Non-Smoker U?

Parents Forum
41

<p>Surprised to hear a college the quality of Swarthmore allows smoking in dorms . . . . </p>

<p>Here are lists of U.S. colleges and universities with smokefree policies. Scroll down to see the listing of 500 colleges with smokefree colleges for all residential housing—you’ll see a lot of top colleges, including ivys, here: <a href="http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smokefreecollegesuniversities.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smokefreecollegesuniversities.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Research shows strong student support for campus tobacco control policies: Students</a>' opinion of tobacco control policies recommended for US colleges: a national survey -- Rigotti et al. 12 (3): 251 -- Tobacco Control</p>

<p>Want to make your campus smoke-free? Here’s one place to start: Colleges</a> and Universities - no-smoke.org</p>

42

<p>My school has a ban on smoking except in designated areas, but it's hardly ever followed. I can pretty much guarantee that there will be at least one smoker walking alongside me on my way to or from classes, which is a 20-minute walk along one or two main paths (so no easy way to escape).</p>

<p>I'm definitely not a fan of cigarettes, especially since it's one of my asthma triggers. But I have no problem with smokers as long as they are respectful of those who don't wish to partake in their smoke. Unfortunately this is college; most kids here aren't mature enough to think of anyone but themselves.</p>

<p>The nicotine-addicted health workers at the hospital complex on campus are the same way, very little respect for the sick kids (major childrens' hospital) in the area.</p>

43

<p>That list is incomplete, it's missing some colleges from it, but it does say it's a "partial list".</p>

44

<p>ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad, yes the list is partial, and it's good to know that even more smokefree colleges could be listed. Does anyone know where to find a more complete list?</p>

45

<p>
[quote]
Surprised to hear a college the quality of Swarthmore allows smoking in dorms

[/quote]
</p>

<p>As an ex-smoker, I would rather see the damn things banned everywhere and taken off the market. Having said that, I understand why Swarthmore has a handful of smoking dorms where students can smoke in their rooms with the doors closed.</p>

<p>The College has a strong tradition of not imposing rules on students in a top-down fashion and not implementing rules that can't be enforced. The Dean of Student Life addressed the issue in a student newspaper article last year:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Associate Dean for Student Life Myrt Westphal said that a complete smoking ban on Swarthmore’s campus would raise questions about how to effectively enforce the ban and how to efficiently hold those who break the rule accountable.</p>

<p>I think it’s hard to ban smoking entirely from a campus the size of Haverford or Swarthmore, Westphal said. My fear is, if you do that, you’re going to play cat and mouse with the smokers. I would like the environment to be as healthy and safe as possible, but 1,400 people live here. I think it’s hard to prohibit everyone from smoking in their home. So to me, the sort of two important factors are, that this is people’s home and that to ban smoking on campus will push people off to the perimeters, or if they’re just fed up, they’ll just smoke where they want on campus. I don’t know that anybody wants to be the smoke police. I think that mandating from the top down doesn’t work on lifestyle issues.</p>

<p>According to Westphal, Swarthmore students who have smoked in non-smoking buildings have been warned and fined in the past. If the students continued to smoke in their room or outside where the smoke traveled into another student’s room, they were told they would not be allowed to live in the building. We have done top down things saying that you may not smoke in any indoor public space, that you may only smoke in certain dorm rooms with the door closed. So, in order to go further than that, I think it would have to be a student initiative, Westphal said.</p>

<p>As for a smoking ban on Swarthmore’s campus, Westphal said that this is not an issue the administration plans to address unless a large population of the community expresses concern. I think there are many groups that could initiate this. It could be the administration, it could be students, it could be visitors. My suspicion is that the administration is not going to address this unless they get a lot of concern from a broad section of the community, she said.</p>

<p>In response to Haverford’s consideration of a smoking ban on its campus, Westphal said, Haverford is such a close ally of us, I’m going to be interested to see what happens. I think anything that makes our environment healthier is good, but I always look at the unintended consequences. And if it makes a whole bunch of rule breakers, I don’t think that makes for a good community.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Haverford</a> considers campus-wide smoking ban - The Phoenix</p>

