Drinking/smoking while pregnant?

74 posts / 0 new
Last post
Starryblue702's picture
Joined: 04/06/11
Posts: 5454
Drinking/smoking while pregnant?

Hey girls, so another thread in a different board game me the idea to ask this question: should it be illegal for pregnant women to drink or smoke during their pregnancy? Why or why not?

I don't think anything like this would ever make it into law (or if it's even ever been brought before the courts before) but should it? If a mother chooses to keep her baby but continues to drink and/or smoke during that pregnancy, she definitely poses the risk of damaging the baby somehow... a baby that would have been perfectly healthy if she would have abstained from such behaviors until after she gave birth. I know this can lead into the old abortion debate, as anyone pro-choice believes that the mother has the right to do with her body whatever she pleases, but does that same point of view apply when we're talking about a woman that wants to keep her baby but still does these things?

Joined: 03/14/09
Posts: 624

No.

Sorry, what damage does a woman who has a glass of wine a week do to her fetus?

culturedmom's picture
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

I don't care if wine and smoking was correlated with....well anything. No one has the right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body. Period.

wlillie's picture
Joined: 09/17/07
Posts: 1796

Pro-life and no, I don't think there should be any more laws about it. Isn't a child automatically evaluated to see if they are harmed by the alcohol an alcoholic mother has consumed? I swear I've read about women losing custody because their child was born with fetal alcohol syndrome. And smoking is terrible while you are pregnant and I have no qualms about judging women who do it, but I'd rather a mother smoke than abort any day.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

I actually know a woman who was a very heavy smoker when she became pregnant unexpectedly. Her Dr. told her to cut back her smoking as much as she could but not to quit cold turkey because the withdrawal symptoms could cause her to lose the baby. I dont know if this is true or not, but as long as Drs give advice like this I cant imagine it becoming law.

I also know this woman took alot of flack for her occasional smokes and so I try not to judge what a pregnant woman puts into her body, because you never know what advice she was given, or by who.

lil96's picture
Joined: 03/27/06
Posts: 573

This was a law and order episode. The mother's first child had FAS. The court on there decided she had to go to rehab and what not. (she had a relapse, went back to court, bla blah bla, everything changed and she stopped drinking)

I strongly dislike the idea of smoking at all or drink enough to get drunk while pregnant. I don't think it is something that could be made into law though, nor do I think it should be made into law.

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6559

"wlillie" wrote:

Pro-life and no, I don't think there should be any more laws about it. Isn't a child automatically evaluated to see if they are harmed by the alcohol an alcoholic mother has consumed? I swear I've read about women losing custody because their child was born with fetal alcohol syndrome. And smoking is terrible while you are pregnant and I have no qualms about judging women who do it, but I'd rather a mother smoke than abort any day.

This is a very interesting point of view. I have never thought of it this way before.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3183

"lil96" wrote:

I strongly dislike the idea of smoking at all or drink enough to get drunk while pregnant. I don't think it is something that could be made into law though, nor do I think it should be made into law.

This is how I feel too. I'm sure you could present me with a situation that would make me wish it was illegal in that case, but the bottom line for me is that I don't think it should be a law, even when it's an awful choice that FEELS criminal to me. (And I'm not talking about a glass of wine or a smoke every couple of weeks.)

But we need to have legal rights to our own bodies.

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

"ftmom" wrote:

I actually know a woman who was a very heavy smoker when she became pregnant unexpectedly. Her Dr. told her to cut back her smoking as much as she could but not to quit cold turkey because the withdrawal symptoms could cause her to lose the baby. I dont know if this is true or not, but as long as Drs give advice like this I cant imagine it becoming law.

I also know this woman took alot of flack for her occasional smokes and so I try not to judge what a pregnant woman puts into her body, because you never know what advice she was given, or by who.

IME, women say that when they don't WANT to quit and not because their doctors actually say that.

Joined: 11/28/06
Posts: 848

"Emilys4Guppies" wrote:

IME, women say that when they don't WANT to quit and not because their doctors actually say that.

I've always had that suspicion but I have no real knowledge of what nicotine withdrawals can do to a pregnant woman and her fetus. I'll admit, it bothers me deeply to see a pregnant woman smoke. It also bothers me to see anyone smoke in the presence of children. I just picture those fragile little lungs inhaling the toxins and I cringe.

