heavily pregnant woman drinking and smoking

Fair enough.

Do you know in America they FORCE all companies to add folic acid to any bread they produce. So that basically all pregnant women will get folic acid in them as they eat any bread (as will everyone else, which does no harm to them).

Also for a while the UK government was seriously talking about adding a little flouride to all drinking water .. as they reckon the nations teeth would all get better. Of course people would lose the right to 'flouride free water out of the tap' and in the US they have never tasted bread without folic acid in it. In practice the folic acid is effectively being forced on them 'for their own good'.

Just out of interest .. would you be in favour of, or against, governments mass effectively forcing the population down such healthy routes? Making it nigh-on impossible for them to choose to not consume certain things? I'm not talking about 'give the population loads of information', I'm talking about 'All tap water WILL have flouride in it for everyone. full stop.'

Again, it's one of the more difficult 'freedom' questions .. just wondering where you stand out of interest ..

It's a tricky one. I'd personally be against it, but I can see the value of it. The real question is why we have to force people...

There is, likewise, a similar difficult question surrounding the moral hazard of the benefits system and the NHS. Take Fetal alcohol syndrome, for example, the individual making the decision to drink has little to no real responsibility to deal with the additional costs/problems of their decision, as it will be picked up by the state (especially as, in the UK at least, FAS is far more common within the benefit class than in other sections of the population). Granting additional rights and benefits within the dependency system for having children certainly creates a moral hazard situation...

The question is, how do you balance the genuine needs of people with the prevention of unforseen consequences and moral hazard?
 
The question is, how do you balance the genuine needs of people with the prevention of unforseen consequences and moral hazard?
The doesn't seem to be a solution much short of restricting what they can actually spend it on, i.e. food/clothing/utility vouchers rather than cash. But obviously then you impose a restriction on who can accept the payments, and open up a black market for passing them on.
 
My missus was told by the NHS to always satisfy her wierd food cravings when preggers, as it is what her body requires at that time.

She hasn't drunk through pregnancy. A few months ago she started moaning on, saying she could absolutely slaughter a single pint of Guinness. Only 1. It was a proper full-on craving. She has perhaps drank it 3 times before in her life!

She bought a pint and guzzled it down and never wanted another one since. The nurse said it was definately an 'iron' requirement FOR THE BABY at the time. Repeat - required by the baby which gave her the craving. She didn't know she needed iron. She only knew she needed guinness!!!


If the landlord has said 'I'm not serving you that guinness it's irresponsible of you' - would that have been reasonable?

There's over 10 times the amount of iron in a bowl of weetabix than a pint of guiness :p
 
There's over 10 times the amount of iron in a bowl of weetabix than a pint of guiness :p
I'm somewhat dubious that pregnancy cravings are accurate enough to crave a specific type of food because of a specific nutrient deficiency, no matter what the midwife said :confused:
 
I think it's all down to educating people regarding the risk. Most people see the risk and try to stop the risks as much as possible.

The people that appear on jeremy karl are doomed and there is no pointing helping people that don't help them self.

The long and short of it "cuurently" is that, it's their body they can do what they like with it. As bad as that sound it's up to them if they want to risk damaging their child before it's even born.

I personally don't see the harm in a mother having the odd drink. But think mothers should stop smoking and being around people who smoke where possible.
 
I'm somewhat dubious that pregnancy cravings are accurate enough to crave a specific type of food because of a specific nutrient deficiency, no matter what the midwife said :confused:

I don't know the science of it. But I promise you she - totally out of character - specifically suddenly started moaning on and on about wanting a single pint of guinness.


One time also I came home and she was eating slices of lime, on dry toast. And going on about how incredibly nice it was!

Perhaps she's just mental ;)
 
I don't know the science of it. But I promise you she - totally out of character - specifically suddenly started moaning on and on about wanting a single pint of guinness.


One time also I came home and she was eating slices of lime, on dry toast. And going on about how incredibly nice it was!

Perhaps she's just mental ;)

I know cravings can be completely crazy, and quite often are something they either didn't like or have never had before, I'm just dubious that the reasoning behind them is they subconsciously know it's a good source of what the baby needs
 
A personal high point of my life was leaving the maternity hosipital after my wife had just had a miscarriage and having to pass the chainsmoking pregnant women at the door!

Some people are just so stupid and selfish that they are beyong help. While disgusting it remains their choice.
 
I think she should have been refused service.

It always saddens me to see parents smoking in front of their babies and infants, never mind while pregnant. It's irresponsible and as far as I'm concerned shows a lack of love/care towards the child's needs and welfare.
 
Last edited:
The real question is why we have to force people...

I think that's a really good point. As I hinted earlier, I don't think we should be taking away people's liberties (and to an extent their responsibility, maybe why people are like this?).

Education is always beneficial when it comes to looking after your health, however there are some people who just won't listen or take it onboard and decide they won't be told, or indeed forced, to do anything. I say let them be, as said, let nature do the rest. I understand that the unborn child is a controversial subject when talking about when life begins and responsibilities, but I firmly believe it's the mother's responsibility to care for it and not the states responsibility to force her to. Intervention may be necessary in certain cases, but when the subject is capable of making their own decisions (and of relatively sound mind i.e. no mental conditions) it should be their responsibility.

I've said the word responsibility a lot, and I don't apologise for that. I think it's something that people take less and less of every year, I hate the way the country has moved to a blame culture and demands that someone other than themselves be culpable for the misdoings of the individual. If there's a loose stone, step over it. If you were given the wrong ladder, go get the right one or use your common sense. If there's a ledge with no barrier, don't jump off it. Worse of all, if you do something stupid, accept that maybe it was your fault.

That's gone a bit OT, but I think it's all related, especially through the type of individual that the OP is likely talking about.
 
A personal high point of my life was leaving the maternity hosipital after my wife had just had a miscarriage and having to pass the chainsmoking pregnant women at the door!

Some people are just so stupid and selfish that they are beyong help. While disgusting it remains their choice.

My sons first fresh breath of outside air was greeted with the same thing.....
 
everytime i see people smoking with kids in the back i feel sickened to the stomach , i dont see the point of this missery.
 
The Landlord has the right to refuse serving anybody & doesn't have to give a reason. I think any decent Landlord would blank her & those that don't should examine there motives.

This.
It is basically up to the barman, and if she left barely able to walk, then she was drunk, so they served a drunk person, and they should not have been doing that.

Its an awful situation, I've friends and family who have served in bars and they have refused people on occasion, served them water instead, etc. Has to be done.

She broke no laws, and no laws were broken serving her, but personally I wouldn't have served her anything after the first drink.
 
I know cravings can be completely crazy, and quite often are something they either didn't like or have never had before, I'm just dubious that the reasoning behind them is they subconsciously know it's a good source of what the baby needs

Shall I tell you something even more wild.

Theory has it when a baby has bacteria .. during breast feeding it passes some of that bacteria - like - micro amounts .. back to the mother through the nipple when feeding.

THEN the mother produces the specific anti-body required, and passes it back to the baby at a later breast-fed.

Mental eh? Bet you thought it was a one-way deal! *


* This may be an urban myth, but I was told it from a reliable source. Can anyone confirm?
 
My wife is 33 weeks pregnant and struggles to stand/move about due to SPD. I can't imagine her doing something like that, she spends half her time ensuring she's eating properly and drinking the right fruit juices, milk etc.

I honestly can't understand why anyone would smoke or drink heavily during pregnancy, but then again there's nothing the state can do or should do - it is down to the mother.

I hope the baby is born with no harm done, but it doesn't bode well for it's future.
 
Back
Top Bottom