There have been two categories of anti-smoking zealotry I think went too far:
1. Jails: Put a bunch of antisocial, mostly violent people together in close confinement, then tell them they can't smoke.
2. Mental institutions: Try to help people hanging onto reality by their fingernails by taking away their cigarettes.
I might now add this third category:
The state's tough new anti-smoking law has an unlikely opponent: a retired doctor who argues the ban is forcing elderly smokers in nursing homes to take unnecessary risks.
Dr. Robert Guild, 71, says the law is forcing him and other smokers at the Maplewood Gardens Retirement Apartments — some in wheelchairs and walkers — to brave an ice- and snow-covered lawn to get to a structure that is far enough away from the retirement facility to meet the ban's requirements.
Comments
go too notmyman.org too kill bill 1008
now or email 50 email too 01s@in.gov
1-50 numbers too stop this bill 1008
("john" should clearly be a telemarketer in real life. Hey, my browser is on my attorney general's "Do Not Circumvent My Security" list, bub.)
Ah, yes, dependency is a terrible thing. But a smoking ban never really "makes" anybody do anything (except maybe quit?).
It can however cause a rabid smoker to offer up anecdotes, exaggerations and rationalizations using emotionalist buzzwords -- like "elderly," "nursing homes," "unnecessary risks" (notice how someone sneaked the pejorative "unnecessary" in there?), "wheelchairs and walkers" and "brave the ice and snow" -- to try to multiply the effect of a single personal opinion. I can't know whether Dr. Guild, still smoking at 71, is concerned for his fragile nursing home flock, or conjuring them to make his own protest. It would be easier if he were a non-smoker and had nothing to gain.
If the doctor had made his case to his elected representative BEFORE the bill went to the vote, he might have convinced the author to add an exception for facilities housing folks with especially high health risks.
A plan for tapering off might have been included in the law, perhaps even a designated smoking room inside each nursing care facility or other qualifying institution, for those elderly who are simply too mentally or physically infirm to risk detoxing. I have doubts whether an amendment like that would satisfy Dr. Guild's asserted concerns -- unless he also could qualify.
I'm sorry if I'm attributing low motives to the doctor in error. But the addict's normal and predictable reaction to any hint of quitting is closed-minded outrage and rebellion. That's true of people dependent on cocaine, heroin, alcohol or nicotine.
Wow, Steve, ... unless I'm mistaken, you're a non-smoker, ...