RebeccaA'07's picture
Joined: 11/19/07
Posts: 1628

"freddieflounder101" wrote:

This is how I feel too. I'm sure you could present me with a situation that would make me wish it was illegal in that case, but the bottom line for me is that I don't think it should be a law, even when it's an awful choice that FEELS criminal to me. (And I'm not talking about a glass of wine or a smoke every couple of weeks.)

But we need to have legal rights to our own bodies.

Agreed. I think it's gross.

Joined: 06/22/10
Posts: 5602

dh has family members who's gf smoked while pregnant. it irritated me SO much. it irritated me even more when they complained they couldn't drink but then lit up:rolleyes: really? you may as well!!! this is a sore subject for me as my ds was born tiny due to PIH and had a wimpy cord and i didn't do any of that stuff. So ya, I judge when i see a woman smoking and drinking and has a perfectly healthy regular sized newborn (not saying that they shouldn't, but it does bother me)

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

Absolutely. Then we should also have pre conception IQ testing/requirements, income verification/qualification, and make it illegal to have children out of wedlock. Because all of those things (stupid parents, poverty, lack of support etc) *may* contribute to causing the baby hardship. They should determine who eats too unhealthy of a diet to reproduce (because children being raised in unhealthy homes have a much harder time learning to be healthy or to eat well, which could damage them). All possible genetic conditions should be ruled out from the reproducing pool as well. I could go on and on here.

Bottom line? it really would be best to just be required to hand yourself in to the state when you are pregnant, so that they can keep your baby safe from you for 40 weeks.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"Emilys4Guppies" wrote:

IME, women say that when they don't WANT to quit and not because their doctors actually say that.

I used to think that too, but this was on one of my best friends and I do trust her.

But a note on that, she did cut back to the point where she was smoking very little by the time she was really showing, and had completely quit by the time baby was born. So I do have to wonder if that is more what Dr.s mean when they tell women to just cut back when pregnant. Dont try to quit all at once, but cut yourself back until you have quit...KWIM?

Starryblue702's picture
Joined: 04/06/11
Posts: 5454

"Potter75" wrote:

Absolutely. Then we should also have pre conception IQ testing/requirements, income verification/qualification, and make it illegal to have children out of wedlock. Because all of those things (stupid parents, poverty, lack of support etc) *may* contribute to causing the baby hardship. They should determine who eats too unhealthy of a diet to reproduce (because children being raised in unhealthy homes have a much harder time learning to be healthy or to eat well, which could damage them). All possible genetic conditions should be ruled out from the reproducing pool as well. I could go on and on here.

Bottom line? it really would be best to just be required to hand yourself in to the state when you are pregnant, so that they can keep your baby safe from you for 40 weeks.

I think there's a big difference between everything you just said and selfishly doing something to harm a baby that would have been born healthy. Poverty, hardships, and everything else someone can overcome in their life... having brain damage or some other problem is a tragedy that they'll live with for the rest of their lives.

fuchsiasky's picture
Joined: 11/16/07
Posts: 955

"Emilys4Guppies" wrote:

IME, women say that when they don't WANT to quit and not because their doctors actually say that.

I only know of one woman who was actually told that and it was due to mental health issues for which she could not be medicated for during pregnancy. It would have all been too much at one time.

daniellevmt's picture
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

Oh goodness no! Can you imagine??

/I know 100 people who know someone who know someone whose OB told them to not quit smoking cold turkey because it could "hurt the baby". Common sense tells us this is untrue. However, I do believe OB's recommend cutting back gradually to the point of quitting only because the success rate of that method is higher than quitting cold turkey.

fuchsiasky's picture
Joined: 11/16/07
Posts: 955

"daniellevmt" wrote:

Oh goodness no! Can you imagine??

/I know 100 people who know someone who know someone whose OB told them to not quit smoking cold turkey because it could "hurt the baby". Common sense tells us this is untrue. However, I do believe OB's recommend cutting back gradually to the point of quitting only because the success rate of that method is higher than quitting cold turkey.

