Instead of putting everyone through all of this agony, why didn't "they" just pull them off of the markets in the first place!
Posted on 08/13/2004 5:24:43 AM PDT by Hatteras
Mom Sent To Jail For Smoking Around Kids
POSTED: 6:43 am EDT August 13, 2004
BOWLING GREEN, Va. -- A woman was sentenced Thursday to 10 days in jail for defying a court order not to smoke around her children.
Tamara Silvius was banned last year from smoking around the youths, now ages 8 and 10, as part of a custody arrangement with her ex-husband.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
Sergeant Major, with all due respect -- your comment epitomizes my posting....to the letter.
Here's personal proof:
I watched my Grandpa smoke himself to death and die of lung cancer that ate away at him so badly that it jumped right up to his brain. Doctors told him years ago that he had better stop smoking or he was going to die early. His response was (paraphrasing) : "Let's see you provide one ounce of proof of the claim...." (Sound familiar?)
Guess who lived with him for 55 years - and never smoked one single cigarette? Yeah, my Grandma. Well, guess what....(I'll let you figure that out because it's hard for me to deal with right now.)
Also, I watched my best friend's mom smoke herself into near-death...and now she has quit - a day late and a dollar short. Guess what....yeah - you got it.
I do despise the liberal left. I don't have anything at all to prove to you or anyone else. They are the leeches in our society who are seeking to destroy us from within.
However, they are not the only destructive ones among us. Figure that one out for yourself as well, Sergeant Major.
I can be a pretty stubborn guy. The older I get (I'm only 39), the more dogged I become when I get something in my craw. I do, however, pride myself on having a great deal of common sense. I can accept proven fact when I see it presented in resounding clarity.
Don't confuse your own stubborn refusal to accept the same with the notion that I am the one who is wrong here. Please just do me the favor of not assuming me to be someone who is buying into some sort of propaganda because you don't agree with my stand.
Do you really and truly believe that inhaling cigarette smoke DOESN'T cause cancer? Do you REALLY?
If you actually believe that, my words here are obviously wasted. And that's just a shame.....
I hope it doesn't get you too. I wouldn't wish that kind of slow, agonizing death on anyone.
This isn't about smoking, this is about ETS and a judge going beyond what they should because the husband wants to get back at an ex.
Lol, I am so sorry for clicking this thread, but here goes.
Since I don't know their particular situation, I'll try and generalize. When parents battle over their children in custody disputes, many times it is not because of the genuine welfare of the children, but a desire to punish the other parent. The issue of smoking is a hot button depending on the judge, and can be used as a club over the smoking parent.
I seriously doubt that this woman voluntarily agreed to this. It was probably the lesser of two evils. I smoked when my ex met me, and his mother smoked. I still smoke. This is another way my ex and his enabler can get to me. So far the last two times they have made false CPS complaints, they've been exagerations and outright lies. They could run with the smoking issue.
Going back to the court order issue, my ex has never seen a rule he couldn't break and get away with. He knows that I could kick his butt in court, and I eventually will, so he is going the back route and using his wife to do his dirty work. For instance, his attorney when asked by the judge who would take care of the QDRO, the attorney said they would take care of it. That was in 2001. It hasn't been "taken care of". Basically it was a Clintionian reply. This is a big violation of a court order. There have been others.
Since the woman was at a family dinner away from home, how did the ex find out that she had lit up? The kids, obviously. This falls under the subject of parental alienation. My ten yr old gets pumped regularly for information. Visitation is starting to turn into hell for her.
I just want to clue you folks in on how nasty vindictive people keep up the trauma, even after the divorce. The kids suffer more from this kind of behavior than they ever will from second hand smoke.
The cigarette issue is a smokescreen (pardon the pun) for the ex husband's true intent.
Easy there chief.
Child support and alimony are one thing. Smoking is another. Running red lights violate actual laws. So does speeding.
The judge overstepped his authority. The judges keep doing that nowadays. Smoking is as legal as breathing. I'd say that if mom were a cop, or a DA, she puts her kids at more risk than if she smoked in the house, but I haven't heard of judges making mom quit by reason of endangering the welfare of the kids.
It used to be legal to separate black riders from white riders on buses. Rosa Parks broke the law too.
