EDITORIAL: Will we ban smoking in homes?

PAUL TAGGART
The bizarre, interesting and wonderful new happenings in the United States can often be commonplace in this country a decade or so later.
The list of examples is long, with television, open gay relationships and facelifts being a few of the more obvious cases.
Could the latest Californian crackdown on smoking also migrate across the Pacific?
The rural California town of Calabasas has enacted the first law in the US banning smoking on streets, at bus stops and in all other public places where people can be exposed to second-hand smoke.
"People have a right to breathe clean air," says Calabasas Mayor Barry Groveman.
And he has a point.
The ban means an end to smokers huddling outside the entrances of offices, lighting up on outdoor restaurant patios, or puffing on their apartment balconies if they are near common areas such as pools or laundry rooms.
Smokers now have to go to designated areas, or will be handed small cards outlining the new law. Persistent offenders risk fines of up to $US500.
San Francisco already prohibits smoking in parks and Los Angeles and Malibu last year cracked down on the habit on more than 65km of beaches.
New Zealand is not that far behind, with a Levin bar owner this week fined $800 and ordered to pay costs totalling $920 after admitting four charges of allowing people to smoke on his premises.
Public health researchers here are also calling for smoke-free homes.
A study has found an "aggressive" smoke-free policy will ensure fewer people start the habit, as well as helping people to kick smoking.
"With the goal of making New Zealand's workplaces smoke-free now largely achieved, people's homes are one of the last frontiers in the battle to reduce second-hand smoke indoors," Dr George Thomson said.
Second-hand smoke was harmful to human health and wellbeing, and homes were crucial sites of exposure, he said.
"Smoke-free homes mean fewer children with glue ear, fewer days off school, and less chance of children starting smoking. And they help avoid the catastrophic effects of cot deaths on families."
Dr Thomson said that up until now research had focused on individuals voluntarily reducing second-hand smoke in homes rather than using legislation.
But what is the point of banning people from smoking around their colleagues in the workplace when they can go home and blow smoke over their partner and children? Maybe fresh legislation is the answer.
It would be difficult to police, but there are many activities that go on behind closed doors that are covered by legislation - including using drugs and child abuse, which some would consider passive smoking to be.
So it may seem odd that Californians in Calabasas cannot stand outside their workplaces or outside bars to smoke, but are being rounded up in "smokers' corrals".
Give it 10 years, however, and who knows what will be happening in this country?