Actually, having just quit smoking (a few times over) I can say that it is in some ways a lot harder to quit gradually. It is like constant withdrawals. Most that I know who have quit sucessfully have used a nicotine replacement or quit cold turkey. I know many women who have quit cold turkey while pregnant and been just fine.

daniellevmt's picture
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

"fuchsiasky" wrote:

Actually, having just quit smoking (a few times over) I can say that it is in some ways a lot harder to quit gradually. It is like constant withdrawals. Most that I know who have quit sucessfully have used a nicotine replacement or quit cold turkey. I know many women who have quit cold turkey while pregnant and been just fine.

See, I think the gradual quit is easier, but that's just me.

But that's just our opinion. I'm talking stats, and that's what Dr.'s usually use to make recommendations.

And success rates are much higher using nicotine replacement or meds, probably more than cold turkey and gradual quit combined. I don't think most meds used for smoking cessation are safe for pregnancy and I've never heard of an OB recommending nicotine replacement for a pregnant woman....I'll have to google and see if some do, and if not, why they don't.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"Starryblue702" wrote:

I think there's a big difference between everything you just said and selfishly doing something to harm a baby that would have been born healthy. Poverty, hardships, and everything else someone can overcome in their life... having brain damage or some other problem is a tragedy that they'll live with for the rest of their lives.

Nah, I can I can tell you straight up with 100% certainty that the impact of poverty hardship and "everything else" is way going to effect a baby a billion times more than a weekly or bi weekly or monthly glass of wine in a pregnant mother. While I don't disagree that poverty and broken homes and all the rest CAN be overcome, statistics are not on those children's side. The statistics are not in favor of banning all consumption (and having legal right over another persons body/right to ingest of a legal substance) simply due to pregnancy.

Smoking is gross. Being a drunk is gross. Doing either while pregnant, also gross. I support peoples right to be gross, though I find it terribly sad. I would hope that people who are so concerned about what strangers put in to their bodies set up more helplines and networks and support groups and whatnot to help pregnant people (or parents to be with addictions, as that is as likely to negatively impact a child as FAS is) get the intervention and help that they need to get or stay sober.

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

"daniellevmt" wrote:

See, I think the gradual quit is easier, but that's just me.

But that's just our opinion. I'm talking stats, and that's what Dr.'s usually use to make recommendations.

And success rates are much higher using nicotine replacement or meds, probably more than cold turkey and gradual quit combined. I don't think most meds used for smoking cessation are safe for pregnancy and I've never heard of an OB recommending nicotine replacement for a pregnant woman....I'll have to google and see if some do, and if not, why they don't.

If we're talking stats then the International Cochrane Collaboration has determined that gradual quitting and cold turkey actually have the same abstinence rates.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"daniellevmt" wrote:

Oh goodness no! Can you imagine??

/I know 100 people who know someone who know someone whose OB told them to not quit smoking cold turkey because it could "hurt the baby". Common sense tells us this is untrue. However, I do believe OB's recommend cutting back gradually to the point of quitting only because the success rate of that method is higher than quitting cold turkey.

I sometimes wonder if it is because OB's know it is super hard to quit, but even cutting back has got to be an improvement for the baby, so they say to do it that way so if the mother fails at quiting, hopefully they will at least stick to a cut back amount.

On a side note: It amazes me the number of women on here who see an OB when they are pregnant. Is that normal in parts of the world? Here we only have one OB and he only sees at risk women. (I call him Dr C-section and begged my Dr not to send me to him when I was preg).

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

ftmom, where are you from? I'm in Canada and we're working towards a model where normal, low risk women do not see OBs but see a general practitioner or a midwife. OBs are specialists and should only be seen if there is an element of risk that makes a midwife or GP unwise. Here, OBs are referred.

I believe that everyone sees OBs in the US because medicine is BIG Business. Birth is the biggest revenue for hospitals and OBs rake it in because of that. When birth is no longer Big Business, then more care will be taken to have women see the appropriate care provider.

