Tobacco control resource center. The right to clean air Talking to children about realizing their rights

Children breathing in air contaminated with tobacco smoke increases the risk of death and a number of diseases, such as asthma.

Comprehensive legislative measures can achieve very great results in protecting children from tobacco smoke. However, one directive path from above is not enough. In Ukraine, by law, by orders of ministries, it is prohibited to smoke in educational, sports, and medical institutions. However, our daily experience tells us that such prohibitions are not respected, and children are still exposed to the deadly smoke.

As we have already said, the surrounding adults have an unhealthy influence on the child in two ways: they force him to inhale tobacco smoke, and also by their example stimulate the start of smoking. Who are these adults? Parents, teachers, neighbors, doctors.

So it turns out that almost all adults know and talk about the dangers of smoking, most of the smokers are taking measures to restrict children from smoke. But often such measures are half-hearted, ineffective, often they concern only very young children and do not affect adolescents. Unfortunately, adults who smoke are more justified, rationalize, defend their addiction than truly protect children's rights to free and healthy air.

The need to respect a basic human right cannot be a reason for someone's offense. This right cannot be ignored for the sake of someone's momentary comfort, friendship, and courtesy. Many people find it uncomfortable to ask not to smoke. When a smoker asks for permission to smoke while in our company, only a few people overcome the awkwardness and refuse. Although smokers rarely bother with our permission, we politely allow ourselves to be killed. "Yes please! Please don’t worry if I cleared my throat. For your pleasure, I may not breathe at all while you smoke. " Rights must be defended. They are above politeness and situation, above relationships. This is basic respect. If people smoke with me, I consider it disrespectful. If you smoke in front of my child, I regard it as an insult and a threat.

Is there a “right to smoke”?

In a street squabble about the inadmissibility of smoking in my presence, in a conversation at home about the need to go out to smoke in the fresh air, the first exclamation from the side of the smoker is: “I have the right to smoke!”. This is followed by harsh statements suggesting that this "right to smoke" applies to any place where the smoker wants to, where he is comfortable to smoke. And me, a person who has the right to clean air, is offered to independently exercise this right, i.e. go to a safe place. In the harshest cases, even the following words are heard: "Go out on your own, if you love fresh air so much!"

We come across such arguments, which have nothing to do with the real understanding of human rights. It is very important to understand what misconceptions and substitution of concepts lie at their basis.

Smoking is not a natural human need and does not require respect or protection

A person who claims to have the right to smoke is basically mistaken: smoking does not belong to the basic essences or needs of a person, which are designated in modern language as human rights (the right to life, health, education, clean water or fresh air, etc. .). The protection of precisely necessary and useful rights for a person, such as the right to freedom of expression or the right to access information, is respected and honored. If smoking would be a natural requirement of man, then God would attach a chimney to man, as one wise man said. Not a single legislative act enshrines the human right to suicide provoked by third parties. The opportunity to buy cigarettes and smoke a person is provided by law, since tobacco is a legal, not illegal drug. However, this alone does not make smoking natural or encouraged.

Smoking is not an individual choice, but behavior provoked and skillfully directed by the tobacco industry

If a person claims that his right consists in the right to choose - to smoke or not to smoke, then it is important to realize that it is difficult to call a conscious and balanced choice that is made in conditions of constant pressure from advertising and television, provocations from smokers around. More on this in the brochure in this series, Why Tobacco Companies Fund Adolescent Smoking Prevention Programs.

Smoking is allowed only where it does not harm others.

In the field of human rights, there is an immutable rule: my right to wave my arms ends where my neighbor's nose begins. Tobacco smoke is harmful to anyone who inhales it. If a smoker smokes, he is the source of the toxic substance released into the atmosphere. The toxic effect of the substances contained in tobacco smoke is, of course, reduced if this smoke is diluted with fresh air outside. In a closed room, in addition to just released smoke, semi-volatile substances accumulated on surfaces from previous cigarettes smoked in this room also have a harmful effect. Ventilation is not enough to bring the premises into a state of security. This is why many health-conscious people around the world choose to stay in hotel rooms that have NEVER smoked.

