's not my preference. But they have rights, too, because the baby is not "mine". She belongs to all of us.

That said, I do not think that point holds. Plenty of women get pregnant and might, say, be in a very bad situation health-wise, with a partner that is contributing, and stop for the sake of the baby. Let's say, she's in a house where people are smoking crack or her partner worked at a chemical factory. She learns how harmful this is to tiny people and asks her partner to make big changes. That's not illogical. It's not illogical to change for the better!

OP, the baby could sleep between you and a rail.


----------



## MariaSangria (Aug 19, 2009)

I'm the OP for this thread. I have found much of this information upsetting, but I'm still very thankful for everyone's input. I will have to strike a balance between keeping as toxin-free an environment as I can for our LO, and having a close, bonded relationship among the three of us -- something that I believe is vital to the baby's health (and ours). It would be extremely difficult not to sleep together; we don't have the beds or the space to do so, and I think it might put a real strain on our relationship. I will keep Baby on my side and DP will need to be as clean as possible (I don't think having him shower every night before bed will happen, but we'll see). I will try to change the sheets often and I will also probably invest in some kind of air cleaner to keep in the bedroom -- I welcome any recommendations here. My partner will certainly hold and cuddle our child during the daytime. FWIW, he has tried to quit before, multiple times, and I have seen the painful struggle. He wants to be a non-smoker (and I would love it, of course!), but it is a very powerful addiction. He intends to quit. I don't feel it would be fair (or realistic) to demand that he quit now, at this extremely stressful time when we are preparing for the baby and then adjusting to being new parents. Naturally I want to be the best mother possible, and provide the healthiest environment for my child that I can, but there's only so much I can control. I wish DP didn't smoke, but he does, and we have a baby coming, and we'll do our best for him or her.


----------



## Sailor (Jun 13, 2006)

I didn't read this whole thread, just the first post by the OP.

I wouldn't co-sleep with a smoker. I'm usually not one who pays attention to what I classify as "minor" risks ... but, it's a little baby, newly born into the world. The last thing I would want to do is expose that baby to smoke residue - residue that comes from what can be, very accurately, described as a cancer stick. There is carcinogens in that residue. Exposing my newborn baby to that, especially at a time when he/she is sleeping, is not something I'd personally be willing to do.

We got an organic wool futon mattress for a reason - we think sleep is one of the most important restorative periods for humans (child or adult), and breathing in chemicals can't be good.

So, yea, if my dp were a smoker, he'd be enjoying the guest bedroom unless he could quit.


----------



## bjorker (Jul 25, 2005)

I will say this... I certainly don't condone it, but I know quite a few people that have done it.

MariaSangria, you sound like a thoughtful and caring person, and I think your plan sounds very reasonable.


----------



## laurelg (Nov 27, 2007)

For what it's worth, my dad was a smoker for 53ish years before quitting cold turkey. He'd gone through years of gums, patches, pills and programs. It finally took literally being shocked by his pacemaker (nope, the first heart attack or round of tachycardia didn't do it) to come to his senses. He realized he wanted to live to watch his grandchildren grow up. He hasn't smoked a single cigarette since.

I would not co-sleep with a smoker, and anyone who has smoked has to shower and change clothes before being around DD. It's not worth the possible health risk to accommodate someone's lifestyle choice/addiction, to us.

OP, rather than give your husband a "pass" for smoking through this difficult time, I would encourage you to encourage _him_ to look at the birth as a new beginning and to take it as an opportunity to spare his child the exposure to chemicals and the poor example. Maybe he, like my dad, will have finally found the catalyst he needs. Good luck!


----------



## j10k (Dec 11, 2008)

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/...hemtrails.html

"Third hand smoke" is not science. In fact the whole Pediatrics study was based on a *phone poll* of people where they asked them if they knew about the dangers of "third hand smoke" AFAIK there have been no studies! (Please correct me if I'm wrong)

I'm not a smoker nor is any of my family, but I do believe that this is junk science at it's worst.

I let smokers go near my baby. Yes I do. And I am not afraid.  (I also let people who smell bad or wear too much perfume near my baby.) We burn incense in our house occasionally. Babies have grown up around fire / smoke for thousands of years. Smoke damages lungs, yes. I'm not certain of the smell of smoke or it's residue is something to really worry about. I will change my mind if solid research proves otherwise.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

The pediatrics study about behavior may be junk, but the knowledge we have about residue and chemicals that remain on a smoker after smoking is based on scientific research, not on a phone poll.

