Adoption refused because of smoking

[applesmom]

This was a first for me! Now I'm wondering if it's a new trend...

A friend of mine who has done hundreds of rescues and fostering of both cats and dogs had found what she thought was the perfect home for one of her charges. Then she discovered that the person was a smoker and she turned her down flat, stating that she would never, ever place a pet in a smoking home!

I was flabbergasted! I've had multiple pets all my life. My parents smoked, my husband and I smoked, and never once have we had an animal with any illness related to smoking. Also after working for many years in vets offices I've yet to see a pet diagnosed with a smoking related illness.

Of course it is the rescuers choice to choose what they consider to be a proper home for an animal they've put so much love and care into saving.

But there are so many other things that go into providing a loving home, that if all other requirements were met; it seems a shame to deprive an otherwise unwanted and homeless pet of a forever home based on individual prejudice!

What's next? Dictating the brand of food the pet is to be fed; the type of bed it's provided, the toys it is allowed to play with, where and when it's to be walked? :eek:

No home is perfect!

[DrKym]

Actually it is a trend. I myself smoke, and had been dropped as a foster home for a Rescue I worked with although I smoked when approved.

The new director dropped several of us. It is also in our guidelines for a couple of the rescues I work with to deny apps based on smoking.

I figure they are just that, guidelines and won't comply. There are too many other issues to work on besides whether a person smokes.

[critter crazy]

phhhtttt...I smoke,a nd Idont understand that as well! WTH! Now I am gonna get refused from saviong an animal because of this? rediculous! Geesh, whats next, refusing me cause I drink too much caffiene?:o

[sumbirdy]

Both of my parents smoke and we've had several animals...none of them had any illnesses related to smoking

[cyber-sibes]

Geesh, whats next, refusing me cause I drink too much caffiene?:o :eek: Have you been peeking in on us? Star loves to swipe my coffee! ;)

I think it is riduculous to disqualify a potential home because a person smokes (although I'm a non-smoker & think every smoker should quit). Isn't it enough of a challenge to find decent homes for animals? I think some of these rescues are a bit too idealistic. Are they implying that smokers who own pets are abusive? If the animal will be fed, get vet care, live in a safe enviornment, and be loved, isn't that better than spending their lives in foster care or shelters?

[critter crazy]

:eek: Have you been peeking in on us? Star loves to swipe my coffee! Personally I think it is riduculous to disqualify a potential home because a person smokes (although I'm a non-smoker & think everyone should stop). Isn't it enough of a challenge to find decent homes for animals? I think some of these rescues are a bit too idealistic. Are they implying that smokers who own pets are abusive?If the animal will be fed, get vet care, live in a safe enviornment, and be loved, isn't that enough?
No coffe here(Yuk) but there is plenty of soda around, and I have had a few cans swiped!:eek:

But yes the point is, along as the dogs are being properly taken care of, what does it matter if the person smokes? My dogs are well taken care of, and I have neve had anyone say anything bad, because i smoke. Yeah I know I should quit, but that is beside the point. Smoking, has nothing to do with the amount of care my animals recieve. People are getting out of control. If they continue along this track, there will be no suitable homes for rescue dogs.

[lizbud]

It's a very dumb idea. :( Maybe this person needs a change in jobs. Just
have them be the one who leads to dogs into the euthanasia room every
day. After 1 week of that(if they last that long) then return them to their
previous job as interviewer for adoptions.I'll bet they would have a whole
new perspective.

[pitc9]

It's a very dumb idea. :( Maybe this person needs a change in jobs. Just
have them be the one who leads to dogs into the euthanasia room every
day. After 1 week of that(if they last that long) then return them to their
previous job as interviewer for adoptions.I'll bet they would have a whole
new perspective.

GREAT point!!

