Hello.
I heard this situation for the 1st time several years ago. IMHO, it was used as a type of 'out clause' and/or 'control' to tick off one parent versus the true belief of child endangerment.
Q: Do you think that one parent should be able to take away or control another parent's choice just because that parent chooses to smoke cigarettes?
I heard where the ex-husband tried (and won, actually) to take his children away from their mother (mainly to get back at his ex-wife) by telling the Court that she's putting their children's health in jeopardy because she smokes both in the house and in the car with them around. Grant it, none of their children had asthmatic problems.
I believe this became a precedence in whichever State it was in.
What's your take on this situation? Do you think that was fair and therefore, valid to be used as grounds for full custody in the eyes of the Court even if it's proven that the questioned parent is a really good parent? Should it be a non-issue and the Court should have seen right through the ex-husband's motives or do you think it was a clear case of child endangerment?
Now, be honest: how many of you, especially the over-50 crowd, had parents, grandparents, friends and/or relatives who smoked cigarettes while you were in the house or car with the windows rolled down to a certain point OR in any public place where strangers were smoking (including on airplanes, stores, theaters, restaurants, ballparks, hospital waiting rooms, work, babysitters, public bathrooms, airports, government buildings, and on and on...) and you lived to tell about it and with no adverse effects?
What's changed that now makes it an 'OOOHHH' issue?
Should the Court even touch this one especially in the case of divorce? Should one adult be able exercise this much control over another adult while the non-custodial parent goes on to enjoy their life unless or until they are awarded custody (or not)?
Get mad if you want to, but even though I don't smoke, I do believe that bars SHOULD be able to allow their patrons to smoke :smxF: if the bar owner is okay with it. The only reason I believe this is because in America, no is forced to patronize a given bar or other establishment that allows smoking. It they don't like smoking (likewise for the employee applicants), I think it is the their right to patronize a non-smoking bar or restaurant. Am I wrong to think this way? Personally, I don't think so.
Will this question stay controversial or is the end in sight because there really is a 'right' answer? :huh2:
Just wondering...
I heard this situation for the 1st time several years ago. IMHO, it was used as a type of 'out clause' and/or 'control' to tick off one parent versus the true belief of child endangerment.
Q: Do you think that one parent should be able to take away or control another parent's choice just because that parent chooses to smoke cigarettes?
I heard where the ex-husband tried (and won, actually) to take his children away from their mother (mainly to get back at his ex-wife) by telling the Court that she's putting their children's health in jeopardy because she smokes both in the house and in the car with them around. Grant it, none of their children had asthmatic problems.
I believe this became a precedence in whichever State it was in.
What's your take on this situation? Do you think that was fair and therefore, valid to be used as grounds for full custody in the eyes of the Court even if it's proven that the questioned parent is a really good parent? Should it be a non-issue and the Court should have seen right through the ex-husband's motives or do you think it was a clear case of child endangerment?
Now, be honest: how many of you, especially the over-50 crowd, had parents, grandparents, friends and/or relatives who smoked cigarettes while you were in the house or car with the windows rolled down to a certain point OR in any public place where strangers were smoking (including on airplanes, stores, theaters, restaurants, ballparks, hospital waiting rooms, work, babysitters, public bathrooms, airports, government buildings, and on and on...) and you lived to tell about it and with no adverse effects?
What's changed that now makes it an 'OOOHHH' issue?
Should the Court even touch this one especially in the case of divorce? Should one adult be able exercise this much control over another adult while the non-custodial parent goes on to enjoy their life unless or until they are awarded custody (or not)?
Get mad if you want to, but even though I don't smoke, I do believe that bars SHOULD be able to allow their patrons to smoke :smxF: if the bar owner is okay with it. The only reason I believe this is because in America, no is forced to patronize a given bar or other establishment that allows smoking. It they don't like smoking (likewise for the employee applicants), I think it is the their right to patronize a non-smoking bar or restaurant. Am I wrong to think this way? Personally, I don't think so.
Will this question stay controversial or is the end in sight because there really is a 'right' answer? :huh2:
Just wondering...
Dislike ads? Become a Fastlane member:
Subscribe today and surround yourself with winners and millionaire mentors, not those broke friends who only want to drink beer and play video games. :-)
Access Restricted: Unlock 1,000,000+ Posts
Stop Peeking Through the Keyhole.
Open the Door.
You hit a wall because the best advice isn't free—it's earned. Since 2007, MJ DeMarco has been active here daily (99.9% active rate), building a war room for entrepreneurs who refuse to settle for mediocrity.
- Active Daily: Life-changing content posted dozens of times every day. No dead threads.
- MJ's Inner Circle: Direct access to the author of The Millionaire Fastlane.
- Vetted Network: Connect with founders scaling to 7 and 8 figures.
- Proven Roadmaps: Strategy over motivation. Execution over "hustle porn."
"SCALED TO 6-FIGURE MONTHS"
"Tips and advice here saved me from huge mistakes, others allowed me to scale my business to 6-figure months."— User MitchC
"INSANE QUALITY OF PEOPLE"
"The number of high quality people I've met from this forum has been insane. All of it predicated on building real value."— User Richard Peck
"You are the average of the five people you surround yourself with."
Are you surrounding yourself with success?
.
O xet edvaemmz cusp sohjv aq vji suef gsun zua op Fim Wemmi, CVX -- Vu eff vu vji vxopt vjiusz.