OP, it sounds reasonable. My own husband didn't quit until he both had the information AND our daughter was born.

Your DH may have a hard job but showering isn't that bad, is it? I really think that would be much better, at least if he did it for the first four months when the risk of SIDS is the worst. I mean... you're going to be up two or three times a night (at least!) to nurse the baby. The least he could do is shower, you know?

As a former smoker who bears no ill-will towards smokers, the daughter of a woman who's quit over 20 times and now has gone two weeks without a smoke (one day at a time, mom!







) and the wife of someone who smoked for ten years and then quit cold-turkey, I fully well know that your husband will quit when he's ready.

But life will never, ever be ready for him to quit. When he quits, it will have to be internal, and then nothing will mess it up, not a new baby, not a family problem, nothing. Because quitting is about knowing that cigarettes are part of the problem, not the solution, to any stress. I am typing this here so that YOU will know that asking him to quit now may mean three weeks of vague cravings, tops, but that even in the first few days, it is LESS STRESSFUL when you don't smoke.

Yep. Less stressful. And if it's not for anyone here, then you're probably still a smoker who is just not smoking, not a non-smoker. (Not that I wouldn't occasionally think, "Ah, a smoke would be nice." But then... codeine would occasionally be nice, as well as cocaine. I don't really want to be a drug addict, though, so they don't tempt me. Same with ciggies.)

So please know that encouraging your DH to quit is not asking him to live a more stressful life.

It's asking him to enjoy a less stressful life, one in which he's not a drug addict.

(Writes the drug addict, the drug being coffee







)


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *j10k* 
Babies have grown up around fire / smoke for thousands of years. Smoke damages lungs, yes. I'm not certain of the smell of smoke or it's residue is something to really worry about.

It's not the smoke that's concerning people here. It's the poisons contained in that type of smoke.

Yes, babies have ben around smoke for millenia. But if you burn wood, or you burn marijuana, you get drastically different types of smoke with different effects. Tobacco (especially mainstream tobacco with all the additives) contains poisons. That's a fact. Breathing it in or coming in contact with its residue is not the same as being around a campfire.


----------



## MCatLvrMom2A&X (Nov 18, 2004)

2 totally different things.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2xy* 
It's not the smoke that's concerning people here. It's the poisons contained in that type of smoke.

Yes, babies have ben around smoke for millenia. But if you burn wood, or you burn marijuana, you get drastically different types of smoke with different effects. Tobacco (especially mainstream tobacco with all the additives) contains poisons. That's a fact. Breathing it in or coming in contact with its residue is not the same as being around a campfire.

People and children who live and work in homes where there is a lot of smoke even from wood-burning often have a lot of problems associated with smoke inhalation as well. They can also develop cancer from the residues even of the wood, because it changes composition as it burns.

Even the smoke from paper and marijuana is not harmless, not at all.

But third-hand smoke is not actually smoke at all: it's the chemicals and heavy metals that remain on you after the "smoke" has settled. Because all smoke is is a bunch of tiny particles floating in the air. Particles like mercury, arsenic, and cadmium, all of which are extremely toxic, are found in cigarette smoke which does settle in part on the skin and clothing of the smoker.

There is just NO QUESTION (even to those of us who would say that bed-sharing is more important than this one issue) that smoking is poisonous. Really. There's not.

I'm sorry if anyone here hasn't been able to quit yet. All I can say, again, is try Allen Carr's book. It's so cheap and you can get it used. But denying the harmful effects of smoking is really not going to help anyone.


----------



## j10k (Dec 11, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2xy* 
It's not the smoke that's concerning people here. It's the poisons contained in that type of smoke.

Yes, babies have ben around smoke for millenia. But if you burn wood, or you burn marijuana, you get drastically different types of smoke with different effects. Tobacco (especially mainstream tobacco with all the additives) contains poisons. That's a fact. Breathing it in or coming in contact with its residue is not the same as being around a campfire.

Yes, I mostly agree with this, but to say that the particulate from burning tobacco / paper / marijuana / wood are drastically different is possibly overstated.

All of these organic substances, when burned, produce arsenic, formaldehyde, dioxin and a cocktail of other chemicals, many in particulate form which can get into the lungs, land on rugs and floors and be ingested and breathed by us all.