[cyber-sibes]

It's a very dumb idea. :( Maybe this person needs a change in jobs. Just have them be the one who leads to dogs into the euthanasia room every day. After 1 week of that(if they last that long) then return them to their previous job as interviewer for adoptions.I'll bet they would have a whole new perspective.Liz, you are brilliant! That would certainly bring home the reality of it. I worked with a woman who had to do that. It broke her heart, and she finally quit the shelter because she couldn't adopt them all, and just couldn't bear to walk one more dog it its death.

[IRescue452]

If all else is great, I don't see refusing them. Of course, if there were two equal candidates, I'd be inclined to give the dog to the non-smoker.

People think I'm extreme because I wouldn't ever give an animal to somebody if so much as a fish wasn't in ideal conditions in the home. I consider that a show of how much research and concern they have for all of their animals though. But smoking, although I consider it a nasty habit, I could adopt a dog to. Maybe not a bird, but a dog ok.

Applesmom: many rescues dictate what type of food is fed. I don't blame them. I wouldn't want a dog eating kibbles and bits, the second ingredient is sugar!

[Lilith Cherry]

Denying a dog ( or cat) from a loving forever home is just downright ridiculous, not to say cruel! I have never smoked and wish others didn't either but I would never exclude someone for that stupid reason!

[buttercup132]

Well they can get second hand smoke too . Not to mention (The people who smoke wont notice) but it gets into the dogs fur and skin and isn't good. There is dogs that come into my work and smell gross because their owners smoke. I'm not saying they shouldnt be adopted out to homes that smoke but it dose harm them too.

[Pam]

It's a very dumb idea. :( Maybe this person needs a change in jobs. Just
have them be the one who leads to dogs into the euthanasia room every
day. After 1 week of that(if they last that long) then return them to their
previous job as interviewer for adoptions.I'll bet they would have a whole
new perspective.

I'll go one word beyond dumb Liz and say ridiculous. Everything you said is right on the mark. Gee, I wonder if human babies up for adoption must all go to non-smoking households. I never even thought of that. I am not a smoking fan. My husband smokes and I wish he didn't but we have always had pets and were never turned away from adopting from a breeder because of his smoking. :rolleyes: This person is out of touch with reality I'm afraid.

[Freedom]

When I adopted Sugar last December, they clearly would NOT adopt out to a smoker's household. On their rescue web site - and on several others - it clearly states that dogs living in a home with a smoker have a 60% increased chance of lung cancer. I found it fairly standard when I was looking to adopt last year. No smokers' homes would be accepted.

They can't knowingly place a dog in a home where it will be injured. I think we all agree on that. They are taking that the next step, can't knowingly place a dog in a home where it will be at high risk for cancer. At least, I guess that must be the reasoning.

And I suppose, if you said to them that it is better to place the dog than PTS, they would counter "so should we place with a known animal abuser?"

I'm not saying this, don't jump on ME! I'm just trying to sort out what I think their view point is on this.

[sabies]

Ditto what so many others have said - is a trip to the euthanasia room better than a life with a smoker? I too wish every smoker would quit for their own benefit but that is irrelevant to adopting a pet.

[applesmom]

Primary lung cancer (cancer coming from lung tissue) is rare in dogs, so the odds are very high that a tumor seen in the lungs is a metastasis from a tumor somewhere else. This is not always the case but it is a reasonable presumption. So in most cases, just seeing a tumor in the lungs is reason to suspect metastatic cancer. Lung cancer in dogs (http://www.vetinfo.com/dlungcancer.html)

Since there have been little or no studies done on lung cancer in dogs, it's my own personal opinion that the refusal to adopt a pet out to a smoker is based solely on personal bias. An ureasonable bias that would rather see an animal put to death or live the rest of it's life in a cage rather than allow it to know love and companionship that all pets deserve!

No dog has ever died simply from having a stinky coat! ;)

[critter crazy]

Lung cancer in dogs (http://www.vetinfo.com/dlungcancer.html)

Since there have been little or no studies done on lung cancer in dogs, it's my own personal opinion that the refusal to adopt a pet out to a smoker is based solely on personal bias. An ureasonable bias that would rather see an animal put to death or live the rest of it's life in a cage rather than allow it to know love and companionship that all pets deserve!