"The fundamental problem is not about normal childbirth; it’s about making normal childbirth abnormal. When we treat high-risk women in high-risk settings, we lower their risk. When we treat low-risk women as if they were high risk, we increase their risk and create complications. That is what we are doing today." -- Dr Michael C Klein OB/GYN

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

Well that makes sense, Im in Canada too! We do have Dr's who are more 'specialized' per se. For example, when I had my DD in a bigger town there were some Dr's who didnt do pregnancy/birth and some who would only take new patients for pregnancy/birth and then send you back to your regular doc after. The Dr I saw was still just a family Dr, but he specialized in pregnancy/births, kwim? But I guess thats the same with alot of Drs. I know one of the Drs in my practice here is the 'sick baby Dr' and gets sent all the babies with chronic problems, as we dont have a pediatrician here. We dont have any midwives though (wish we did), but a doula practice just opened with 3 doulas so that is an improvement for us.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3183

I'm in NY and we have specialists for everything, I was shocked when my friend from Oklahoma who has 3 sons said she had never been to an ob/gyn. Imagine her surprise when she moved here and thought her GP would handle everything.

I like it the way I have it, but that is probably because of what I'm used to. But I like the idea of expertise in a specialized area.

As to the quitting smoking issue, I have also heard that the difficulty of going cold turkey creates so much stress in the mom that gradual quitting was determined to be easier on her as well as on the baby.

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

We've all HEARD it, Laurie, but is it true? I mean, 48 hours after quitting your blood oxygen levels go back to normal...doesn't that physical benefit make the risk of withdrawl worthwhile? We all know that babies of smokers get less oxygen inutero. What about all the other benefits of quitting?

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3183

"Emilys4Guppies" wrote:

We've all HEARD it, Laurie, but is it true? I mean, 48 hours after quitting your blood oxygen levels go back to normal...doesn't that physical benefit make the risk of withdrawl worthwhile? We all know that babies of smokers get less oxygen inutero. What about all the other benefits of quitting?

I don't know. . .for some people, quitting smoking cold turkey is incredibly traumatic and stressful, and not a good state to be in while pregnant.

And as a former smoker, although never a really heavy one, that crap stays in your body a long time. I can speak for myself as well as other people I know who have quit: you are coughing up black stuff for weeks, the physical effects are in there long after 24 hours.

But I have no idea. I'm not a doctor and I quit smoking when I first decided I was ready to start trying to get pregnant.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I'm sure that there is some sort of realistic happy medium. Does cold turkey work for everyone? No. I think that where most normal people call BS is when this "tapering" thing goes on for the entire pregnancy Smile There is no reason anyone, even a heavy smoker, can't quit smoking during their pregnancy. I don't really care if they do it in a day or in three weeks of "tapering off"......but if at week 39 of pregnancy they are still claiming that it would be "too traumatic" to their body, I don't buy it.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"freddieflounder101" wrote:

I'm in NY and we have specialists for everything, I was shocked when my friend from Oklahoma who has 3 sons said she had never been to an ob/gyn. Imagine her surprise when she moved here and thought her GP would handle everything.

I like it the way I have it, but that is probably because of what I'm used to. But I like the idea of expertise in a specialized area.

As to the quitting smoking issue, I have also heard that the difficulty of going cold turkey creates so much stress in the mom that gradual quitting was determined to be easier on her as well as on the baby.

SOrry for totally derailing, just wanted to say that I am glad it is not like that here, cause we have a ob, but thats about it for specialists. We have a few that travel through town once every month or 2 to go to a pediatrician for DS, for a 'emergency' appointment, we had to go to a larger town an hour away, however, that town is in another province so for a regular appointment the closest pediatrician would be 5 hours away in province.

Yuck! Maybe thats why it isnt that way here. Too much hassle!

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I think that it really is a matter of perspective. If my child was ill and needed to wait to be seen because the itinerant traveling specialist was not due to ride through town for another few months, or my only option was to drive 5 hours to get my child care I would find that more than a hassle, frankly. If you have good insurance, the ability to have a plethora of world class specialists available to you is pretty fortuitous, if you ask me. I had an OB for my first two pregnancies and a HBMW, it really is all about having choices, which luckily prevail (in my area, anyway).

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

"Potter75" wrote:

I'm sure that there is some sort of realistic happy medium. Does cold turkey work for everyone? No. I think that where most normal people call BS is when this "tapering" thing goes on for the entire pregnancy Smile There is no reason anyone, even a heavy smoker, can't quit smoking during their pregnancy. I don't really care if they do it in a day or in three weeks of "tapering off"......but if at week 39 of pregnancy they are still claiming that it would be "too traumatic" to their body, I don't buy it.

