Posted By Ken Taylor
The hazards will include: lung cancer, coronary heart disease, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, other circulatory and respiratory diseases, acute irritant effects on eyes, throat and respiratory tract and aggravation of asthma. The actual risks will depend upon the types of exposed persons (eg whether they also smoke or have existing relevant health problems), length and frequency of exposure, ventilation, etc. As to the control measures to be adopted, these will have to be a matter for careful selection by a competent person aware of the situations and nature of work involved. Hopefully some of our local authority readers will be able to amplify on this now that I have stopped your thread from falling into the relative obscurity of the next page on screen.

Posted By Stuart Nagle
I read with interest in the Daily Telegraph over the weekend that one health authority is considering withdrawing the services of it's staff to 'clients' who continue to smoke whilst a member of their staff is present in the 'clients' property in respect of home nursing care etc !!

The general premise being that staff should not be exposed to smoke in their workplace - the 'clients' home, and if they are, the service they offer will be withdrawn until the smoking stops...

Stuart

Posted By Joe
I tried asking this question some time ago, when the issue was not quite so PC and sexy as it is now.

I work with a local authority social care provider and we currently have difficulties with passive smoking in our day care, residential care and home support settings and in view of the impending legislation (I am in Scotland!) I don’t see the problem getting any easier to deal with in real terms.

I say real terms because I know the answer from many of the users of this forum will be to suggest the removal your staff ergo no problem, but this is not always feasible due to the level of service some clients will receive.

To date we have done the following, which may be of use to some;

Within residential and day care settings we have attempted to restrict the smoking of clients to designated smoking areas and carried out smoking risk assessments i.e. can they hold a cigarette, do they extinguish them properly etc. The problem in this area is should staff 'support' a smoker to hold cigarettes whilst they smoke. (Terrible I know but play that against them smoking themselves and setting fire to themselves and the building!) But with adequate and sufficient air extraction systems in place this should reduce exposure to passive smoke.

In the community (Home Support) we request that clients do not smoke whilst staff are present and with very heavy smokers that they don’t smoke for a period prior to their arrival. problems here are client’s home, big brother etc. Staff are instructed to ask clients to not smoke, open windows as necessary (but remember its Scotland, its usually cold!) and this can lead to the potential for conflict between staff, clients and carers.

Confession time here, I am a NON SMOKER and always have been and I kind of support some of the moves taking place in our land, but I am an operational health and safety officer and have to assist my employer in developing ways of dealing with new legislation, but how can we do this when some of our tasks are carried out in peoples homes and they already feel they are having other peoples wills forced upon them in public places so it sure ain’t gonna happen in their own homes.

I will watch this thread with keen interest to see both others opinions, but in Scotland its too late for that and any new and inventive control measures that we haven’t thought of yet.

And before anyone suggests it we have already discounted the Michael Jackson type oxygen tents but are still evaluation BA for our Home Support Workers!

Joe

Posted By J Knight
My, this subject certainly does raise hackles and cause outbreaks of petulant sarcasm!

I have a couple of points to make about the practical steps employers should and maybe do not need to take in this respect.

My first piece of general advice is that we don't have to worry too much if service users want to set fire to themselves in residential services, especially if they are cognitively intact. I know this because it happened on a couple of occasions in services run by my former employer and neither HSE not NCSC (as was) were remotely interested. There are possibly issues about such events setting fire to the rest of the building, and it is very distressing for everybody concerned, but there is no ordinary need for staff to be in attendance on a smoker in order to prevent this.

When people need assistance to smoke, such as for example somebody to hold a cigarette for them, risk assessment can consider the possibility of providing aids and adaptations to do this, rather than using a person. There are many devices on the market.

It is quite reasonable to withdraw service on H&S grounds in homecare if the risks outweigh the benefits to the organisation. I do wonder if the Telegraph report concerned a blanket ban, or if this is perhaps an example of perhaps over-zealous reporting? My former employer withdrew one homecare contract which basically consisted of feeding cigarettes to a chain smoker for 12 hours a day.

Good, common sense controls like a contracted agreement to not smoke when the worker is present are ideal for the typical short care at home visit. More complex care needs will require more complex control measures.

The national care standards do allow for no-smking policies in care homes; though even as as a non-smoker I find this idea somewhat unfair, unless all the service users want this.

The National Association of Safety & Health in Care Services is hosting a conference in Peterborough in April and this will be themed around passive smoking in care delivery. The association is open to all local authority & not for profit care providers, contact apply@nashics.com for more info,

John

Posted By s.micklewright
"What is the probability that our employee will die of lung cancer or of any of the other possibilities you have listed ? "

Impossible, and this is what everyone forgets, susceptibility to illnes caused by anything is based entirely on the subjects genetic predisposition to inherit the illness, hence 100 year old ladies who have smoked all there lives dying of unrelated smoking illness. Just a thought.

It is interesting that passive smoking has become a huge issue now, when less of us are exposed to it than we were years ago, the evidence I feel is scaremongering, but nanny knows best...
...wheres my mobile phone?

Simon

Posted By David A Jones
A slight expansion of the thread;

what if a care worker refuses to carry out tasks in a persons home due to the risks presented by passive smoking?

Personally I think they are full justified in such a stance and should be fully protected from any adverse consequences e.g. discipline, sacking, etc. of taking such a stance

Posted By Nick Egan
I'm always telling my school age children "read the question" Well I didn't heed my own advice with my first posting.

Obviously the "workplace" is within the control of the employer and so he can impose a smoking ban to protect workers from the category 1 carcinogen "second-hand smoke".

I don't know the answer to the home visit question that was posed. But what would you do if your employee (eg HSE inspector) had to visit another employer where there was a poorly controled use of a Cat 1 carcinogen, say VCM? Surely the controls should be the same? PPE as well as all the other controls!
Nick

Posted By Merv Newman
nick,

must respond to a slight error in your last posting : cancer is NOT a category 1 carcinogen. It may result from exposure to category 1 carcinogens. OK ?

While tobacco smoke may be a C1 for smokers I still have enormous difficulty in understanding any stats for passive smokers. The difference between directly drawing the concentrated smoke into your lungs and just breathing smoke laden air is enormous. I haven't measured it but I could call it as 1000 to 1 (prove me wrong).

The numbers dont work.

I'm a 60 year old pipe smoker. what are my stats and what are those for my wife who used to smoke 20/day until 25 years ago ?

Can someone give me some HARD numbers ?

Or is it all wooly thinking on a line with banning conkers ?

Posted By Joe
Within earlier postings to this thread there was some reference made to the use and availabilty of smoking aids.

Does any one have any information on these items they could send me or share with the forum?