No dog has ever died simply from having a stinky coat! ;)

Exactly!! And I have never been told my dogs stink! I take great care of my dogs, and they smell, and look good!

[Taz_Zoee]

"Primary lung cancer (cancer coming from lung tissue) is rare in dogs, so the odds are very high that a tumor seen in the lungs is a metastasis from a tumor somewhere else. This is not always the case but it is a reasonable presumption. So in most cases, just seeing a tumor in the lungs is reason to suspect metastatic cancer. "

This is EXACTLY what DJ died of. We are not smokers, and our dog still died of lung cancer. So apparently it doesn't matter, the dog can get lung cancer even if it lives with non-smokers. :rolleyes:

[Roxyluvsme13]

Oh good gosh. My mom smokes, and I've never ever seen any of our pets have any smoking-related illnesses. It might be harmful to something like fish or amphibians, but dogs and cats? That's just stupid. :confused:

[Catlady711]

I can understand an adoption place having a right to restrict who they adopt pets out to, it's their right.

I don't agree with it personally.

I, hubby & my mom have all smoked with pets in the house, we've had Dusty for 11 1/2 years (she'll be 17 this summer) and the only main thing she's suffering from is severe osteoarthritis (she does have some respiratory problems, but she showed up with them and are very minor). We've had Jack for 6 years and his only problem is constipation. We've had Pooky & Bear for 5 years and they have no problems. Cami we've only had 1 year and the kittens less than 6 months, but neither of them have any health problems.

I do realize that smoking can cause cancer and even allergies/athsma in pets, but I personally think that limiting pets to only homes without higher risks for some things that are long term is a little overboard. What's next, do they test our homes for radon, carbon monoxide, mold, and lead paint? Do they test the air quality if we live too close to a factory? There has to be a limit.

I understand the concern, but as has already been pointed out there are already too many animals unwanted dying in the streets and euthanized in shelters to be picky to a fault about adoptions. No two people are going to agree on the absolute best care for an animal and I think just finding someone that fits the major catagories for proper care (space, time, money, proper vet care, etc) would be sufficient.

[Canis-Lupess]

Ah, I know two dogs that have died of lung cancer because their owners smoked. My aunt and uncles previous JRT, yes the same aunt and uncle who now have the seriously obese Meg who I posted a photo of and and a white GSD who belonged to a work colleague who smokes along with her husband.

The GSD was only 6 and the JRT was 10. They don't live far from each other either. Probably takes about 15 minutes to walk from one house to the other. If two dogs in such a close proximity can die because of their owners habit, how many more do all over the UK and elsewhere.

Sorry to dampen things here but I don't see why, if smoking can be so harmful to humans, that it can't also be harmful to cats and dogs.
I know many pets don't get lung cancer from living in smoking homes same as not all people get smoking related illnesses from either smoking themselves or breathing in somebody elses smoke but the risk is still there.
Many people wouldn't think of having their children breathing in their cig smoke...although some don't care...but they don't bat an eyelid when it comes to their pets.

[lute]

I think it's silly to refuse an adoption because of smoking. I don't smoke, but i have friends that smoke when they are at my house. No one has ever said anything about my dogs smelling like smoke. Their coats are fine. In great condition at this time actually!

anywho, I agree that I'd much rather adopt a dog to a home filled with smokers than have a dog be killed. The risk of the dog getting lung cancer is slim, but possible. I don't think it's enough of a problem to refuse an adoption though.

[Canis-Lupess]

Here is a link I found on the matter.

Seems that secondhand smoke is more risky for cats for various reasons but can be a risk for any pet.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2165722.stm

Here is another link I just found.