That's exactly it.

And this is totally anecdotal but annoys me so I wills hare. I have a friend of a friend who claims she was told not to quit. Bullsh*t. She was lighting up at her baby shower...TACKY. And then when her baby was born at 39 weeks (repeat c/s) and was 5lb2oz she said it was genetics.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"Emilys4Guppies" wrote:

That's exactly it.

And this is totally anecdotal but annoys me so I wills hare. I have a friend of a friend who claims she was told not to quit. Bullsh*t. She was lighting up at her baby shower...TACKY. And then when her baby was born at 39 weeks (repeat c/s) and was 5lb2oz she said it was genetics.

I so agree! I also find it tacky to see someone smoking in a wedding dress! And I am still an occasional smoker, in fact this debate really makes me want a smoke:).

I do see where everyone is coming from on the tapering off to nothing. I just dont like to see other women being judged when you dont know there story.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I know enough to know that if a woman is hugely pregnant and smoking she has been aware of her pregnancy for long enough to have had time enough to taper if she cared enough about her baby. I guess I would judge for that.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"Potter75" wrote:

I know enough to know that if a woman is hugely pregnant and smoking she has been aware of her pregnancy for long enough to have had time enough to taper if she cared enough about her baby. I guess I would judge for that.

Thats pretty harsh. I know a number of women who love and care for their babies who had the occasional smoke when pregnant. One does not equal the other in my mind.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I don't know, saying I judge someone isn't all that harsh (to me). I think that anyone who says they never judge is a liar.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"Potter75" wrote:

I don't know, saying I judge someone isn't all that harsh (to me). I think that anyone who says they never judge is a liar.

Im not saying I 'never' judge. Just that in this case I think it is important to know more before judging.

RebeccaA'07's picture
Joined: 11/19/07
Posts: 1628

"Potter75" wrote:

I know enough to know that if a woman is hugely pregnant and smoking she has been aware of her pregnancy for long enough to have had time enough to taper if she cared enough about her baby. I guess I would judge for that.

Agreed. Health of the child is far more important.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3183

"ftmom" wrote:

SOrry for totally derailing, just wanted to say that I am glad it is not like that here, cause we have a ob, but thats about it for specialists. We have a few that travel through town once every month or 2 to go to a pediatrician for DS, for a 'emergency' appointment, we had to go to a larger town an hour away, however, that town is in another province so for a regular appointment the closest pediatrician would be 5 hours away in province.

Yuck! Maybe thats why it isnt that way here. Too much hassle!

I'm in NY....you can't walk for more than 5 minutes without hitting a doctor's office. Hospitals abound as well, whether in the city or the suburbs.

Jules's picture
Joined: 10/03/01
Posts: 797

@ Potter75
If a mother drinks moderately or more while pregnant (depending on who's defining this is 1-2 drinks or more per day), her baby is at increased risk of FASD. What happens then? Intervention that costs. Behavioral problems that cost. Frequently prison time that costs.

It's a pretty high bill for you and me to pay just so someone can drink through pregnancy if they choose. AND that says nothing of the permanent damage done to that kid's brain. That's something no amount of intervention can repair. Doesn't that poor child have a say? The affect isn't just during pregnancy; it's life long.

According to the FASD Center, the lifetime cost for each child with FAS is $2 million or more. A recent study found that 60 percent of subjects with FAS or FAE had been in trouble with the authorities, charged with a crime, or convicted of a crime. However, most cost estimates do not include law enforcement costs.

The rate of FAS is 0.5 to 2 per 1,000 live births. If the rest of the spectrum is included, I think the number jumps to 10 or so per 1,000 live births. Sad thing? Totally preventable.

In the 70's, carseats were not mandated for babies. The biggest opposition was a parent's right to be personally responsible for their child's well being. To require car seats violated their rights. And yes, car seats are a pain in the... Eventually the momentum turned because society was expected to bear the brunt of injuries. Covering the cost of lifelong care for babies and children injured because a parent chose not to use a car seat had results -- car seats became mandated.

I wonder if at some point research based, clearly preventable mental retardation won't also come under some legislation. The cost of some women's personal choice is clashing with economic well-being of other women and their families.