I'm not defending smoking around children or anything like that, just that I see smokers as a part of our large communal family on earth. They have to smoke outside while at my house, but they get to hold and spend time with my baby / children just like anyone else. These environmental toxins are everywhere, and often "naturally" occurring, so I see them as a livable risk that me and my family are willing to live with. The benefit to my children of spending time with my smoking friends and family and getting to know and hug them, hold them and love and learn from them is much more important that whatever infinitesimal particulate may be on them. YMMV Just my opinion is all.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *j10k* 
Yes, I mostly agree with this, but to say that the particulate from burning tobacco / paper / marijuana / wood are drastically different is possibly overstated.

All of these organic substances, when burned, produce arsenic, formaldehyde, dioxin and a cocktail of other chemicals, many in particulate form which can get into the lungs, land on rugs and floors and be ingested and breathed by us all.

I'm not defending smoking around children or anything like that, just that I see smokers as a part of our large communal family on earth. They have to smoke outside while at my house, but they get to hold and spend time with my baby / children just like anyone else. These environmental toxins are everywhere, and often "naturally" occurring, so I see them as a livable risk that me and my family are willing to live with. The benefit to my children of spending time with my smoking friends and family and getting to know and hug them, hold them and love and learn from them is much more important that whatever infinitesimal particulate may be on them. YMMV Just my opinion is all.

I see your point, but consider that smoking produces these natural toxins in quantities that are known to be highly carcinogenic.

I agree that people who smoke do not forfeit their rights to be with their children / grandchildren, BUT- it really is not cut-and-dry. What about a person who had just smoked and wanted to hold a newborn without washing her hands? What if a child nearby had asthma? What if this were a different, more dangerous drug (meth, for example)?

Okay, so the woman could hold the baby, but meth kills almost right away, so that's a no, right? Simple?

But cigarettes _can_ kill if enough nicotine gets into the body of the infant. We know that. It really is toxic. I mean, formaldehyde occurs in nature, sure, and there's arsenic in almonds, but are you really going to say, feed your baby with a spoon that had arsenic spilled on it, after you just rinsed it really quick? Even if you are willing to give her a dessert with some (presumably ground-up







) almonds in it?

What I'm saying here is that the existence of formaldehyde, cadmium, and arsenic in the environment does not mean that we should not avoid them in toxic doses.

And what is in cigarettes, and even what gets left on the smoker after, is a near-toxic dose for a tiny baby.

So we should avoid THAT.

A shower before co-sleeping, a long smoking jacket, and good, frequent hand-washing should work for a new dad. But I really would balk at the suggestion that they not share a bed at all, OR that he not worry about it. There is a middle ground.


----------



## j10k (Dec 11, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EdnaMarie* 
I agree that people who smoke do not forfeit their rights to be with their children / grandchildren, BUT- it really is not cut-and-dry. What about a person who had just smoked and wanted to hold a newborn without washing her hands? What if a child nearby had asthma? What if this were a different, more dangerous drug (meth, for example)?

Ok, let's talk meth. My brother takes prescription meth (Desoxyn) for ADD. He's allowed near my kid. Actually I think that ingested nicotine is more highly toxic than ingested meth. Eating one cigarette can kill a toddler. They are super toxic if eaten. I know what you're saying though. An irresponsible drug abuser would not be allowed to babysit my kid by any means. A responsible drug user though, would. And of course, respiratory problems in the infant would certainly complicate my view.

That being said, amounts of nicotine _residue_ that are in smokers homes according to a study by the BMJ http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/13/1/29 are cited as "5-7 times higher in households of smokers trying to protect their infants by smoking outdoors than in households of non-smokers"

The problem with this conclusion is that when you look at the actual numbers further into the study it becomes clear that 5-7 times of almost nothing is _probably_ insignificant. The levels of nicotine found in the smokers' living rooms were reported to be 0.32 mcg/m3 compared to 0.10 mcg/m3 in the living rooms of nonsmokers. These amounts are so so so very very very small! These numbers are measured in parts-per-trillion!

(Some perspective on these impossible to visualize numbers: the legal limit of workplace exposure in the US is 500 mcg/m3, 2,500 times more than was found in the smokers' households.)

You are very very right. It's certainly not cut and dry. I'm just not convinced of the danger. (I have now officially read way way more about this topic than I even care about  ... really! I know that I sound like a smoking zealot, but I'm not. I'm a non-smoker and find it to be a pretty stupid habit.


----------



## j10k (Dec 11, 2008)

Oh, and one more little thing ... I was thinking about why I actually care about this issue and found this link: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wa...1466-24235809/.

This actually annoys me. I was adopted by a smoker (who later quit). The fact that someone would be denied a home! Grrrr.