"Epidemiology found that dogs in smoking households had a 60 percent greater risk of lung cancer; a different study published in the same journal showed that long-nosed dogs, such as collies or greyhounds, were twice as likely to develop nasal cancer if they lived with smokers."

http://www.smokefreesociety.org/NewsClip/Pets-1.html

[wolf_Q]

I don't think that is a valid reason to refuse adoption. However, I don't think kids/pets/other members of the household should have to be subjected to cigarette smoke. My personal opinion is that if you want to smoke, thats fine, but smoke outside/away from other people/pets. Many of the people I've worked with smoke, and I don't care one bit, as long as they do it outside, the smell of cigarette smoke makes me ill, literally...honestly I wouldn't want my dogs to have to breathe it in either. I would not refuse to adopt out a dog if the people smoked though.

[Catlady711]

I also wanted to add, because I didn't think to mention it before. In our house we have several air purifiers, one of them is quite large and expensive in the room we are in the most, and we open the windows to 'air out' the house frequently.

I think it does alot on cutting down on the lingering smoke, as well as regular cleaning to eliminate 'smoke film' deposits on windows/walls etc, and we shampoo our carpets at least 2x a year. The only reason I mention this is I got to thinking of how many non-smokers come over to our house and frequently mention the house 'doesn't smell like smoke' and I even have one aunt that is allergic to smoke and our house has never bothered her.

I only thought to mention that because I have been to smokers houses where even I can smell the 'dirty ashtray' smell, the whole house is covered in 'smoke film' and the even people smell strongly of cigarettes. Those homes don't have air purifiers, they don't open many windows and don't seem to regularly clean the 'smoke film', their cars are even worse.

I don't know if that actually has any long term benefits or not as far as health goes, but it does point out the differences in how smokers live.

[Freedom]

However, I don't think kids/pets/other members of the household should have to be subjected to cigarette smoke.

RI has recently passed a law that you can not smoike in a car with a child under the age of 6 in the car. And they are trying to pass the same regarding the home.

Smoking is a "hot" issue just now.

I think it makes a difference if it is one person (as in the case which started this thread) or if it is the policy of the adoption program.

Just went back and read post #1 again. It is not clear from that if it was one person in a program, or one person looking for someone to adopt a pet she was fostering, not as a part of a program. In which case, she has the right to adopt out to whom she wants.

[Canis-Lupess]

On the adoption issue, I'm a bit umming and arring on that one....undecided in other words. I wouldn't be bothered if a shelter refused to adopt to a smoking home and neither would I be if they did adopt out to a smoking home.

I was mainly pointing out that smoke is a risk for pets because it seemed that some people were stating that they didn't think it was.

If I was adopting out personally, I know I'd prefer pets to go to non smoking homes than smoking ones...providing either was suitable for the pet anyway but I don't know whether I'd block pets going to smoking homes providing they would give the creature proper care...fortunately, I don't have that job.
I think more shelters might develop issues with smoking homes with more evidence that comes to light about the risk it causes pets but I also think it would do wonders for the actual smokers if they tried to kick the habit also....maybe the creatures could be an incentive...they are good for humans in other ways, why not that?

Still, saying that, even if people smoke, it doesn't mean they smoke indoors, they might prefer to smoke outdoors to prevent smells or discolouration of walls etc...protect any children living in the house or out of respect for another adult/partner who lives with them and doesn't like smoke...in this case I doubt a pet would be at risk.....it's just hard to know what habits each smoking applicant has regarding their smoking and I don't think shelters want to start asking about a persons smoking habits and, even if they did, no doubt some people might fib about them in order to stand a chance.

I've always been anti-smoking from being a young child but I think it was the deaths of those two dogs that really made me think about pets living in smoking homes. When you personally know creatures that died because of it, it does have an affect on your opinion about it.

Oh, just saw Freedoms post.
In the UK, it gets even better, lol. They are banning smoking in all public buildings, places of work, pubs, clubs, even partially enclosed areas or areas where people have to congregate like bus stops and doorways to work places where smokers would use as a smoke area.
If you live in a council property, you cannot smoke in your house whilst there is a council worker in your home. I'm not sure if this extends to private hire workers etc...
Also, if you are in a car that is being used to give other people lifts, say co-workers who all get in the same car to save on petrol etc...you cannot smoke in those either...even if it is your own car.

