[Michah]

Hi there,

Have a look at this email I sent in response to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald. This is a major newspaper in a capital city in Australia.......I tell you, legislation makes my blood boil......The pollies are trying to ban smoking from all mental health facilities.......no designated areas, no taking the patient outside for a smoke.......basically they will restrain and heavily sedate the patient during withdrawal. What happened to civil liberties!!! All in the name of a bloody cigarette. Read on........tell me what you think.


To Whom This May Concern,

Well, well what a revolting concept. I agree with Dr Alvaro Manove, who wrote that piece in the SMH, "Stopping Mentally Ill People from Smoking is Cruel", March 20, 2009.

I speak from personal experience. I am a mentally ill person who has had many admissions into a psychiatric facility in Brisbane, Queensland. I have to say, that we had designated areas within the complex to smoke. Voluntary and involuntary patients had the same liberties.

To think that a severely impaired person, suffering from psychosis for example, could possibly process the withdrawal from nicotine in the name of
"political correctness" is beyond me. You only have to look at a large amount of people trying to give up smoking(which is a choice, mind you) and they, being "normal people" suffer intense headaches, moodiness, agitation, anger, anxiety and grief. I am not saying that all people suffer terrible withdrawal symptoms, but most people I have talked to have wrestled with this addiction like a well-meaning crocodile. Now add that to a severe psychotic episode!!

While someone is in terrible physical and mental anguish do you think that the obvious downside to smoking is really at the forefront of their long-term
well-being? Give me a break! Most patients struggle with what day it is, let alone "Is this cigarette killing me? No, this severe depressive episode is likely to kill me first!!

Let them smoke, for goodness sake! it is cruel and unusual punishment to remove a legal dependancy that provides some relief in this horrendous time. I have also found that smoking is the only vice that recovering alcoholics or drug addicts have. Don't torture them further by taking away the only thing they feel they have left........believe me, I have been told by patients that their pouch of tobacco and their tiny blue lighter is all that remains of their life outside.

Send some of those NSW politicians or policy makers in to TALK to patients........they will see a very different view from their privileged, bigoted, narrow-minded positions. Once they see the anguish and mental torture people go through in a psychiatric facility, they will be compelled beyond their understanding to provide the "cancer stick" that they, in their infinite wisdom, were prepared to deny!!

Yours sincerely,

Michah Hadley
Queensland

[jbug]

I know here in the US in a couple of weeks the tax on our cigarettes is going up big time. I found out that the people that sponsored the bill are the tobacco makers Phillip Morris. I plan on trying to quit again when that tax goes into affect because I won't be able to afford to smoke. Here in Arkansas they upped the tax $.50 and then the added $1.50 will hurt. The state tax will be used to fund a statewide trauma service as we don't have a trauma center. I can see that but I go to Missouri to buy my cigarettes just so I don't have to pay that tax.

I know here in Arkansas they tried to pass a law that they were going to take away smoking in mental health facilities but it didn't get passed because they realized how important it was for us to be able to smoke.

Jan

[deliquesce]

what the bleeding ****?!

any chance to have a link to the article? i missed it in today's paper.

at first guess, would think it could be passed, as it goes against basic human rights?

am very interested to know which asswipes want to pass this legislation. if it k.rudd + team, they will definitely be getting angry letters.

[Michah]

Thanks for input.......deliquese(can never remember the spelling of your username, sorry!)

Shocking HUH!!! My dad hopes my letter gets published......he was the one who told me about it........he knows I get really fired up about the rights of the mentally ill.

Heres the link to the letter

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/l...054991796.html

Thanks for getting disgusted with me!!!

[Taonuviel]

I've been to three facilities around here, and one has no place for smoking. Another one has a room (nastiest thing ever... all that concentrated cheap cigarette smoke! Had to hold my breath and walk fast past it.), and the other allows patients to smoke outside (not so bad. The air takes it away, though it is a bit annoying trying to avoid it to get some fresh air.). The one without anywhere to smoke provides patches, but the smokers get rather... testy... about it. Last time I was in a patient had family sneak in cigarettes for her... not sure what came out of that!

I hate most cigarettes. Seems like every once in a while I'll smell one that verges on pleasant, but that's rare. I think laws should be tougher against them to protect the rights of non-smokers to have clean air, and especially the rights of severe asthmatics. If people want to smoke, fine. But it's wrong to intrude on non-smokers. And then there's smoking around kids, which should be entirely illegal.