----------



## itsmyturn (Aug 17, 2009)

Quote:

I agree that people who smoke do not forfeit their rights to be with their children / grandchildren, BUT- it really is not cut-and-dry. ...What if this were a different, more dangerous drug (meth, for example)?
There is absolute NO comparison between Meth and Cigarettes. It is disturbing to hear them being compared.
Crystal Meth is a horrible highly addictive drug. People wither away, physically and mentally, within months of becoming addicts. Meth abusers should not be around children because they are dangerous and unpredictable, that cannot said cigarette addicts.

Quote:

My brother takes prescription meth (Desoxyn)
FYI prescription Meth is NOT the same substance as the popular illegal stuff "Crystal Meth". Desoxyn is a simpler form of meth which is made in a controlled lab with controlled substances.
Crystal Meth is made from household cleaners, rodent poisons, and many over the counter drugs.
Just wanted to point that out.


----------



## j10k (Dec 11, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *itsmyturn* 
FYI prescription Meth is NOT the same substance as the popular illegal stuff "Crystal Meth". Desoxyn is a simpler form of meth which is made in a controlled lab with controlled substances.
Crystal Meth is made from household cleaners, rodent poisons, and many over the counter drugs.
Just wanted to point that out.

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Desoxyn Desoxyn is the pharmaceutical name for methamphetamine, aka crystal meth. Yes, my brother takes what is essentially "crystal meth" and it has changed his life 100% for the better. They are obviously synthesized using different methods in the lab than on the street, but i believe that they are chemically identical. (Please correct me if I'm wrong") He uses this drug, but does not abuse it.


----------



## itsmyturn (Aug 17, 2009)

Sorry, did not mean to step on your toes if I did








I was just trying to point out that the legal stuff is safer because it has the same chemical make-up & potency every time.

Street meth never has the same consistancy or potency, & it frequently has other things added to it besides methamphetamine.


----------



## Porcelain Interior (Feb 8, 2008)

This is really interesting. I wonder though for those that have a smoker in the house and don't allow him/her to co-sleep due to the dangers, what about during the day?

What about a SAH parent who smokes? Shouldn't they also shower/decontaminate each time they light up?

I guess what I wonder is, if it's so bad that dad gets kicked out of the bed at night, why let him around the baby during the day either? It's bad all of the time isn't it? Not just at night?

FWIW we co-slept as teen parents, and then later with our 2nd child and my husband was a light outside only smoker. I never made him shower, and was very aware of the dangers of smoking (I've never smoked) and never allowed smoke around my children. However the 3rd hand smoke issue never even occured to me way back then.

I just wonder if it's so dangerous maybe the smoker shouldn't really ever hold/touch/breathe near the baby unless they've showered and totally eliminated the problem?

It seems rather impossible.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

I think there's a message getting lost here. The message is:

Smoking is more dangerous than not smoking.

Being exposed to even a small amount of toxic chemicals is more dangerous than not being exposed.

While parents have a right to their children, they do need to consider what sort of risks they are willing to take.

Showering before spending 6 - 12 hours in full contact with a baby, and leaving some of that residue in a place where baby will spend between 10 and 16 hours a day, is one simple way to minimize risks.

Before holding baby, smokers, even SAHP smokers are advised to wear a weather-appropriate over"coat" and hat, wash hands before holding baby, and brush their teeth. Yep, quite a routine, but when you are addicted to a drug, you have to accept the extra work that comes with it.

I live with a smoker- my mother. I demanded that she stick to that routine. She knew about the risk of SIDS, etc. She never complained.

Finally, I'm not going to apologize for comparing meth to cigarettes. A deadly drug is a deadly drug. Obviously there are a lot of differences, but my point was not about behavior (obviously meth would be so much worse, but then, so would alcohol!), cigarettes are not less harmful just because they're less common. Drugs are very dangerous, even alcohol. And it's not only the nicotine, it's the other substances used for manufacturing the cigarettes and found in smoke.

I was raised by a smoker who still smokes. My kids are in her house while my husband trains with the army. I am for a balanced approach to dealing with drug addiction.

But smoking is a drug addiction. Cigarettes are dangerous. That is an important message for parents who have the chance to really consider it and try to make the decision to quit.


----------



## dachshund mom (Dec 28, 2007)

OP, do you have the space to sidecar a crib? That would give the baby his own sleeping surface, but you'd still be right there.


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SubliminalDarkness* 
I agree with others. It's not safe. And I, personally, wouldn't be comfortable with a smoker regularly holding my child, either.

I'd have to say that I think being held by Dad overrides that.


----------