This comes into force in July in England. Southern Ireland already has the ban in place.

[applesmom]

RI has recently passed a law that you can not smoike in a car with a child under the age of 6 in the car. And they are trying to pass the same regarding the home.

Smoking is a "hot" issue just now.

I think it makes a difference if it is one person (as in the case which started this thread) or if it is the policy of the adoption program.

Just went back and read post #1 again. It is not clear from that if it was one person in a program, or one person looking for someone to adopt a pet she was fostering, not as a part of a program. In which case, she has the right to adopt out to whom she wants.

Freedom she's also a canine behaviorist and takes on the dogs with behavioral problems from many groups in addition to rescuing on her own. Not sure which catagory this dog fell into.

I do agree that a group or individual who has taken on responsibility for an abandoned pet has the right to choose where that pet is placed.

However it doesn't make any sense to me to deprive that animal of a loving home for the sole reason that the would-be adopter happens to be a smoker.

She and I are still debating the issue! ;)

[IRescue452]

Our city has a smoking ban on all indoor public places. Its great! its wonderful to be able to eat at a restaurant without getting smoke in my eyes or lungs or nose.

[Twisterdog]

I smoked for decades, and have since quit. I gave my pets a good home, either way. They were loved and well cared for. If not for me, they would have all been dead.

Is smoking a nasty, smelly, dirty, harmful habit? You bet. Would everyone ... people, pets, kids ... be better off without exposure to smoke? Sure. I don't know ANYone who smokes who has ever said, "Oh, I'm so happy I'm addicted to this expensive, smelly drug!"

I suppose in this rescue's opinion, she is finding the best home possible for this dog. And I certainly understand that impulse. I honestly don't think that smoking ought to be much of a criteria, but that's JMHO.

But what rescues and shelters sometimes lose sight of is this: for every addtional month you spend finding the PERFECT home, while turning down VERY GOOD homes, that is a month that the space in your home or shelter is filled, and therefore other dogs are dying for lack of a place to go. I'm certainly not advocating adopting animals out to the first semi-passable home to come along, willy nilly. That does NO favors to those animals. But there is such a thing as taking TOO long and being TOO picky as well. That certainly does no favors for the dozens of dog who died, waiting for "perfection".

[Kfamr]

I don't think that is a valid reason to refuse adoption. However, I don't think kids/pets/other members of the household should have to be subjected to cigarette smoke. My personal opinion is that if you want to smoke, thats fine, but smoke outside/away from other people/pets. Many of the people I've worked with smoke, and I don't care one bit, as long as they do it outside, the smell of cigarette smoke makes me ill, literally...honestly I wouldn't want my dogs to have to breathe it in either. I would not refuse to adopt out a dog if the people smoked though.

My thoughts exactly.

After years and years of choking over cigarette smoke, I finally got my parents to smoke outside. They rarely smoke in vehicles anymore when I'm with them too.

About the dog's coat smelling... YUCK. I can't stand getting near my dogs if my parents just hugged them/petted them. They could have smoked a cigarette 10 minutes prior to touching the dogs and they dogs STILL reek afterwards. I don't enjoy the smell at all, which is why I don't smoke. It's just gross.

[critter crazy]

This isnt a question of whether or not you as a person like/dislike smoking. It is a question of whether or not people should be turned down to adopt a dog just because they smoke!