Inpatient rights... need to be maintained. Facilities should be required to have separate space for it - outside is best. Especially since if it's outside and the weather's not that great, it may encourage smokers to cut back to the minimum!

[Michah]

Originally Posted by Taonuviel

I've been to three facilities around here, and one has no place for smoking. Another one has a room (nastiest thing ever... all that concentrated cheap cigarette smoke! Had to hold my breath and walk fast past it.), and the other allows patients to smoke outside (not so bad. The air takes it away, though it is a bit annoying trying to avoid it to get some fresh air.). The one without anywhere to smoke provides patches, but the smokers get rather... testy... about it. Last time I was in a patient had family sneak in cigarettes for her... not sure what came out of that!

I hate most cigarettes. Seems like every once in a while I'll smell one that verges on pleasant, but that's rare. I think laws should be tougher against them to protect the rights of non-smokers to have clean air, and especially the rights of severe asthmatics. If people want to smoke, fine. But it's wrong to intrude on non-smokers. And then there's smoking around kids, which should be entirely illegal.

Inpatient rights... need to be maintained. Facilities should be required to have separate space for it - outside is best. Especially since if it's outside and the weather's not that great, it may encourage smokers to cut back to the minimum!

I agree taonuviel, non-smokers rights are just as important as smokers rights. Non-smokers should always have the right to choose.I definitely think that separate areas are called for........there are the obvious health risks with passive smoking......

But should smokers be restrained and heavily medicated in the name of political correctness because appropriate facilities have not been provided for smokers?.......I think not. This is not a smoking debate.......it is a civil liberties debate. It is about the right to chose.

In corrective services in QLD, our forensic psychiatric facility is given part of their state budget in cigarettes because it keeps the patients "docile" and "malleable". What, so the criminally insane are allowed to smoke but the "relatively, law-abiding mentally ill" aren't?

Gosh, the inconsistencies are atrocious......

[AAAAA]

Smokers have no rights. Local businesses particularly bars and taverns suffered greatly when people (who were not customers btw) passed legislation that prevented smoking in these places.

The last time I was in the hospital I had to sneak out to my car to smoke, which was technically illegal as it was a non-smoking campus, no smoking permitted on the property at all. I wasn't aware that there were still hospitals that permitted smoking anywhere. The last hospital I worked at closed down the smoking breakroom and prohibited employees to smoke on the property.

[Taonuviel]

Oh, right, I'm sure that's why the one didn't allow it - it was the only inpatient unit of the three that was part of a medical hospital. The other two were strictly psychiatric hospitals.

[artie]

I actually took up the habit in a psychiatric unit in New Zealand, I was very manic and thought (wrongly) everyone was smoking the peace pipe, patients warned me about the addiction risk but staff did nothing. I'd say a lot of people could sue the govt for getting them hooked.

I think the real psychological reason the most agressive ant-smoking campainers are in it is because it's no longer legal to bully on the basis of race, sex etc. For people who are always thinking with the primative, reptile part of their brain someone always has to be bottom of the dominance heirachy.

Anyway I smoked for 15 years and finally quit when breathing and activity became difficult. Am very glad I got out alive.

In my case the militant campaigns against smoking turned me into a militant entrenched smoker, rather like an interaction with the KKK might make an African-American racist, it probably delayed me quiting by years.

Good luck

[kim_johnson]

I'm ambivalent about this issue. As a smoker I feel very angry and frustrated when I can't smoke a cigarette. I have no problem not smoking inside but I do have a problem with not being able to smoke outside or with not having a place provided for me when I am unable to go outside. The lack of smoking rooms in airports is my current gripe. That being said, I'm not sure that I have a 'right' to smoke anymore than a person has a 'right' to drink or a 'right' to take heroin or cocaine or...

Personally, I think the best case that can be put forward (the case that is most likely to succeed) is that case that nicotine is a neurotransmitter and altered levels of nicotine in the brain is going to have an impact on behavior. Since the majority of people in an inpatient psychiatric ward are there for the purposes of medication stabilization it would help the stabilization process immensely if people were having their usual levels of nicotine.

- One problem is that people often smoke more in an inpatient setting than they do in an outpatient setting. Especially when smoking is considered a legitimate reason for a walk around the yard.

- If they do plan to not allow smoking then I do think they should provide nicotine replacement therapy (for the reason stated above).

The hospital I spent most of my time in went non-smoking. That being said, they made an exception for the psychiatric ward (providing a smoking room and then fencing an outside area such that people could securely smoke outside) precisely because of the medication stabilization issue.

