PREVENT DIVORCE
Here's One Way How

The purpose of this site is to assist in
(a) avoidance of amateurish lay notions
(b) using of medical journal data on the role of tobacco in divorce
(c) providing list of cases of spouses suing on the subject (below)
(d) citing the century of medical advisories on the subject (below).

Let's start by seeing what medical researchers have found as a significant risk factor in divorce. Prepare to be surprised!

The bottom line is that professional researchers have found that "smoking is a predictor of divorce," see Jerald G. Bachman, Ph.D. et al., Smoking, Drinking, and Drug Use in Young Adulthood (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, Pub, 1997), p 70 (Review,   Sequel).

Smokers have 53% more divorce than nonsmokers. See Prof. William J. Doherty, Ph.D. et al., Cigarette Smoking and Divorce, 16 Families, Systems & Health 393-400 (1998). (This latter study made news nationwide, with an accompanying article on it entitled, "Smokers more likely to go through divorce: Study supports research showing more problems among those who puff," by Karen S. Peterson, of USA TODAY, which was in turn cited in The Detroit News, page 6A, on Tuesday, 29 December 1998.

". . . the immediate effect of smoking . . . is a lowering of the accuracy of finely coordinated reactions (including associative thought processes)."—John H. Kellogg, M.D., LL.D., F.A.C.S., Tobaccoism, or, How Tobacco Kills (Battle Creek, MI: The Modern Medicine Publishing Co, 1922), p 88.

Peter H. Knapp, M.D., et al, in Am J Psychiatry, Vol. 119, Issue # 10, pp 966-972 (April 1963) (Smokers' typical brain-damage symptoms include "distorted time perception"; smokers "spoke about time moving slowly"; smokers showed "marked denial of concern . . . about any dangers associated with tobacco" showing impaired self-defense reflex ability to comprehend future consequences of current actions, e.g., current smoking's future effects).

Dr. William M'Donald, in The Lancet Vol. 1, Issue # 1748, page 231 (28 Feb 1857) ("no smoker can think steadily or continuously on any subject. . . . He cannot follow out a train of ideas.")

Both the government and the American Psychiatric Association have issued reference books listing smoking in separate classifications for its mental effect—meaning, as a "mental disorder," in the International Classification of Disease, 9th ed. (ICD-9), p 231, and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed. (DSM-III), pp 159-160 and 176-178. Tobacco causes brain damage, is called "Tobacco Organic Mental Disorder" (TOMD). The Manual includes smokers in the TOMD category if withdrawal symptoms occur within 24 hours (most smokers have symptoms in two hours).

The Surgeon General's colleagues say that if the public knew smoking's severe mental effects, making it not a habit but worse (a mental disorder), that fact becoming publicly known (instead of censored as it is) would have a major impact on the public's perception of smokers ("a profound effect upon the reputation of this behavior")! See the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), book, Research on Smoking Behavior, Research Monograph 17, Publication ADM 78-581, p 5 (December 1977), quoting Murray E. Jarvik, M.D., Ph.D.

“A Gallup poll found that 57 percent of all marriages fail due to ineffective communication and conflict resolution skills.” Reference, Rev. Lawrence M. Ventline, in “Soul-saving and marriage savers,” in The Source, p A5 (22 June 2008). Well, duh . . . .! How can a person “communicate” with a mentally ill person unable to reason in a rational sane manner?! Divorce is foreseeable!

Related web sites provide background information, as divorce is only one facet of adverse effects that cigarettes are linked to.

Abortion Addiction AIDS
Alcoholism
Alzheimer's
Birth Defects
Brain Damage Crime (Domestic Violence) 
Dangerous Chemicals
Diabetes Drugs Emphysema
Fires  Heart Disease Homelessness
Hiring Difficulties Lung Cancer Macular Degeneration
Mental Disorder Seat Belt Nonuse SIDS
Suicide Tuberculosis The Complete List

In view of known smoker misbehaviors, including domestic violence (crime), at a higher rate than among nonsmokers, and smokers' disproportionate rate of chronic disease, it is easy to understand why smokers have 53% more divorce than nonsmokers.

The clergy had a role in attempting to prevent this. Pursuant to clergy's then involvement, a Michigan law sought, and seeks, to ban this excess risk factor in divorce.