[Giselle]

This isnt a question of whether or not you as a person like/dislike smoking. It is a question of whether or not people should be turned down to adopt a dog just because they smoke!
Then that should rely on cold hard facts. The cold hard fact is that smoking tobacco (especially sidestream smoke which is the smoke that comes off the tip) contains a high amount of proven carcinogens. I'm sorry, after having a family friend die of secondhand smoke, I don't approve of smoking in any way shape or form. I can understand why adoption groups won't adopt out animals to smoking homes, and, to be honest, I swing to the agreement of their decisions. However, I suppose if the family is simply extraordinary, I would include in the contract that the person should make an attempt to smoke outside of the dog's vicinity. If one wouldn't subject a child to secondhand smoke, I don't see how it's okay to subject an animal to it :/ My two cents.

[bckrazy]

In all honesty... that is insane.

Would they even be willing to compromise with a no smoking in the house clause? I know that most smokers never smoke in the house. I mean, I doubt that the dog will be in close quarters with some one smoking, anyway.

I think smokers are stigmatized waay, way too much... like they're evil, reckless and trying to inflict cancer on everyone/thing around them. I'm not a smoker, but I know plenty of smokers, and they never smoke in a car with me or right next to me.

[Canis-Lupess]

I also know many smokers and they don't seem to give a damn who they blow their smoke all over. Yes, there are the more considerate ones but many of them aren't and I have witnessed them with my own eyes.

One of my former managers had the inside of his car set alight when a driver in front tossed a lit cig butt out of his window and it flew back and got sucked into my managers partly open window and ended up on his back seat.
My current manager who does smoke has been fined twice after being caught throwing cig butts on the ground instead of putting them in a bin. I told him it served himself right.... :D I'm very much against throwing litter generally.
Even though smoking is prohibited on buses, there were no amount of times when the driver had to tell a passenger at the back to put out their cig because they were trying to puff away in secret...and making the whole bus smell of their crap at the same time.
I also had no amount of people blowing their smoke all over me when I was waiting at bus stops or in the bus station. I'd be there first and they'd come and sit next to me, light up and the smoke would drift my way and all in my face and I'd end up having to get up and go stand somewhere else which was NOT fair.
I drive now so I don't have to put up with buses anymore.
One of my other colleagues regularly smokes in the work building even though she knows it's not allowed. She is also the one whos' GSD died of lung cancer.

In the paper yesterday, there was a piece about a guy who died after setting himself alight whilst having a secret cig in the hospital where it wasn't allowed anyway. He had been smothered in a flammable cream for a skin problem and had been warned that it was flammable and also had been warned not to smoke anymore cigs whilst he was in hospital. Not being able to stop himself and showing total disregard for what he had been told by docs and nurses, he sneaked off to have a smoke, he lit the cig and turned into a ball of fire. I couldn't help but feel it served himself right.

Yes, there are plenty of smokers who do not seem to give a damn about whether other people want to breathe in their crap or not and many people I speak to agree with me on that one. A lot of the time, it is the other people who complain first before I tell them I agree so I know this is a generally growing attitude towards smoking.

Like us, dog may hate the smell of smoke but they can hardly say so can they? It may make their eyes feel dry and tired and their lungs feel sore like it does me when I've been somewhere where there is a lot of smoke. I try to avoid these situations at all costs because of this but dogs living in smoking homes can't.

I know that smokers aren't deliberately trying to inflict cancer and everything else on those around them but they do often seem to value their habit over the health and safety of others like in the number of incidents I mentioned above.

What has this to do with adotping dogs you might say? Well, if these smokers show disregard where other people, children and such are concerned, why wouldn't they show this same disregard with pets?
Some smokers might save it for outside but many wouldn't and I think this is what shelters worry about.

I agree with what Gisele said about maybe encouraging them to smoke outside the house if they adopt a dog but this can't be enforced on a daily basis can it? I wouldn't want to subject any creature to it personally.

[DrKym]

In the course of finding an adoptive home, we look at a lot of things, would I refuse a smoker soley based on the smoking? No. However if I have a bird that has 2 equally qualified apodters, and one house is a non smoking house and the other house is a heavy smoking house, I would probably choose the non-smoking house. Since most birds do not get outdoor excercise or fresh air as window drafts are can be deadly. Same scenario with a dog or cat? it probably wouldn't factor into my decision. Double standard? Not really, just difference in the way that different animals are cared for.