<p>.</p>

46

<p>I think this is pretty much where it stands now with Haverford:</p>

<p>The</a> Bulletin - Philadelphia's Family Newspaper - Haverford College May Ban Smoking On Campus</p>

<p>
[quote]
Haverford College may soon ban smoking on its campus, making it one of a growing list of schools nationwide that have sought to protect students from secondhand cigarette smoke.
Haverford's new president, Stephen Emerson, an oncologist, told a student newspaper that he would seek to eliminate smoking in all public areas, including outdoors. But strangely, the ban would not apply to student residences, The Bi-College News reported.
Smoking among college students has been on the rise for years, prompting more and more campuses to consider various smoking bans. But most start by banning smoking indoors.
"To keep smoking in dorms is certainly behind the national trend on this issue," said Bronson Frick, the associate director of Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights. "It means that students will still be exposed to secondhand smoke in an area where they're inside for eight hours or more a day. Most schools in the country have already addressed the issue of smoking indoors.
"The mantra is generally work from the inside out with smoke-free policies," Mr. Frick added. "The priority is usually to ensure that all indoor places are smoke free because that's where people are exposed to secondhand smoke, then to discuss outdoor areas."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There are some designated healthy living and non smoking dorms here, though. My guess is that the fact that Haverford is a strict Honor Code school has something to do with their decisions on this as it puts even more pressure on students as far as reporting, etc. There are other reputable schools allowing smoking in dorms - I think Lafayette still does, for one. </p>

<p>Another reason I disagree with the concept of smoking dorms - the smoke in those buildings where everyone smokes has to be at even more dangerous levels than would be typical in a dorm where smokers and non smokers coexist. .</p>

<p>The list in the OP isn't comprehensive. Best way to get specific information about schools is by searching the individual school websites under key words like "smoking policy."</p>

47

<p>
[quote]
Another reason I disagree with the concept of smoking dorms - the smoke in those buildings where everyone smokes has to be at even more dangerous levels than would be typical in a dorm where smokers and non smokers coexist.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But, the only students who live in those dorms choose to do so.</p>

48

<p>
[quote]
But, the only students who live in those dorms choose to do so.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I know. But the school is still choosing between banning smoking dorms altogether versus putting these young people in an even more toxic environment than they'd be in under the old policies.</p>

49

<p>
[quote]
I know. But the school is still choosing between banning smoking dorms altogether versus putting these young people in an even more toxic environment than they'd be in under the old policies.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Having designated nonsmoking and smoking dorms makes sense to me. It protects those who do not smoke while allowing smokers to light up to their hearts' content. And there's no necessary requirement to be a smoker to get into a smoking dorm, just an expectation that those in a nonsmoking dorm will respect its inhabitants by refraining from smoking in the building.</p>

<p>Smokers choose to engage in a toxic activity on a regular basis. Just like I choose not to. Are you saying their choice supersedes mine?</p>

50

<p>^^^ No, to the contrary. My preference is for schools to get rid of the smoking dorms entirely, as so many are now doing. If it's a hassle to light up for these young adults, some of whom have just started the smoking habit, it could be a deterrent to developing smoking as an entrenched habit. It's also not fair, IMO, to the support staff and people who have to go into these buildings on a regular basis.</p>

51

<p>
[quote]
It's also not fair, IMO, to the support staff and people who have to go into these buildings on a regular basis.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>At Swarthmore, smoking is not allowed in any pubic area of a smoking dorm. Can't smoke in the halls. Or the bathrooms. Or the lounges. Only in a student room with the door closed. Support staff don't go student rooms ever except under exceptional circumstances.</p>

52

<p>The problem there is that smoke can't be contained just by closing doors:</p>

<p>Health</a> concerns prompt smoking ban in undergrad dorms</p>

<p>
[quote]
The decrease in air-quality caused by second-hand smoke because the smoke cannot successfully be contained to individual dorm rooms. Most ducts in individual rooms are connected to ducts in common areas.