          Michigan Governor Engler (1991-2002) and staff were paper-supportive of action to enforce that law, issuing five pertinent memoranda:

Exec Order 1992-3 Law Support Letter # 1 Anti-Cigarette Smuggling Finding Law Support Letter # 2 Governor's Overview

      Note the record of advice a century ago to women on the subject of relations with smokers, and specifically, smoking and marriage. That advice was to note the altered relationship, thus to not marry smokers in the first place. Here is background on this concept, from:
  • Dr. John Lizars (1787-1860), The Use and Abuse of Tobacco (Edinburgh: 1859), pp 120-121. Advice then was that to avoid being a victim of a smoker's "vices and debased habits," women who "sufficiently value their own happiness, and the health and happiness of their families . . . ought not to marry smokers; nor should they trust the promises of reformation which [the smoker] may make, as they are very seldom kept."

  • James Parton (1822-1891), Smoking and Drinking (Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1868), pp 27-32, has a general overview with commentary. P 99 has a narrative on genetic damage passed on to one's descendants.

  • Chemistry Professor John I. D. Hinds (1847-1921), The Use of Tobacco (Nashville, Tenn: Cumberland Presbyterian Publishing House, 1882), p 106 (has additional context as well).

  • Meta Lander (1813-1901), The Tobacco Problem, 6th ed. (Boston: Lee and Shepard Pub, 1882), pp 255-256. The basis, in modern terms, was smokers' abulia (impaired impulse and ethical controls), and various adverse impacts on the family. (Examples at pp 221-222, 238-242, 260-262, and 370-371.) The book used the then terminology, "as tobacco comes, good manners go." (Example at pp 221-222). The solution is "'never to marry a man who uses tobacco.'" P 306 cites "a club of young ladies who are pledged to kiss no man whose lips are tainted with tobacco. May its membership rapidly increase!" Lander cites another example at p 247.

  • "Good Habits Clubs" of the 1900's advocated likewise, to avoid debased men, said Miami University Botany Professor Bruce Fink (1861-1927) in his 1915 book, Tobacco, pages 100-101.

  • Jules Michelet [1798-1874], the French historian, said: "Tobacco separates man from woman, and is the most dangerous obstacle to conjugal happiness."

  • Dr. Hippolyte A. Depierris (1810-1889), Physiologie Sociale (Paris: Dentu, 1876), p 74, had linked smoking and divorce in the 1830's, "la fumée du tabac aurait causé bien des divorces, si la législation l'avait permis."

  • Pryns Hopkins, Ph.D. (1885 - 1970), Gone Up in Smoke: An Analysis of Tobaccoism (Culver City, CA: The Highland Press, 1948), p 158, cited the issue of "the increasing devotion [addiction] of women as well as men [as] a considerable factor in the concurrent increase in divorce."

  • Herbert H. Tidswell, M.D., in his 1912 book, The Tobacco Habit: Its History and Pathology, listed examples of contact with tobacco poisons, at page 149, examples now oft-overlooked: contact with smoker-used towels and linen.

  • In his 1930 book, The Tobacco Taboo, pp. 66-67, Rev. Charles M. Fillmore elaborated on this concept.
    • In a 2000 ruling, Egypt's mufti, Farid Naser Wasel, declared smoking by a spouse a legitimate ground for divorce by the nonsmoker spouse, says "Smoking spouses face divorce in Egypt" (BBC, 30 July 2000).

    Why smokers mistreat their spouses and family can be understood from this 1845 concept by Rev. Benjamin A. Lane:

    "As in the night, imagining some fear,
    How easy is a bush supposed a bear."
    Rev. Lane is referring to smokers' dysfunction of misinterpreting and over-reacting. For background, click here.

    Another example is given by Count Egon Corti, in A History of Smoking, transl. by Paul England (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co, 1932), p 101: "If time hang heavy and he has nothing else to do, a man will drink [smoke] tobacco. Is he moody, angry, or perplexed, he sticks his pipe between his teeth and takes a long pull at it. Should [if] his wife begin to nag, the man will fill his mouth with smoke and puff it in her face."

    The book, Schizophrenia: Symptoms, Causes, Treatments (New York: Norton, 1979), by Kayla Bernheim, Ph.D., and Richard Lewine, Ph.D., provides insight. At 27-28, “There are two primary ways of describing disordered thinking. One is that the normal brain has a filter mechanism which prevents the intrusion of unwanted or irrelevant thoughts. As you read this book, for example, you are relatively unaware of the noises of the outside world. . . . You are able to focus your attention on this page, more or less at will, and you can direct your mind to shut off extraneous thoughts and feelings.” At 25, “More fundamentally, the schizophrenic finds it difficult to organize thoughts and direct them toward a goal.” At 28, “The schizophrenic person appears to have a faulty 'shut-off mechanism, a faulty filter."

