Comments on: Judge Grants New Secondhand Smoke Trial http://www.legalnewswatch.com/131/judge-grants-new-secondhand-smoke-trial Stories That Impact Your Rights Sun, 12 Oct 2008 04:28:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Gary Newbold http://www.legalnewswatch.com/131/judge-grants-new-secondhand-smoke-trial/comment-page-1#comment-914 Gary Newbold Wed, 05 May 2004 15:39:04 +0000 http://www.legalnewswatch.com/?p=131#comment-914 Please note who submitted this. Please note who submitted this.

]]> By: judge william f. chinnock http://www.legalnewswatch.com/131/judge-grants-new-secondhand-smoke-trial/comment-page-1#comment-913 judge william f. chinnock Sat, 08 Nov 2003 12:54:11 +0000 http://www.legalnewswatch.com/?p=131#comment-913 NOTICE: “NO SMOKING AROUND CHILDREN” The law review article entitled "No Smoking around Children," by Ohio Judge William F. Chinnock, has just been published in the University of Arizona Law Review (Vol. 45, No. 3, Nov. 2003). It's subtitle is “The Family Courts’ Mandatory Duty to Restrain Parents and Other Persons from Smoking around Children." Its major points: 1. “The evidence is overwhelming and irrefutable. Smoking tobacco causes and aggravates serious diseases in smokers, and quite often, leads to death. Smoking kills almost three times as many smokers each week in the United States as were killed in the September 11th terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.” 2. “Secondhand smoke causes and aggravates serious diseases in non-smoking adults and children. Every three weeks secondhand cigarette smoke kills about the same number of non-smokers in the United States as were killed in the September 11th terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.” 3. “Children are especially susceptible to diseases caused by secondhand smoke. Secondhand smoke is a real and substantial danger to the health of children.” 4. “Children comprise the most abused segment of society in the world. Fortunately, the children of America are protected by our unrivaled, centuries-old system of juvenile justice.” 5. “The clear and convincing evidence of manifold harm from secondhand smoke to children is consistent, robust, and irrefutable. This evidence gives rise to a duty upon family courts, the legislature, and administrative agencies to take action to reduce children's compelled exposure to tobacco smoke.” 6. “Existing American law requires a family court, on its own initiative and regardless of the health of the child, to consider the danger of secondhand smoke to children as a significant, and possibly determinative (where child has health problems), factor in determining issues of visitation and custody. Family courts have a further duty to protect all children under their care by issuing court orders restraining anyone from smoking in their presence as a matter of standard practice.” NOTICE: “NO SMOKING AROUND CHILDREN”

The law review article entitled “No Smoking around Children,” by Ohio Judge William F. Chinnock, has just been published in the University of Arizona Law Review (Vol. 45, No. 3, Nov. 2003). It’s subtitle is “The Family Courts’ Mandatory Duty to Restrain Parents and Other Persons from Smoking around Children.”

Its major points:

1. “The evidence is overwhelming and irrefutable. Smoking tobacco causes and aggravates serious diseases in smokers, and quite often, leads to death. Smoking kills almost three times as many smokers each week in the United States as were killed in the September 11th terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.”

2. “Secondhand smoke causes and aggravates serious diseases in non-smoking adults and children. Every three weeks secondhand cigarette smoke kills about the same number of non-smokers in the United States as were killed in the September 11th terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.”

3. “Children are especially susceptible to diseases caused by secondhand smoke. Secondhand smoke is a real and substantial danger to the health of children.”

4. “Children comprise the most abused segment of society in the world. Fortunately, the children of America are protected by our unrivaled, centuries-old system of juvenile justice.”

5. “The clear and convincing evidence of manifold harm from secondhand smoke to children is consistent, robust, and irrefutable. This evidence gives rise to a duty upon family courts, the legislature, and administrative agencies to take action to reduce children’s compelled exposure to tobacco smoke.”

6. “Existing American law requires a family court, on its own initiative and regardless of the health of the child, to consider the danger of secondhand smoke to children as a significant, and possibly determinative (where child has health problems), factor in determining issues of visitation and custody. Family courts have a further duty to protect all children under their care by issuing court orders restraining anyone from smoking in their presence as a matter of standard practice.”

]]>