[/quote]
</p>

53

<p>There are no "ducts" in the smoking dorms at Swarthmore. It's not forced air heat.</p>

<p>Again, 88% to 90% of the students live in dorms where smoking is prohibited completely. The only students who live in smoking dorms do so because they have chosen to. Even in those dorms, they can only smoke in their own room with the door closed -- not in halls, not in lounges, not in common areas.</p>

54

<p>Point taken as far as ducts and Swarthmore, specifically, idad, but regarding the first part of that statement, smoke can't be successfully contained in a room. It goes under doorways, through windows, even through outlets and plumbing. If you walked through or took an air sample in the hallways you'd still find levels of second hand smoke. I understand that some people are going to disagree with the notion of an outright ban and see it as an issue of individual freedom. Regardless, the effect on employees and workers is one of the reasons many schools have used to justify banning designated smokers dorms/areas.</p>

55

<p>If college is to prepare the students for the workplace then banning smoking in dorms and every other building on campus is a good start since they'll likely not be able to smoke in their workplace or hotels either. They may as well get used to going outside to indulge their habit.</p>

<p>I've also seen the incovenience of being able to smoke outside only help some smokers quit.</p>

56

<p>


</p>

<p>I agree with the points you made about a indoor smoking ban preparing students for the workplace, but your last point, in particular, was very true for my brother-in-law. He was a life long smoker, but always said that as soon as smoking was banned in his building, he would kick the habit. Sure enough, the day smoking was no longer permitted inside his office, was the last day he smoked. He's been smoke free for years.</p>

57

<p>Smoking is not a "habit". It is a drug addiction. Calling it a "habit" makes it more difficult for smokers to understand their addiction and what they must do to quit.</p>

58

<p>Well, having been a lifelong NON-smoker myself, I'm only repeating his words. Habit or not, that's what he said.</p>

59

<p>
[quote]
Smoking is not a "habit". It is a drug addiction.

[/quote]

It seems to be both. The habit part is powerful though (so is the addiction) and it's this habit that the inconvenience of smoking can help break. They'll still have the pull from the addiction side but the habit side gets broken when they can't light up at the desk, in a conference room, before and after dinner, while in a bar with a drink, etc. They'll still have the addiction side to deal with but they need to make a more conscious effort to feed the addiction when it's not so convenient. If nothing else it seems to reduce the number of cigarettes they smoke which reduces the amount of nicotine they're putting in their system which I assume would eventually make it easier to quit.</p>

<p>I saw a lot of smokers quit once they could no longer smoke at work and at restaurants and bars. The breaking of the habit sure seemed to help them overcome the addiction and quit.</p>

60

<p>
[quote]
If nothing else it seems to reduce the number of cigarettes they smoke which reduces the amount of nicotine they're putting in their system which I assume would eventually make it easier to quit.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not really. A drug addiction like nicotine is an all or nothing proposition. "Tapering off" as the smoking cessation people call it has been pretty conclusively shown in studies to not help quit rates at all. If anything, forced cutting down just puts the smoker into a state of withdrawal before every smoke, thus reinforcing the notion that each and every cigarette is essential to their very ability to exist. That's why so many people quit for six months or a year and end up smoking again. They think they can have one cigarette, no big deal. But, one is not a choice. It's either none or all of them again. 95% of relapsed quitters end up back smoking their full amount. It's like a junkie. An addict can't have just a little heroin every once in a while.</p>

<p>From an overall societal standpoint, the increasing difficulty of being a nicotine addict and the unpleasantness of the frequent withdrawal states does encourage people to quit. It also helps people trying to quit, especially no-smoking bars as alcohol is the number one "cause" of relapses.</p>

<p>Having said that, enforcement of a no-smoking ban in a college setting is problematic. If I'm a college administrator, my number one goal is going to be to get the smokers out of the dorms where non-smokers live and breath. Stop punishing the non-smokers. If the smokers want to kill themselves, have at it. It's their choice. They can decide to quit at any time, just like the 46 million ex-smokers in the United States.</p>