Something that bothered me last night at Coach's...bartender was probably eight months pregnant yet there were numerous folks smokin it up

Of course she chose that job and they have the right blah blah but if I smoked I would step my happy azz outside given the situation

Thoughts?

I bartended as a second job and even taught bartending for several years - IMO it is not the customer's responsibility or expectation to make concessions for bar staff. The bartender is an adult and it is up to her to either find another position during her pregnancy or continue to work.

If she was your waitress would you have gone and gotten and carried your own food from the kitchen and/or expected other customers to do the same?

Not the same as throwing out smoke for jr to enjoy

Not the same as throwing out smoke for jr to enjoy

Still, not the customer's problem. If you want to be outraged at someone, I'd direct it towards the mother to be.

No outrage bates...just think the puffers lacked class is all...one night they could take a step outside out of respect for the kiddo

No outrage bates...just think the puffers lacked class is all...one night they could take a step outside out of respect for the kiddo

If that bartender was there for only one night that might be true. But for a permanent employee you can't expect the patrons to always step outside. I agree that it's the employee's issue to resolve here as long as smoking is legally allowed.

It is the bartender's fault for putting her child at risk for not finding another job. She is probably a smoker.

If that bartender was there for only one night that might be true. But for a permanent employee you can't expect the patrons to always step outside. I agree that it's the employee's issue to resolve here as long as smoking is legally allowed.

If you are a regular you should know her on a more personal level and step outside until she is back from maternity leave

Regardless of who is at fault...Regardless of the scene or situation if you smoke in a room with an obviously pregnant person you are a douche

If you are a regular you should know her on a more personal level and step outside until she is back from maternity leave

Regardless of who is at fault...Regardless of the scene or situation if you smoke in a room with an obviously pregnant person you are a douche


All doucheyness (sp) aside, I really find it bazaar that anyone would expect patrons of a bar to go outside to smoke simply because the bartender has made the decision to work while pregnant. This has come up before (bartenders turing up pregnant) when I tended bar and NEVER would the bar owner or patrons feel it was anyone's responsibility other than the bartenders and I doubt you can find anything that would back up the opinion that the patrons should be inconvenienced and not the bartender. Depending on the size of the bar she could fill a different staff position for awhile, take a short bartending assignment at a bar without smoking (or less smoking), just deal with it or quit/take leave.

I personally do not smoke and find it gross and annoying but that doesn't change what should or should not happen in your scenario.


Regardless of the scene or situation if you smoke in a room with an obviously pregnant person you are a douche

I agree with that statement except for the 'regardless' comment. Smoking in our society these days is limited to very few public spaces. Sure, in a home a small gathering of friends, a car, etc. the smoker should (IMO) not smoke at all if anyone nearby disagrees or is pregnant etc. But in a designated smoking area, the only person being stupid is the pregnant woman.

I think BB is correct that it is not the patron's responsibility but I really think a lot of Easy for showing class. The mother to be is not showing good sense. The fact is, if she is not bothered by all the smoke in the first place, she is likely to be a smoker, herself. If so, that baby is going to be exposed to it, regardless. That is speculation, I'm sure.

Hats off to Easy.

Perhaps the mother-to-be is a smoker.

I choose to do electrical work, so there is a good chance that I could get shocked or electrocuted.

I choose to do electrical work, so there is a good chance that I could get shocked or electrocuted.

Yes, but you don't expose your child to it.

Yes, but you don't expose your child to it. I sure don't, that is my point.

I understand the health and risk factors, but I can guarantee you that plenty of us on here have friends whose mothers smoked, drank, snorted, or whatever when they were pregnant with them and they came out just fine. I highly doubt that this situation is going to make the baby any genetically worse than some other kid that has been passed on the heart disease gene, the cancer gene, the Alzheimer gene or whatever other bad family health history gene is out there. Yeah, this sounds insensitive but isn't it insensitive that the mother doesn't give two craps about her own child's health by working in it? I mean get a temp job at Barnes & Noble or something like that. No reason to put the blame on the smokers...

