I'm against the nanny state. But I'm an aggressive supporter of humane treatment for our pet companions, and that extends to protecting them from health hazards.
Accidentally, I found out the possible danger of second-hand smoke for animals. In 1990, I turned me and my three-pack a day smoke habit over to the SmokeEnder program. The MO is behavior-modification and group support over a number of weeks. By the last week, we didn't need or want to smoke cigarettes.
The cure lasted. Part of the reason I stuck with my new identity as a non-smoker was all the anecdotes I heard from group members about how their cats and dogs had died - prematurely, it seemed - from cancers in the area of the nasal cavity. Just the year before I had taken into my life my first dog, a Japanese Chin Nicole. So delighted with motherhood, I added a huge gray cat Sarah. Since then, as many lead paint watchers know, I had provided Pomeranian Molly Mittens with a smoke-free home.
But what if I hadn't found out this possible link between second-hand smoke and animal cancers? I might be in the same ignorant state I discovered a neighbor and his one-year-old dog to be in. Molly Mittens died on June 30, 2006. Since I'm not ready to have another dog, I shop for and give those cute stuffed animals with squeakers and ropes for dogs in my apartment complex.
Shocker: Tonight when I knocked on a neighbor's door, he answered it with a cigarette. The dog jumped up for his two toys. The man didn't act "caught" or distressed that he was smoking inside with his door taking in what was exhaled.
During Katrina, I joined with thousands of other bloggers in successfully lobbying for provisions for pets during future disasters. Now, I'm lobbying for the definition of "animal abuse" to include second-hand smoke. Legislatures, courts, NGOs, vets and landlords need to be on the front lines to protect animal companions from this man-made health problem. Just as in Katrina, I ask other bloggers to join in this mission.
Oh, that's great. Even if only 25% of pet owners are smokers, you'd rather these animals NOT have a home and boost the country's euthanasia rate even higher because you want to play "big brother" to all companion animals in the United States?
Indeed, second hand smoke is not good for any living creature but LIVING is the key word and a pet with a loving home and second hand smoke beats an overflowing shelter or rescue any day.
And what of those who smoke and foster animals for shelters and rescues.
Well, I guess those pets are better off euthanized also.
I'd much rather place a homeless companion animal in a loving home - cigarette, pipe or cigar smoke included - than be the one injecting the drugs that will end another animal's life.
If you're so righteous on smokers NOT having pets, I suggest YOU volunteer at a local shelter and look into the eyes of each animal you euthanize because you'd rather that pet not be subjected to smoke.
Posted by: Roger Gromwell | July 24, 2008 at 05:39 AM