    Such data provides insight on aberrant behavior by smokers. They want to cooperate with the spouse and family, but display symptoms of their minds wandering in a flight of ideas from topic to topic without a competent analysis. They fail to comprehend the “broadest intendment” of the meaning of spouse's words, concepts, and actions even when meant with the kindest intent. Smokers display a lack of “a filter mechanism” to deal with the spouse and family activities sequentially and progressively, in a rational, complete, thorough, and professional manner. Thus they may over-react and "blow" at whatever is occurring.

    In essence, when such incidents happen, it is no longer the person you married, or your parent or child, but a different person in essence, a person the victim of the tobacco disorder that has afflicted them first, then eventually afflicting you in terms of their resultant behavioral deterioration.

    Once you understand this symptom pattern, you can yourself perhaps be better able to empathize, as you would if the person were afflicted with any other disorder.

    Women victims of smoker abuse thus seek a divorce. See, e.g., Margaret F. Brinig and Douglas W. Allen, "These Boots Are Made for Walking: Why Most Divorce Filers are Women," 2 American Law and Economics Review 126 (2000). For one view of parental rights, see, e.g., Bill Wood, Galluzzo Equal Custody Brief: Challenging Ohio State Custody Laws (14 March 2005). (Caveat: While containing many otherwise good references, there is some confusion of cause and effect. Smoking is a family destroyer and causer of other social ills cited; those social ills, e.g., destroyed families, do not cause smoking. Smoking is what is "filling our prisons, causing psychological problems, suicide, psychosis, gang activity, rape, physical and sexual child abuse, violence against women, general violence, alcohol and drug abuse, poverty, lower academic achievement, school drop-outs, relationship instability, gender identity confusion, runaways, homelessness, . . . and any number of corrosive social disorders." See our cigarette effects site.)

    Good Advice That Would Have Been a Life Saver
    for These Women whose Smoker Paramours or Husbands
    Were Convicted For Having Murdered Them
  • Lisenba v State of California, 89 P2d 39-108 (21 March 1939) aff'd 14 Cal 2d 403; 94 P2d 569-586 (5 Oct 1939) aff'd 314 US 219; 62 S Ct 280; 86 L Ed 166 (8 Dec 1941). In this typical murder-by-smoker case, this cigar smoker murdered his wives, 1932-1935, using hammer blows, snake bite, drowning, to collect accidental death insurance policies. The deaths looked so accidental that the police were convinced, but the insurance company fortunately wasn't!

  • Crooker v State of California, 47 Cal 2d 348; 303 P2d 753 (1957) aff'd 357 US 433; 78 S Ct 1287; 2 L Ed 2d 1448 (30 June 1958). In this smoker murder case, one of many, this woman's boyfriend, a first law student, Mr. Crooker, murdered her, when she said she'd leave him. Moral of story: Follow the 19th century advice. Don't pick a smoker in the first place.

  • Pate v Robinson, 22 Ill 2d 162; 174 NE2d 820 (1961) cert den 368 US 995 (1962) rev 345 F2d 691 (CA 7) aff'd 383 US 375; 86 S Ct 836; 15 L Ed 2d 815 (7 March 1966). In this brain-damaged smoker murder case, the smoker with suicidal tendencies shot himself in the head and killed his infant son and common-law wife, and was convicted and jailed.)

    • The earliest husband-wife lawsuits in which tobacco is recorded as an issue are Durden v McWilliams & Smith, 31 Ala 438 (1858) and Bradley v Murray, 66 Ala 269; LRA 1 917F, 863 (Dec 1880). In the 1858 case, the court ruled that tobacco, cigars and brandy are not necessities. And in the 1880 case, the court ruled that tobacco is not a "necessity" for the spouse to provide. That case involved a husband-wife support of "necessaries" situation. The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that while items such as groceries are "necessaries" and indeed a support matter under the statute, "Pipes, tobacco and cigars, are too clearly without the pale of the statute, to require discussion."