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

Jules...we both know that there is a difference between mandating the rights for seperate beings (ie: carseats for children) and mandating the rights for pregnant mothers. My body is my own. Mandate this and before you know it, it will be illegal for women to make ANY choices on their own while pregnant. It's a fine, fine line to walk and not one I'm willing to.

I choose what is put into my body. I choose what I do with my body, pregnant or not. When the baby is a seperate entity then you can make laws that protect it (carseat laws, neglect/abuse laws, ect).

daniellevmt's picture
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

"ftmom" wrote:

SOrry for totally derailing, just wanted to say that I am glad it is not like that here, cause we have a ob, but thats about it for specialists. We have a few that travel through town once every month or 2 to go to a pediatrician for DS, for a 'emergency' appointment, we had to go to a larger town an hour away, however, that town is in another province so for a regular appointment the closest pediatrician would be 5 hours away in province.

Yuck! Maybe thats why it isnt that way here. Too much hassle!

Yeah, that sounds totally awesome!

????

daniellevmt's picture
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

"ftmom" wrote:

I so agree! I also find it tacky to see someone smoking in a wedding dress! And I am still an occasional smoker, in fact this debate really makes me want a smoke:).

I do see where everyone is coming from on the tapering off to nothing. I just dont like to see other women being judged when you dont know there story.

But you don't know her whole story, right? How can you call it tacky? Maybe the bride is super stressed or celebrating her marriage with a smoke! Wink

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"Potter75" wrote:

I think that it really is a matter of perspective. If my child was ill and needed to wait to be seen because the itinerant traveling specialist was not due to ride through town for another few months, or my only option was to drive 5 hours to get my child care I would find that more than a hassle, frankly. If you have good insurance, the ability to have a plethora of world class specialists available to you is pretty fortuitous, if you ask me. I had an OB for my first two pregnancies and a HBMW, it really is all about having choices, which luckily prevail (in my area, anyway).

What I meant about it being a hassle is that we would have to go so far for a regular appointment if it were something that was just 'normal', like to drive 5 hours for a well baby assessment or to have an ear infection checked at the pediatricians. There just isnt enough specialists to go around up here so they do the best they can, and part of that is having regular family Drs who 'specialize' in one thing or another. And as an example, when DS was having issues, the 'baby Dr.' in my practice took us over and consulted with the pediatrician over the phone. When the pediatrician decided he needed to see us we had to drive for an hour, but it wasn't an emergency situation per se, just an emergency in that DS was only a few days old so they wanted to deal with it right away. We do have a hospital and air vac. and all that. In an emergency they would get us to the nearest children's hospital by helecopter....but those are rare situations. I am perfectly happy with my family Doc for most things. (I keep using a pediatrician as an example just because that is the only specialist we have personally needed to see, oh, except the hearing specialist (cant remember what they are called) and we had to drive 12 hours to see him because it couldn't wait the months before someone could take my husband in town, luckily we have good medical that pays travel).

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"daniellevmt" wrote:

But you don't know her whole story, right? How can you call it tacky? Maybe the bride is super stressed or celebrating her marriage with a smoke! Wink

Oh, she can smoke if she wants, and I was actually a smoker leading up to my wedding day. I just hate the look of a woman smoking in her dress is all. I keep picturing her showing her wedding pics one day and having a smoke hanging out of her mouth in them, or burning a hole in the dress and never being able to pass it down. It just bothers me, but I wouldnt think she wasnt a good person, or didnt love her husband, respect her vows or anything.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"daniellevmt" wrote:

Yeah, that sounds totally awesome!

????

I meant that I was glad its not like that here because we would have to do those things to get to a specialist. So it is good that my regular Dr can handle so many things. We are not lacking specialists because we lack the people to send to them, we are lacking them because there just arent enough to go around to all the northern towns. So if all pregnant women had to go to an Ob for example, we would have a wait list over 9 months;), and if I had to go to a pediatrician for a ear infection I would have to drive 5 hours to get there. So Im glad I dont have to do those things, not that we dont have the specialists. Does that make sense?

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"ftmom" wrote:

Oh, she can smoke if she wants, and I was actually a smoker leading up to my wedding day. I just hate the look of a woman smoking in her dress is all. I keep picturing her showing her wedding pics one day and having a smoke hanging out of her mouth in them, or burning a hole in the dress and never being able to pass it down. It just bothers me, but I wouldnt think she wasnt a good person, or didnt love her husband, respect her vows or anything.