The hospital here is on a non-smoking university campus. There is one officially recognized smoking area on campus (and it is a big big campus that could take you up to 30 minutes to get there) and a few 'unofficial but we will turn a blind eye' areas. There are none in the vicinity of the hospitals (including the psychiatric ward) however. My p-doc rolled her eyes when I asked her how that was working out for medication stabilization. I'd say that would be the way to attempt to get clinicians and clients all arguing for the same thing...

[Tumnus]

As a non-smoker who was hospitalized in a non-smoking hospital I was curious about those who weren't allowed to smoke. Some seemed to be okay with it since they had those little plastic things with nicotine in them to use instead of cigarettes (anyone know what they're called?) but they all agreed that it was hard to not have a chance to go out a smoke. I, for one, appreciated not smelling cigarette smoke on anyone or in the air but I do think it makes way more sense to allow smokers to smoke while hospitalized in a psych hospital or in a psych ward. Just like drug addicts addicted to cigarettes often hold onto the cigarettes while they get off the other drugs, stabilize, and then maybe try to cut the nicotene addiction. It just makes sense to work on the more pressing problem first.

[Alexismiles]

I'm sorry this upsets you but I feel it's a good idea to ban smoking in any hospital atmosphere since hospitals are to help and heal people. The other patients in the hospital may not want to have to inhale the gases sent off from 2nd hand smoke because they not only stink but are a real health concern since any amount of 2nd hand smoke inhaled passively is dangerous to the people breathing them in.
I think all mentally ill patients in hospitals should be encouraged to quit and what a better time than when in a facility that is there to help you with your mental health. Since quitting smoking will bring out a lot of strong emotions the patients quitting will have someone immediately on hand to listen and understand.
I think this is a super good idea. I'm glad to hear it. Again, sorry if this upsets you.

[Alexismiles]

Just a quick note on "smoker's rights" No, the laws don't give smokers rights. There are no laws protecting smokers. It is not like a religion or race or something of that to be a smoker. People get in trouble and are fined for playing loud music, people have to make sure emissions coming from their cars meet a criteria and so do manufacturers to protect the general public. It only makes sense that cigarettes falls under these restrictions. In my opinion not nearly strict enough though.
Second hand smoke kills people. It makes a person who wishes to be healthy and clean have to inhale very harmful toxins, smell unpleasant odors and to have their homes stink as a result of a next door neighbor or a tenant smoking inside their homes. It's upsetting to think people have to move from their homes and break leases and have to pay penalties for such because of a next door neighbor or tenant who smokes so heavily they could not breath in their own homes and could not even open up a window for fresh air because it would come in from the windows as well as from within the common walls shared. Little kids, people's children are being gassed by toxic fumes emitted from other people's cigarette smoke and all the while smokers keep talking about their rights? What about a non-smokers right to just breath inside their homes without getting sick off of someone elses bad habit?
I don't mean to sound angry but I am annoyed when I hear smokers talking about their rights and the truth is, you have no rights as a smoker. But I do have rights to breath because I need to breath. Nobody needs to smoke.

[Michah]

Alexismiles, you are entitled to your opinion, no doubt. Without our values, we would not be made of much........

This is not about smoking.......this is about restraining and sedating patients so they cannot smoke.......it is about the right of the patient to CHOOSE. It is a civil liberties debate.......to restrain and sedate a person for the reasons of political correctness is tantamount to torture. I am sure the UN would have a problem with this.....

THIS IS NOT ABOUT SMOKING........it would be like restraining a patient who is an alcoholic or heroin addict......you just don't do it........wrong, wrong, wrong!!!!

[deliquesce]

agree with Michah .

i wouldn't have half as much of a problem with this if *all* public hospitals here in Aus were smoke-free premises. but no, that isn't the case. so i wonder why it is only the mentally ill that are being targeted?

i used to work at one of the largest hospitals here in NSW. we had a gent who came in to have his lungs operated on 3 times in two years because of the damage he had caused them by smoking.

and yet, we would still find him after each operation in the grounds, still woozy from sedation, puffing up and getting his fix of nicotine.

we need to pass laws to sedate people like him, before sedating those going through mental health crises. i would not have half as much of a problem with this, if it were a law that was being applied across the board.