Something that bothered me last night at Coach's...bartender was probably eight months pregnant yet there were numerous folks smokin it up

Of course she chose that job and they have the right blah blah but if I smoked I would step my happy azz outside given the situation

Thoughts?

Thoughts, yes. It's self-righteous people such as yourself who are the real problem. What the flying fig do you care what this woman "subjects her child to"? It's none of your frelling business. You act all high and mighty about a circumstance which normally you wouldn't actually get too upset over. I mean Did you ever think to feel sorry for the woman for being raised in the type of environment which allowed her to think it wasn't a problem to work in a smoky bar while pregnant? Maybe someone abused her pre-natal rights and subjected her to harmful chemicals while she was still in the womb a couple of decades ago. But do you seem to care about her? No, you care about this unborn fetus which may or may not actually make it into this world. (miscarriages, mother in a car crash, any number of possibilities here) And you don't even know what the true risks are to this fetus from the second hand smoke. I was reading studies from a college student's research paper last year that showed second hand smoke may not be as harmful as previously thought. Maybe you are all worked up over rhetoric that you were indoctrinated with in your own environment growing up. You start by saying it would be more classy for the smoker to go outside and then a couple of posts later you show your true nature. In your words the smokers were the "douche"bags for not going outside to smoke. So really I think you had a problem with the smokers or there's something else going on here. I doubt you just genuinely really care for the unborn fetus of a woman you will never have any contact with in this frivolous life.

I was at McNellie's not too long ago and about to light a cigarette in the upstairs smoking section of the restaurant when I noticed my waitress was visibly pregnant. I asked her if I should go outside to smoke and she said it would be fine. I felt pretty uncomfortable about it but she had definitely made her decision. And I would have been more uncomfortable going down three flights of stairs and standing outside in the wind by myself just to try to feel some tiny bit of misguided piece of mind. There were two other levels she could have been working on that are 100% smoke free. She chose to be up there that night. What's done is done. I am not a "douche" for lighting up anyway. She is not a bad person necessarily for making the decision to work up there. You are not the savior and protector of unborn fetuses. I think you can step down from your high horse now, Marshall.

And those are my thoughts on the matter.

Well said Ezrablum! Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of bars/restaurants that she could bartend at that are smoke free (if that's the only trade skill she possesses). Businesses that are more liquor sales than food sales have the right to have designated smoking areas or be complete smoking (like Hudsons, Dan OBriens, Baker Street, etc.) Maybe she chose to work that night because she knows people that smoke (as previously stated maybe she herself smokes) and she knows that smokers tend to drink more and therefore the ticket sales and tip will be better. Maybe those patrons who were in there smoking already took into account her being pregnant and had already asked her a couple of months before if she didn't mind them smoking. Just cause you come up in there doesn't mean that they haven't already been over the subject themselves. Those three places I mentioned above, I know almost everyone that serves me and they know me. So chances are, she knows her customers...

Wow, guys. You clearly aren't concerned about this child and that surprises me.

I agree that it is not the patron's duty to not smoke and that the mother is the one making the decisions. But by the logic just given, it is okay to abuse/injure a child if its parents don't care about it, anyway. I am not saying you said that. I am saying the logic you are using leads in that direction.

Easy was just speaking up for doing the right thing as a human being and he wasn't letting that mother set his standards. I say, good for him. The fact that she might be a piss poor mom (and I don't know the facts other than that she is exposing the child to all this smoke) and/or doesn't care about the effects on the child seems to set the standard for some. Personally, I'd hate to think I would treat a child with lousy parents with any less care and concern than I would the ones whose parents are responsible.