The restriction on smoking protects the right to clean air and a healthy environment not only for non-smokers, but also for smokers themselves.

Forced exit from the premises to perform some action is a limitation. It is logical to introduce such a restriction on behavior that is harmful, and not on healthy breathing. In a crowd of people waiting for transport, it sometimes seems that almost everyone is smoking, there is smoke from all sides. However, it turns out that dozens of non-smokers suffer from one smoker's cigarette smoke. Who in such a situation is more logical to step aside? A smoker, like a non-smoker, wants to live in a pleasantly smelling house, to feel the smell of perfume, flowers, to feel the cleanliness and well-groomed housing. The smoker wants to breathe clean air, to be healthy. Restricting smoking in a room, especially a residential one, is a way to keep this space clean, fresh, pleasant for everyone.

Of course, it is convenient if the issue of restricting smoking in public places is resolved in legislation. Then it is clear and understandable to everyone - they do not smoke here, violators are fined. If restrictions on smoking are not introduced, or they are not observed, then the protection of their rights to clean air takes the form of personal conflicts, smoking becomes the subject of disputes, offenses, disagreements. Therefore, legislative bans on air pollution with tobacco smoke (and a system of strict enforcement) are a mechanism for the protection of human rights.

How you can protect the air from tobacco smoke pollution

For those who get in the way of smoking, and who are ready to defend their rights to clean air at home, at work, in public places and in transport, it is important to remember the following rules:

How doctors and teachers can protect a child's right to fresh air

At one of our seminars, an anti-smoking activist demanded a smoking ban for doctors and teachers, to the point of depriving them of the right to engage in professional activities if they smoke. By and large, this worthy man was right. The doctor's words that tobacco causes certain diseases if the doctor himself smokes are not true. A smoking teacher or psychologist, no matter how much they talk about a healthy lifestyle, will be perceived by children as liars.

In a real school and clinic, many adult employees drink and smoke in full view of young patients and students. The white coat, the status of the teacher only reinforces the widespread perception in the child's perception: "Smoking is okay, it's good." Official smoking bans in schools and hospitals have no effect. In post-Soviet countries, we are very good at ignoring even the most sensible directives, like party politics once did.

As reasonable people, we cannot say that smoking is harmful only to adolescents (a significant part of its consequences affects health after 18 years). We cannot classify smoking as a behavior permitted only by adults as more conscious individuals (elections, driving a car), because smoking is a self-destructive behavior, it can hardly be called a reasonable, balanced behavior (more on this in the already mentioned brochure on preventive programs of the tobacco industry) ... Those teachers and doctors who smoke try not to realize their addiction, refer it to their personal life, which has nothing to do with work.

However, smoking educators' attempts to engage in prevention are usually unsuccessful, as when discussing smoking with adolescents, they subconsciously justify smoking.

Preventive admonitions from a smoker can only have an effect in the context of horrors from personal life: “I have been smoking for 20 years, and have already become impotent” or “Only 10 years of smoking, and all my teeth have already fallen out, my daughters have been diagnosed with bronchial asthma”.

Based on the right of children to a clean and healthy environment, it is clear that maximum restrictions on smoking should be in place in medical and educational institutions, i.e. smoking is prohibited throughout the building and in front of the building. All areas where employees work, vehicles belonging to the institution should be free from tobacco. The restrictions apply to everyone, regardless of status, chain of command or length of stay in the institution.

Cigarette smoke poisons children, and it doesn't matter who lit this cigarette - a parent who came to pick up a child from school, a teenager or a principal in his office. Only with the introduction and maintenance of a complete ban on smoking throughout the school territory is it possible to talk about the effectiveness of any other methods of preventing teenage smoking. The ban will not work without tangible and equal sanctions for all violators. Let the committee of high school and teacher activists be able to impose fines for violating a child's right to fresh air. Additional finances will be useful for conducting KVN or printing anti-tobacco campaign materials.

Everyone entering the territory (and not the school building) must be warned about the complete ban on smoking introduced here. It is good to place materials on a separate information board about what rights of the child are violated in case of forced smoking, what diseases are caused by smoking, what sanctions, who can be imposed for violating the ban, where the money from the fine will be spent.