Now if the choice was a forever home with a qualified adopter, and no other adopter in the picture, would I deny them because they smoked? No, but I would discuss the option of keeping the bird room smoke free. Will that mean they will? Maybe not, but I certainly won't deny an animal a lifetime of love and happiness based on a vice of the owner. There are too many other things that are in the forefront in deciding, such as vet care, and willingness to train and excercise, the animals safety in the yard, the amount of time willing to be spent. Non Smokers don't automatically love their adopted animals more and Smokers don't automaticall love them less. They simply have differences in their personal vices or lack there of :)

Just my thoughts

[CathyBogart]

I would be very reluctant to place a foster of mine in a smoking home, and I would probably refuse as well.

I don't buy the "settle for a less than perfect home because there are lots of homeless animals" argument. If I were responsible for placing an animal, I would be responsible for finding it the very best.

[critter crazy]

So the conclusion is, People like me who smoke, are considered not acceptable as fosters because we smoke?? well, then what about people who drink or do drugs? you gonna do a piss test on all of your applicants??? a smoker will come right out and tell you they smoke, what is there to hide? but you could be placing an animal in the hands of a drunk or Drug addict without knowing it! Makes no sense to me! And dont tell me that alcohol and drugs will not affect the animals life! cause that is bull crap, and we all know it.
This whole thing is just rediculous! So what if I smoke! I dont bother anyone, I dont harm my kids or my dogs, I am a responsible person. I dont drink or do drugs, but yet I am still a "bad" Person, cause I have a bad habit!
Whats next, i cant own a dog, cause i eat fast foods? or dont drive the right car?

[Canis-Lupess]

Not everyone admits that they smoke.

Still, this is not the argument because, if any of us did adopt out and we knew the applicants had a drink or drugs problem, we certainly would not adopt out to them. Not knowing they have a problem with drink or drugs doesn't make us hypocrits, it makes us unaware that they have a problem with drink or drugs. Those on drugs are often noticeable because drugs do have an affect on people that others can notice such as gaunt face, dirty appearance, not much in the way of wit or intellect because half their brain cells have been destroyed by the crap they take...they often shake and walk funny too.

The problem with drink and drugs is that they can make the user less able to take proper care of the animal or even cause the user to cause harm to the animal themselves. With smoking, the animals are breathing in the smoke which can harm them....even if their owner otherwise takes good care of them, if they smoke indoors and the dog breathes it in, every breath is causing potential damage whether that smoking owner likes it or not.

[Love That Collie]

So the conclusion is, People like me who smoke, are considered not acceptable as fosters because we smoke?? well, then what about people who drink or do drugs? you gonna do a piss test on all of your applicants??? a smoker will come right out and tell you they smoke, what is there to hide? but you could be placing an animal in the hands of a drunk or Drug addict without knowing it! Makes no sense to me! And dont tell me that alcohol and drugs will not affect the animals life! cause that is bull crap, and we all know it.
This whole thing is just rediculous! So what if I smoke! I dont bother anyone, I dont harm my kids or my dogs, I am a responsible person. I dont drink or do drugs, but yet I am still a "bad" Person, cause I have a bad habit!
Whats next, i cant own a dog, cause i eat fast foods? or dont drive the right car?

I agree on this one and I'm not a smoker. And only have this to say.
I think way too many individuals in this world have their "cheeks" clenched way too tight on certain issues and carry them to extremes.

[applesmom]

Not everyone admits that they smoke

That shouldn't be a problem to any rescuer who is prejudiced against smokers as the majority swear that smokers stink so bad they can tell they're a smoker from 20 feet away! ;)

It should always be the rescuers choice whether or not to place a homeless animal in any home. But the overall welfare of the pet must come first. If every what-if were taken into consideration, no adopter would ever be acceptable!