Didn't have to walk down two flights Ezra...Could have just waited until you left

Now McNellies may be a little different since she could easily work on the other levels but just couldn't see myself smoking it up next to a bun in the oven...Seems to me since your brain thought to ask you already knew the right answer

Ive already stated my opinion on the scenario above, so I guess I'll expand it a bit and get on my soapbox. It's kinda interesting how the welfare of a single child becomes foremost on one's mind only when it's right in front of one's face. But we don't realize, or in some cases care, how many times in a week we actually participate in the abuse of children we'll never see (myself included). There are a couple of great documentaries and studies/reports on how our need/greed for cheap fashion, cheap computers, cheap food and even cheap brooms is all done on the backs of child labor from other countries.

Is it not true that the baby will basically have its own blood supply at 8 months?

"The March of Dimes, which advocates for healthy babies, says if all pregnant women in the U.S. stopped smoking, there would be an estimated 11 percent reduction in stillbirths and a 5 percent reduction in newborn deaths. Babies whose mothers smoked during pregnancy are up to three times as likely to die from sudden infant death syndrome as babies of non-smokers, according to the March of Dimes.

Other effects are more common and better known: Smoking nearly doubles a woman’s risk of having a low-birth-weight baby, slows fetal growth and increases the risk of preterm delivery."

Ive already stated my opinion on the scenario above, so I guess I'll expand it a bit and get on my soapbox. It's kinda interesting how the welfare of a single child becomes foremost on one's mind only when it's right in front of one's face. But we don't realize, or in some cases care, how many times in a week we actually participate in the abuse of children we'll never see (myself included). There are a couple of great documentaries and studies/reports on how our need/greed for cheap fashion, cheap computers, cheap food and even cheap brooms is all done on the backs of child labor from other countries.

No one is going to save the world but if everyone tried to help the ones in front of them, at least some would be saved. If we had to save them all, none of them would be saved. There will always be people exploiting and abusing children. They are vulnerable and that makes them targets. I am not saying we should turn a blind eye. I am just saying we're talking about two different things. And the fact that we ignore or are ignorant of other abused children really has little to do with how we treat the one in front of us. IMO.

Is it not true that the baby will basically have its own blood supply at 8 months?

Even with a separate blood supply, the problem is what is going into the blood stream. What she breathes, the baby breathes.

And the fact that we ignore or are ignorant of other abused children really has little to do with how we treat the one in front of us

I really hope you found comfort in the hypocrisy of that statement.

I really hope you found comfort in the hypocrisy of that statement.

How is that hypocritical? If I have no idea a child is being abused by something I did or bought (and I couldn't tell you a single instance, right now) but I help a child in need - where is the hypocracy?

How is that hypocritical? If I have no idea a child is being abused by something I did or bought (and I couldn't tell you a single instance, right now) but I help a child in need - where is the hypocracy?

Forgive me, I didn't realize I was talking to someone with your background that had "no idea" cheap food, clothing and household items came at the expense of others. I guess ignorance (even if intentional) is the perfect defense to hypocrisy.

But, its all good, I've bought plenty of cheap shirts, hand picked fruit and brooms myself.

Forgive me, I didn't realize I was talking to someone with your background that had "no idea" cheap food, clothing and household items came at the expense of others. I guess ignorance (even if intentional) is the perfect defense to hypocrisy.

But, its all good, I've bought plenty of cheap shirts, hand picked fruit and brooms myself.

I used to teach at the graduate level International Business Transactions. We have a number of laws in place forbidding things such as the use of slave labor and child labor. I am certain that there are times when China, for example, gets around them. However, could you please share with us what group uses child labor so we can avoid being such moral reprobates that wanting to offer kindness to the children in front of us is worthy of being called a hypocrite? I mean, name names - not just spout off what you read somewhere or "believe" is true.

Walmart uses child labor.

Walmart uses child labor.

Details. I have heard that crap for years and it is just gossip. How old? What products? Why isn't the government prosecuting them?

No one is going to save the world but if everyone tried to help the ones in front of them, at least some would be saved...

I don't fault you for your 'gotta save some of the world' feel-good liberal views. I guess it's good intentioned but I'm one of those people who would just as soon you worry about saving your own world and let the rest of us worry about saving ours. In fact I'd say your type of leftist attitude only serves to enable those who refuse to take personal responsibility for their own actions.

