A court issued a restraining order preventing the parents of an eight-year-old girl from smoking in the child’s presence. The court initiated the order, it was not requested by one of the parents. Additionally, the court noted that the child was healthy and did not have any respiratory problems. The court conducted an exhaustive review of the dangers of secondhand smoke and found that children are especially susceptible to diseases caused by secondhand smoke and that secondhand smoke is a danger to all children, regardless of their health. The court found that the “best interests of the child” standard imposes a mandatory duty upon family courts to consider the danger of secondhand smoke to all children within their care in determining matters of visitation and custody.
Government, through its agencies and officials including prosecutors, may seek to enforce its health laws. For example, the government may revoke the license of a retailer that sells tobacco products to minors. These cases may also directly involve the tobacco industry, for example, a government might impound and destroy improperly labeled cigarette packs.
A court issued a restraining order preventing the parents of an eight-year-old girl from smoking in the child’s presence. The court initiated the order, it was not requested by one of the parents. Additionally, the court noted that the child was healthy and did not have any respiratory problems. The court conducted an exhaustive review of the dangers of secondhand smoke and found that children are especially susceptible to diseases caused by secondhand smoke and that secondhand smoke is a danger to all children, regardless of their health. The court found that the “best interests of the child” standard imposes a mandatory duty upon family courts to consider the danger of secondhand smoke to all children within their care in determining matters of visitation and custody.