Of course, for the introduction of such a working regulation, it is important to hold discussions, both among parents and at a meeting of the pedagogical team. And let the topic of the meeting be not the lofty mission of the teacher, but reasonable pragmatism: if children do not smoke, they get much less sick, learn the educational material better, they have less risk of becoming smokers.

Talking to parents about their children's rights

It is at home that children are least protected. There they spend most of the day, where their opinion is rarely taken into account, there they can hardly influence the established rules and relationships. It is in their own home that about half of the children breathe tobacco smoke.

Parents' meeting is a good opportunity to improve the situation. Of course, it will not be easy for mothers and fathers who are tired after a working day to tune in to such a conversation. But the teacher, referring to the parents, is not going to educate them, but proposes to solve the problem of morbidity in the classroom together. For example, he may say: “Over the past month, more than half of the class has had respiratory diseases. You probably know that 40% of all diseases of the bronchi, ear-nose-throat, cases of exacerbation of asthma, caries in children are caused by forced inhalation of tobacco smoke. It is very important to change the existing situation, especially now, when children's organisms are weakened by both the ecological situation and vitamin deficiency ... ". Parents of high school children are invariably worried that children start smoking. Asking about this can be a great way to start a conversation about secondhand smoke and the smoking of surrounding adults, because children smoke because adults smoke.

It's good to start a discussion by suggesting a tricky situation, a controversial statement like the ones below. And even if these stories can be somewhat removed from the real life of teenagers' parents, they make it possible to more easily see their mistakes using someone else's example. Then there is a heated discussion, and if you help in time with useful facts, then as a result the parents themselves will come to wonderful decisions on how to change the situation for the better. Even my mom’s thinking about how to free the kitchen from her dad’s smoking is a huge step towards a Smoke-Free Home. This conversation is not intended to be a complete cessation of smoking. Our main task is to make it clear to parents that the health and rights of the child suffer if parents smoke near him.

Below are some conversation starters with questions to guide the discussion.

Respect my rights, don't smoke at home!

This is the story of a young pregnant woman: “My dad smoked for as long as I can remember. Smoked in the kitchen, in the toilet. I was little, so all the time I told him that it was harmful, that I did not want his death. Then my parents were touched by my concern. The father did not quit. She was a teenager - she fiercely fought against my father's smoking, poured facts, proved how harmful it was. Did not help. Even now, when I am in position, my father continues to smoke in the apartment where I live. He, as if apologizing, says that he has a strong addiction. But I will not tolerate this anymore. Now the conversation is not about HIS health or life. Here the basic, inalienable right of MY CHILD to life and health is violated. Either smoke or me - this is my ultimatum! "

Smoking in an apartment - how often does this happen? What do non-smokers and children feel if someone smokes in the house? Who and how can change the situation for the better? Can a child independently change the established family norms, what help can non-smoking adults provide him?

How often do adults in your family listen to the child's opinion and position in the process of making decisions that directly concern him? Probably, many have heard about the Convention on the Rights of the Child. There is a separate article 12 in it, which ensures the child's right to participate (read out). What prevents our families from adhering to this recommendation? Let's remember examples when our children took part in the discussion: how did they feel about the decisions made together? What could be done to ensure that our children are truly actively involved in family life?

Safe distance from cigarette

Street, public transport stops, parks are considered open air. It is assumed that the smoke from the cigarette is quickly dispelled without causing harm or inconvenience to others. Standing in a dense crowd of people at a bus stop, you can't say that. And I really want to determine the safe distance from a smoked cigarette. After all, the neighbor's right to wave his hands ends where my nose begins. With regard to the cigarette, my nose is quite sensitive, I get angry and annoyed, even if the person smokes, walking 50 meters in front of me.

Smokers sometimes try to move away from children on walks, when they smoke, how far do they go? What distance from a cigarette do you think is safe for the health of someone who does not smoke? How can a non-smoker ask stop smokers not to smoke in front of him?