I used to teach at the graduate level International Business Transactions. We have a number of laws in place forbidding things such as the use of slave labor and child labor. I am certain that there are times when China, for example, gets around them. However, could you please share with us what group uses child labor so we can avoid being such moral reprobates that wanting to offer kindness to the children in front of us is worthy of being called a hypocrite? I mean, name names - not just spout off what you read somewhere or "believe" is true.

For someone who taught - you really are out of touch.

Most recently in the U.K. the Primark child labor news has been explosive (I know, I know, you're naive enough to retort 'but that's not the USA). It was uncovered suppliers of the Gap were using child labor (10-13 year olds and paid nothing). Dateline (or one of those type news shows) did a great piece on US child labor in our farms and how little if anything is being done to stop it. It is estimated thousands of children harvest in the USA every year for little or no pay. While to say Wal-Mart itself uses child labor is a little far reaching, but their suppliers have been linked to child and forced labor. Hanes was uncovered as using a factory in Bangladesh that relied on child labor (children between the ages of 10-15 paid $.065 cents per hour - yes 6.5 cents). Making underwear for Hanes. It was uncovered Nike suppliers used child labor to produce both shoes and soccer balls.

Here's a Press Release from CommonDreams http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/1024-01.htm

Details. I have heard that crap for years and it is just gossip. How old? What products? Why isn't the government prosecuting them?

I dunno. Our government has no authority in China and wherever other countries. I know many children works in factories over there and Walmart get their supplies from them. Everyone knows this, you should, too.

I dunno. Our government has no authority in China and wherever other countries. I know many children works in factories over there and Walmart get their supplies from them. Everyone knows this, you should, too.

There probably isn't a clothing retailer on the planet that doesn't use child labor at some point in their supply chain.

Singling out WalMart is dishonest

I dunno. Our government has no authority in China and wherever other countries. I know many children works in factories over there and Walmart get their supplies from them. Everyone knows this, you should, too.

They do have authority in this country over American retailers that sell goods made by unlawful means. They would be all over them if they could prove such a thing. "Everyone knows" a lot of things but not all of them are much more than gossip.

For someone who taught - you really are out of touch.

Most recently in the U.K. the Primark child labor news has been explosive (I know, I know, you're naive enough to retort 'but that's not the USA). It was uncovered suppliers of the Gap were using child labor (10-13 year olds and paid nothing). Dateline (or one of those type news shows) did a great piece on US child labor in our farms and how little if anything is being done to stop it. It is estimated thousands of children harvest in the USA every year for little or no pay. While to say Wal-Mart itself uses child labor is a little far reaching, but their suppliers have been linked to child and forced labor. Hanes was uncovered as using a factory in Bangladesh that relied on child labor (children between the ages of 10-15 paid $.065 cents per hour - yes 6.5 cents). Making underwear for Hanes. It was uncovered Nike suppliers used child labor to produce both shoes and soccer balls.

Here's a Press Release from CommonDreams http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/1024-01.htm

I never said it didn't happen. I said we have laws against it and I was not aware of any ongoing situations in this country. We were discussing caring about an unborn child and you went off on a tangent as if because there is child labor in the world I was being a hypocrit for caring. You can't even name a company in the states - just allegations about types of businesses. And no, I am not naive. What I am is being real. You aren't. I don't know anyone who would buy something that was made by exploiting children due to child labor but other than speculation, we just don't know. We hear about companies, but none of them are front row center, this company is doing blah, blah blah. Even you, who threw that out there like it was gospel just came up with an article that doesn't even apply to the states other than to imply and suggest without proof.

Pure and simple, you were looking for a reason to excuse caring about an unborn child and this was quite a reach. If you are waiting for the world to be perfect before someone can act in kindness without being a hypocrite, count on being surrounded by them.

Did you even read the article - it gave specific company names that sell in the US and provided much more than gossip and speculation. The DateLine piece was taped in the US and interviewed the children being used in the fields.