Bad laws REQUIRE disobedience. So do bad judges.
That's the delicate part about the social contract. The people place their faith in those that make the rules, and the rulemakers have to abide by that and make rules that are sensible.
Make smoking illegal or make divorce decrees that are enforceable. She's going to get her chance to appeal at the criminal level. She wouldn't necessarily have that right at the family court level.
Judges DON'T MAKE LAWS. They don't. They see that things are done in accordance with the law. You can't enjoin people not to do things that are otherwise lawful.
Make smoking illegal and things change. Then a judge can say "Don't do drugs around your kids. Don't do drugs at all or I'm awarding custody to your husband." Perfectly reasonable.
Unbelievable. I'm glad I'm old and can remember this country when people were considered smart enough to raise their own kids without government interference.
It is if a judge says it is.
And we allow him to get away with it.
That is a terrible situation to be in, I see my grandchildren at least two times a week ,we are having a sleepover they love coming here, I dont smoke around them because they have enough problems, but if my daughterinlaw layed down her laws, I am afraid I would do the same thing you are doing ,I am a proud grandma and I would be so sad if I was not a part of their life, but I wont be bullied,I hope things get better for you, but remember this shrew will be the one to answer to her kids ,why you are not part of their life.
Things won't get better.My oldest is 13, my younger ones are 6 and 2. I haven't seen any of them in 6 years. My sons won't take control, so I am deprived of my grandchildren.
"With a B"
Oh, I don't know. Sounds like the kind of person that witchunts were invented for, to me.
Love your tagline; hate your take on the law.
The law was made for man, not man for the law.
A bad law has no claim on our obedience.
The answer is absolutely, yes. My point is that in most "domestic" or "family Court" proceedings, the male gets screwed because it's un-PC to criticize and/or hold women accountable for their misbehavior.
Instead of putting everyone through all of this agony, why didn't "they" just pull them off of the markets in the first place!
A woman was sentenced Thursday to 10 days in jail for defying
a court order not to smoke around her children.What's wrong with this picture ¿¿
A few years back, another woman had court problems while trying to obtain a divorce. The father had the little son tell him if the mother smoked when the son was with her on the week-ends. The son did, and hauled the mother into court. I haven't heard the outcome of this in quite awhile
Ms DeMatteo's lawyer, Joan Shkane, said: "The father can request urine samples, air samples from her home and that's just another way he is intruding on her life. What they've done is turn Nicholas into a little informant."
The New York Affiliate of the ACLU is the NY Civil Liberties Union
Was inevitable.
I heard a divorce lawyer say on TV that if you have an exspouse who smokes, call, because you can literally get anything you want in today's hysterical shrill atmosphere in America concerning smoking.
Boy, did Osama blow it by not citing smoke as one of his jihads.
He'd own America by now.
BOWLING GREEN, Va. (AP) - A woman was sentenced Thursday to 10 days in jail for defying a court order not to smoke around her children.
Tamara Silvius was banned last year from smoking around the youths, now ages eight and 10, as part of a custody arrangement with her ex-husband. She allegedly violated the order during a trip to South Carolina for Thanksgiving. For that, Silvius was fined $500 US and was given a 10-day suspended sentence on the condition she not do it again.
But Silvius was back in court Thursday for violating the order a second time in June. Silvius, a pack-a-day smoker, claims the restriction violates her rights.
A judge upheld the order in January, citing medical evidence of the effects of second-hand smoke on children. Silvius has appealed to the Virginia Court of Appeals.
Sorry I have no link.
Feeding the kid french fries would have been worse for his health. A simple reprimand would have been more than enough.
>>Anti-smoking laws are not a liberals-only issue.
No doubt about that. Conservatives have shown themselves only way too willing to see the notions of freedom of assembly, property rights, private activities as the bailiwicks of the state, albeit for all the valid reasons.
Based on what has been achieved with tabak, I wonder what defence could be used against gun confiscation, mandatory vehicle choices, not to mention implanted chips by HMO's, etc etc.
I think this judge is nuts. Talk about judicial activism.
If this is conservatism, one wonders what's the difference with liberalism.
Both seem to worship at the altar of the state.
Marry a fag, just don't smoke one!
Hail America, Land of the Fr....never mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