What-if a fence should blow down, collapse or catch fire, someone would leave a door open, the dog should choke on a rawhide? Those are real and immediate life threatening concerns. Yet no adopters are turned down because of those maybe's. It doesn't make any sense to turn down a good home because of something that might happen in the far distant future.

In addition just as every breeder must face the fact that by producing a litter they are in some way contributing to the pet overpopulation problem; a rescuer who choses not to place a homeless pet in an otherwise loving smokers home must face the fact that other helpless pets may be paying the price for their prejudice.

[lizbud]

This isnt a question of whether or not you as a person like/dislike smoking. It is a question of whether or not people should be turned down to adopt a dog just because they smoke!


I don't think anybody is listening. :D The thread has morphed.Too bad
really. In a perfect world, nobody would smoke and all dogs would have
loving homes. We are far from perfect. It's a fact that every time a person
is born in America, so are 15 dogs and 45 cats. That's far to many for the
number of available homes. Humane societies should use any and all chances
to help place dogs who will love & care for them.

[Canis-Lupess]

That shouldn't be a problem to any rescuer who is prejudiced against smokers as the majority swear that smokers stink so bad they can tell they're a smoker from 20 feet away!

I'm anti smoking but there are a lot of people I know who smoke but you can't smell it on them...unless they just had one.
One colleague who used to work at our place and smoked quite a lot informed me one day that her husband didn't know she was a smoker. I was quite surprised that he didn't know and that it was secret although I must admit she didn't smell of smoke. She knew he'd go mad if he found out. She chewed sugar free gum all the time to prevent the smokey breath and he obviously never smelt it on her clothes.
I read up not long back too some article where loads of people smoke and hide it successfully from their partners....!!! :confused:

[Kfamr]

I'm sorry if I got "off subject" on not liking smoking. Being that it is something that has effected my breathing my whole life, whether I choose to or not, it's sort of something I rant about on occasion. Although, I don't see why there is any issue with people expressing their feelings on smoking.

[Canis-Lupess]

Maybe it's because those that do smoke think we are personally against them because they smoke.

It isn't with me. I might dislike smoke and smoking but I have never written a person off because they smoked...I just avoid the smoke. It's not that I hate the person....unless they are a problem in some other way. Yes, I said some smokers don't give a damn how their smoke might affect others but thats a problem with their attitude, not their smoking.

[bckrazy]

I was thinking about this, and personally, I would use common sense were I adopting out a dog... and I'd obviously be VERY picky about my foster pups. ;D

Ok, first off - I would only adopt to some one who truly loves dogs, who is educated about dogs, and who is experienced/willing to learn. ANYONE who would fit into this criteria would definitely not be the kind of person who blows smoke all over their dogs and doesn't care. I would find it very admirable for the adopter to let me know that they do smoke, and be honest about it. But ultimately, I would not take non-smoking or smoking into consideration, I would solely base it on the dedication to the dog and the desire to give the dog a loving home.

Who is to say that a smoker's home is a "less than perfect" home??? My Mom smokes, and my dogs have never smelled anything like smoke, or have encountered smoke, in their lives.

[Miss Z]

I agree with Cathy Bogart, if I was in the position of finding a dog a home, I would feel it's my duty to seek the best possible home. If that meant turning down a couple who'd owned dogs all their life but smoked, as opposed to a family keen on loving a pet and non-smokers, then I would do it. If the dog was a child, then surely we'd do the same thing. Now I'm not intending to compare the values of dogs and children here, but I believe that it's still a fair point to make.

I don't think it would ever come down to the likes of refusing homes because of eating fast food and such likes. You can't endanger anything else by your own eating habits. To an extent, getting high on drugs won't affect those around you unless it causes you to become abusive and violent. I don't condone those points, but I do solidly believe that smoking is the most detrimental to the health of all household inhabitants.


I also know many smokers and they don't seem to give a damn who they blow their smoke all over. Yes, there are the more considerate ones but many of them aren't and I have witnessed them with my own eyes.


Very true!