Smoking mom

I am 5 years old, I really love my mother. I really like to play and talk and walk with her. But on any walk there is a time that I really do not like. This is when she drives me away from herself, pushes me away, demands not to approach. At these moments, my mom smokes. I really want to be as slim, beautiful and wonderful as my mother. She laughs when I walk or talk like she does. And when I put a pencil in my mouth and breathe the air out of it, my mother gets very angry. Probably, there is something in these cigarettes that greatly change my mother, she becomes angrier from them.

What effect might a mother's demands on her baby have to move away when she smokes? Who can and should protect a child from forced inhalation of tobacco smoke? What would be the most convincing argument for a mother that smoking should not be allowed with a child? From whom does mom need to hear about the dangers of secondhand smoke?

Talking to children about realizing their rights

It is very important for children to realize that someone cares about them, that they are not alone on the planet, there are documents that can protect them from violence from their parents. Therefore, it makes sense to discuss whole articles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child with the children. In terms of form, the discussion can be structured as follows: first, we ask a question about their life, then we select a small quote (article), read it to the class. Now a discussion of what was meant by this or that article, how you can change the unacceptable, discriminatory situation raised in the introductory part of the conversation. For a conversation with the guys, it is better to use not the full text of the articles of the Convention, but a summary of the main provisions of the article.

Best Safeguarding of the Rights of the Child

Are you familiar with the situation when a mother smokes with a child? How does this picture make you feel? Are you in a situation of forced inhalation of tobacco smoke? What are the health consequences of inhaling tobacco smoke?

Summary of Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child: All actions in relation to the child must fully take into account his interests. The state must provide appropriate care for the child if the parents or other persons entrusted with this responsibility do not do so.

Of course, this article is also about providing the child with food, living conditions, and education. Do you think a mom or dad who smokes in the presence of a child violates this article of the Convention? Who and how could change this situation, protect this child? What actions on the part of the state can protect you, for example, from forced inhalation of tobacco smoke? (law banning smoking in public places, in apartments, information campaign for parents) What could you do yourself to protect your right to smoke-free air?

Freedom of expression of the child's views and opinions

Let's discuss today who makes the decisions in your home? About arranging furniture, about rest, spending money, for example. If something was forbidden in the house, who and how can allow it? And if smoking was accepted in your house, who could change this rule and introduce a ban on smoking?

Articles 12 and 13 at a glance: A child has the right to freely express his or her views, and these views should be given consideration by adults in any matter affecting the child.

The child has the right to express his views, receive information, convey information and ideas.

Smoking in the house - does this question concern the child living there? Do your parents ask your opinion on this? Can your opinion influence family decisions? How do your peers feel about the fact that parents smoke at home, or doctors smoke in a hospital, or when a driver lights a cigarette in a minibus? Knowing the situation at home, what do you think, what arguments could help children make their home (entrance, school, clinic) free of tobacco? How can you make your opinion heard?

Access to relevant information

You probably know what tobacco advertising is for, what is it for? How true do you think she is? What information about tobacco is not on the posters? (on harm, death) Where, from whom could you get objective information about tobacco?

Article 17 in a nutshell: The state should ensure that children have access to information and materials from various sources, it should encourage the dissemination by the media of materials that contribute to the social and cultural development of the child and take steps to protect children from harmful information.

Is tobacco advertising harmful or helpful? How could you and other children be kept away from tobacco advertising? What television commercials would you think of so that all children in the country have access to objective information about tobacco (they should not be boring and edifying)?

Standard of living

Do you think your family meets all the necessary needs for food, clothing, education? What do you and your family lack money for, what do you save on?

Article 27 at a glance: Every child has the right to a standard of living necessary for his physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development. Parents have the primary responsibility to ensure an adequate standard of living. The duty of the state is to create the appropriate conditions for the implementation of this responsibility. State obligations may include providing material assistance to parents and their children.

Suppose one of the parents smokes. How much money per month from the family budget flies into the pipe: we calculate by the average cost of a pack or by the real situation of someone from the class. Now we add to this the possible cost of drugs for treatment in case of cardiovascular or pulmonary diseases caused by smoking. Let's think about what you need could be bought with this money?