[Michah]

Originally Posted by deliquesce

agree with Michah .

i wouldn't have half as much of a problem with this if *all* public hospitals here in Aus were smoke-free premises. but no, that isn't the case. so i wonder why it is only the mentally ill that are being targeted?

i used to work at one of the largest hospitals here in NSW. we had a gent who came in to have his lungs operated on 3 times in two years because of the damage he had caused them by smoking.

and yet, we would still find him after each operation in the grounds, still woozy from sedation, puffing up and getting his fix of nicotine.

we need to pass laws to sedate people like him, before sedating those going through mental health crises. i would not have half as much of a problem with this, if it were a law that was being applied across the board.

Absolutely, sweetie.......look, I am a smoker. It is a choice I make......but I will not choose for others, especially non-smokers........I agree that hospitals should all be non smoking.......I also worked in a major hospital in Queensland(funnily, it was the same hospital as all my psych admissions!! HAH) and we had a smoking area away from everyone and you'd get the occasional cancer patient out there and other really unwell people. The sedation option should be available, but like with most things, human rights dictates that if the patient is not in imminent danger to themselves or others, they should not be forced to do anything as they are considered "mentally competent". Its like the rules for signing a DNR or organ donation....it is done while the patient is competent......it is their choice.

Now i know how bad it is......BUT it is not my right to make the choice for someone else........I used to think, My God how can that cancer patient smoke that cigarette? But who am I to judge? I have never lived in their shoes

Thanks everyone for your input........some really good arguments.

[Peppermint_Patty]

Hello All,

Here in the state of Ohio, USA we have a state wide smoking ban which makes it illegal to smoke in any public building including restaurants, cafes, pubs, hospitals, office buildings, etc.

And yes... while there were a few businesses who said that their business suffered as a result of of the smoking ban, most businesses have stated that their business actually increased as a result of the ban.

So it's a been a good thing for everyone, unless you are a smoker of course, lol.

Anyway... I realize that some of you are upset about banning smoking in Australian health care facilities... but unless a hospital is willing to undergo expensive alterations -- i.e. create rooms with SEPERATE VENTILATION SYSTEMS... banning smoking is the best thing to do, as cigarette smoke can contaminate the air of the entire healthcare facility with carcinogens, carbon monoxide, and other pollutants.

Also sorry to stir the pot further , but if you are visiting a hospital at the tax payer's expense... that is you are poor or unisured and not paying your own way... then I think the government and the public DOES HAVE THE RIGHT to step in say "NO!!" to anything that could contribute to additional healthcare costs (i.e. burden to the taxpayer).

Statistically speaking, smokers incur much higher healthcare costs than non-smokers.... so if I am a taxpayer, I don't want to be supporting or even enabling a person's habit, if that habit has the potential to create even more expense!!

So I think making the patient quit the smoking habit is a very good thing.

Furthermore.. healthcare facilities ban illegal drugs and alcohol on their premises and force alcoholics and drug addicts to kick the habit, so why should nicotine addicts be treated any differently?????

Anyway... as far as sedating a patient who is a smoker, I don't agree with that idea. I think the best idea would be to give the patients counseling and a short stint of nicotine patches.

Just my $0.02,

Peppermint Patty

Originally Posted by AAAAA

Smokers have no rights. Local businesses particularly bars and taverns suffered greatly when people (who were not customers btw) passed legislation that prevented smoking in these places.

The last time I was in the hospital I had to sneak out to my car to smoke, which was technically illegal as it was a non-smoking campus, no smoking permitted on the property at all. I wasn't aware that there were still hospitals that permitted smoking anywhere. The last hospital I worked at closed down the smoking breakroom and prohibited employees to smoke on the property.

[deliquesce]

.

michah - in complete agreement, once again. i probably jumbled my last post up a bit. i would have a *major* problem sedating the chap who continued to smoke after his lung ops. his choice, right? so it confuses me as to why it's acceptable to take away the choices of those in psych wards.

if you end up in a hospital to get a few stitches, but the docs decide at the same time that your foot needs to be sawn off, for your ultimate health and well being - well, that is something they ask your permission for. and you still have the right to refuse.

so it's the same thing here. people in psych wards go in to deal with their current crisis. they do not go in to get forced 'help' with giving up cigarrettes.

i am a non-smoker, and i find the habit disgusting. i really was glad when they banned smoking in pubs and stuff. but this is something different altogether, yknow?

[deliquesce]

patty - the issue isn't about a blanket ban against smoking in all hospitals. it's about banning smoking in only psych hospitals. that's discrimination, yeah?

if it was a ban against all hospitals providing a premises for people to smoke, then i would have no problem with it, whatsoever.