Yeah. I would feel totally comfortable saying that she didn't care enough about how gross she would like in pictures to quit.

Just like I'm saying that she obviously didn't care ENOUGH about her baby to quit. That statement has no bearing on how I feel about other choices that any given mother may make, simply that were I to see a largely pregnant woman smoking I would think that she was selfish and what she was doing in that instance was wrong.

I think that you are being hypocritical calling me harsh when you admit to feeling the same way. I also think that current smokers have a much different reaction to hearing that people judge them, because it upsets them personally.

Sorry Jules, but the car seat being like light to moderate drinking argument is simply nonsense, for the reasons Emily stated. You bring up a woman drinking two drinks a day, which most people would consider fairly heavy use. Do you honestly advocate banning all pregnant women from having a drink, EVER in pregnancy? Should women have to POAS before being served in a bar? Or is it only the clearly showing people who can't have a drink? What if a woman is just fat, and is refused service because a server thinks that she looks pregnant? How about nursing Moms, should they also be banned from service?

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6559

As for smoking while pg - While I agree it is not the best case situation. We need to first get abortion illegal before we start giving women more reason to want to abort. Never having smoked I am in no position to say how hard it is. If you could easily just snap your fingers and be done smoking I doubt many people would smoke.

As for needing an OB. During the course of my pregnancies I have had very low progesterone, several miscarriages, pre-eclampsia, PIH, gestational diabetes, poor blood flow, PROM, RH incompatibility and pre-term labor. I am very thankful I had access to an OB. And I am also very thankful that when I went into labor at 32 weeks and my daughter was born within hours at 3lbs 15oz that there were top notch specialists right there in the NICU and neither I or she had to be taken anywhere else to receive care. If I lived in a time or place that did not have OB's neither I or my beautiful 3 little girls would be alive.

Joined: 01/18/06
Posts: 1626

Smoking in pregnancy is gross. I wouldn't ever ban it though. Like many have said, it's a slippery slope for women's rights.

A very largely pregnant woman asked me about a brand of diapers at the grocery store last week, while we were loading the trunk of our car. She was smoking, leaning on the open window of her SUV where her young daughter was waiting in her carseat. I totally judged her. It was disgusting. "Gotta see what's good in diapers before this new one arrives!" as she pat pat pats her enormous belly with the hand holding the cig.

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

Potter's got it. POAS for a glass of wine! Imagine! Besides, the alcohol will do the most damage before she's showing even.

ftmom's picture
Joined: 09/04/06
Posts: 1538

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

As for smoking while pg - While I agree it is not the best case situation. We need to first get abortion illegal before we start giving women more reason to want to abort. Never having smoked I am in no position to say how hard it is. If you could easily just snap your fingers and be done smoking I doubt many people would smoke.

As for needing an OB. During the course of my pregnancies I have had very low progesterone, several miscarriages, pre-eclampsia, PIH, gestational diabetes, poor blood flow, PROM, RH incompatibility and pre-term labor. I am very thankful I had access to an OB. And I am also very thankful that when I went into labor at 32 weeks and my daughter was born within hours at 3lbs 15oz that there were top notch specialists right there in the NICU and neither I or she had to be taken anywhere else to receive care. If I lived in a time or place that did not have OB's neither I or my beautiful 3 little girls would be alive.

SO I kinda feel bad for continuing to derail this one, but just an aside, here you would have seen our wonderful Ob (not really being sarcastic, everyone who has seen him loves him) for most of your pregnancies, and then would have been told to go to a larger center about a month before delivery, just because of the complications. The worst part about that, is if the baby is born early without earlier complications, they will keep Mom here for recovery and send baby to the nearest nicu....which would just suck!

At least I dont live farther north. My SIL had to leave town for the last month of her normal pregnancy so that her baby could be born at a normal hospital, with a Dr in attendance (they dont even have a Dr in their town except on rotation).

Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

Kyla, I think that's pretty standard when you live in the boonies (what I am getting from your post is you live in a remote area). May I ask where in Canuckland you are? We're in a farmtown just outside of Toronto, in the East end, where doctors of all kinds abound.

Pages

Log in or register to post comments