[Peppermint_Patty]

Deliquesce,

Whether it is a regular hospital or a psych hospital is immaterial, IMHO... as it should be banned in ALL health care facilities not just for the pollution issue that I mentioned earlier, but also because it is a fire/explosion hazard.

(It's an explosion hazard if a lit cigarette is near an area where oxygen is used)

Anyway... as far as banning it only in psych hospitals, I don't really see that as discrimination.

I think psych hospitals have to deal with the threat of violence much more than a regular hospital-- including the possiblity of a patient deliberately setting fire to the facility through the use of cigarettes, lighters, etc, as an act of retribution or even a form of suicide.

So no, I don't think it is discrimination.

However why Australia doesn't ban smoking in ALL healthcare facilities is beyond me. Given the fact that smoking is such a unhealthy practice, allowing smoking in a health care facility is hypocritical IMHO.

Peppermint Patty

Originally Posted by deliquesce

patty - the issue isn't about a blanket ban against smoking in all hospitals. it's about banning smoking in only psych hospitals. that's discrimination, yeah?

if it was a ban against all hospitals providing a premises for people to smoke, then i would have no problem with it, whatsoever.

[50guy]

I haven't smoked for over 25 years, just the occasional cigar and scotch.

Last time I checked smoking was not illegal. It is regulated, somewhat like liquor. I'm opposed to smoking in public places indoors. Wanna smoke, have at it, just take it outside. On the other hand, if a private business wants to allow smoking on their premises that is their business and it is my right to not patronize that establishment.

The hospital I work at has a Psych Ward and also has two heated and air conditioned outdoor enclousures with air exchanges for smokers. Oh, and it is a Federal Government owned facility.

[deliquesce]

Originally Posted by Peppermint_Patty

Anyway... as far as banning it only in psych hospitals, I don't really see that as discrimination.

I think psych hospitals have to deal with the threat of violence much more than a regular hospital-- including the possiblity of a patient deliberately setting fire to the facility through the use of cigarettes, lighters, etc, as an act of retribution or even a form of suicide.

So no, I don't think it is discrimination.

However why Australia doesn't ban smoking in ALL healthcare facilities is beyond me. Given the fact that smoking is such a unhealthy practice, allowing smoking in a health care facility is hypocritical IMHO.

there have been a string on MI experts coming out and saying that banning smoking in psych wards will likely increase aggressive behaviour, actually. inpatients aren't allowed to keep lighters etc, so there is no possibility of pxs setting alight to things.

just to be clear: the smoking doesn't actually happen inthe wards, but outside the hospital - probably in the grounds, in a well ventilated area. and for psych wards, there is always someone with you supervising.

so banning it from the ground doesn't actually do anything, imo, other than send the message that the state has total power over everything they do .

as i've said - would have no issue with this if it were extended to all hospitals. but it is beyond me as to why the mentally ill are targeted. my honest opinion is that it is likely that there simply weren't enough people who cared enough about the rights of the mentally ill to oppose it, whereas a blanket ban across all hospitals has many opposers.

[Alexismiles]

Sorry about that. I have issues with second hand smoke and having to move a couple of times because of it.
I didn't realize they allowed smoking in other hospitals. For the patients, they have their own smoking area?

[deliquesce]

yeah, i have asthma myself, so i kind of detest smokers who stand near me . especially at bus stops, grrr.

at the hospital i used to work at - there was a smoking area for staff only, and the patients were allowed to on the grounds outside. this was a general hospital - it had a psych ward - but did all the usual hospital stuff too.

they made it that the staff had to go to a particular area to smoke, because they didnt like that we were sending the wrong message about it being acceptable.

[(JD)]

Hmmm I suppose the mental institution ban could be considered due to the fact that they don't allow patients there to continue any addiction. They search, take away and watch for any "contraband" for other non-healthy behavior, what is different about smoking cigarettes? I.E. Alcoholics aren't allowed to drink there. Crack heads aren't allowed to sniff... self harmers of any kind aren't allowed to do so... and imo, that includes smokers.

I think it's good, personally.

Also, consider the doctors who don't smoke, and wish to breathe healthy air. If there was some type of "right" to smoke, it would probably infringe upon others, and take away their right.

I'm sorry for those who do smoke, and need to feed that nasty habit. If the manufacturers didn't cause the addiction, it wouldn't be so difficult to give it up. (I don't wish to get on a soapbox, but have the same opinions regarding the fast food places that put ingredients in their food so you crave them.)

I wish good health for all.