             There is a further legal ramification of smoking and divorce, reported in a number of cases. The nonsmoking spouse can foreseeably identify the smoker spouse as a danger to the children, due to cigarettes' toxic chemicals above safe legal limits, violating the common law duty with respect to the "right to fresh and pure air,"

    For data verifying the second-hand TTS danger to women around smokers, see Kristin E. Anderson, Steven G. Carmella, Ming Ye, Robin L. Bliss, Chap Le, Lois Murphy, and Stephen S. Hecht, “Metabolites of a Tobacco-Specific Lung Carcinogen in Nonsmoking Women Exposed to Environmental Tobacco Smoke,” 93 J Natl Cancer Inst (#5) 378-381 (7 March 2001).
    Jill Halterman, M.D., M.P.H., "No-smoking Rules Not Common Enough For Asthmatic Children," Ambulatory Pediatrics (March-April 2006) (ten times more dangerous for them to live with smoker than nonsmoker parents)
    For pertinent lawsuits and context, see E. L. Sweda, Jr., “Lawsuits and secondhand smoke,” Tobacco Control 2004; 13 (Suppl I): i61-i66, “Child Custody,” pp i63-i64
    For other precedents, see "Smoking As Factor in Child Custody and Visitation Cases," 36 ALR 5th 377-393 (1996).
    For law review analysis, see "Risk Management of Passive Smoking at Work at Work and at Home," 13 St. Louis Univ Pub L Rev 763 (1994).

    “Cigarette users are unsafe. I would just as soon think of getting my employees out of the insane asylum as to employ cigarette users.”—Quoting E. H. Harriman, in the book by Miami University Botany Professor Bruce Fink, Tobacco (Cincinnati: The Abingdon Press, 1915), p 49.
    Of course. Smokers are notoriously disproportionately
  • mentally disordered
  • acalculic
  • anosognosic
  • accident-prone
  • brain-damaged
  • impulsive
  • intoxicated
  • sick
    • You would not go to an insane asylym to hire someone; why go there to find a marriage partner?

    Here is a list of court cases in which issues of the smoker as potentially unfit and thus foreseeably to lose child custody, were raised:

    In re Marriage of Stanley, 411 NW2d 698 (Iowa, 24 June 1987)

    Roofeh v Roofeh, 138 Misc 29 889; 525 NYS2d 765 (Nassau County Family Court, Mineola, New York, 22 Feb 1988) (Details at ASH)

    Pizzitola v Pizzitola, 748 SW2d 568 (Texas App, 31 March 1988) (Details at ASH)

    Reeves v Reeves (Circuit Court, Kentucky, o/a 3 June 1988) (child impacted by second-hand smoke case)

    Badeaux v Badeaux, 541 So 2d 301 (Louisiana App, 15 March 1989) (Details at ASH)

    Debra Morrow v Philip Morrow, 1989 Ohio App LEXIS 3218; 18 OLA 235; 1989 WL 94805 (11 Aug 1989) (Details at ASH)

    Potter v Potter, Lawyer's Weekly No. MA-2953, 3 Mich Law Weekly 1468 (1989), and Mich L W 956 (Michigan App, 24 June 1991)

    Wilk v Wilk, 781 SW2d 217 (Missouri App, 5 Dec 1989) (Details at ASH)

    De Beni Souza v Kallweit, 16 Fam L Rep (BNA) 1496 (California Super Ct, Judge David Stirling, 12 July 1990) (Details at ASH) (Case cited by Hall, p 116, n 5)

    Satalino v Satalino, No. 11440-86 (Nassau County Sup Court, New York, 10 Oct 1990), Trial (Feb 1991), p 82. (Details at ASH)

    In re Walter P, 228 Cal App 3d 113, 119; 278 California Rptr 602, 605 (4 March 1991) (making child ill, even smelled of cigarette smoke) (cited by Uhlich, p 747, n 116)

    Karen Mitchell v Robert Mitchell, Appeal No. 01-A-01-9012-CV-00442, 1991 Tennessee App LEXIS 337; 1991 WL 63674 (26 April 1991) (Details at ASH)

    Nocera v Nocera, Case No. B 89-2922 DM (Kalamazoo, Michigan, Judge John F. Foley, 29 May 1991)

    Bryant/Dept of Social Services v Wakely, Appeal No. 131708 / 211708 (Michigan App, 13 June 1991)

    Strathmann v Linda Foster (Common Pleas, Erie County, Judge Stephanie Domitrovich, Pennsylvania, 1991)

    Lamacchia v Lamacchia (Probate Ct, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, Judge O'Brien, 19 Dec 1991)

    Sulva v Isaacson (Illinois, Judge William Ward, 15 January 1992)

    In re Marriage of Cynthia K. Black, 837 P2d 407 (Montana, 1 Sep 1992) (order no smoking around child) (Details at ASH)

    John Doe v Jane Doe, South Carolina (1992)

    Tamara Helm v Mark Helm, 1993 Tennessee App LEXIS 109; 1993 WL 21983 (3 Feb 1993)

    Cowgill v Cowgill, 1993 Delaware Family Ct LEXIS 40; 1993 WL 331912 (Del Family Ct, 19 May 1993)

    Montufar v Navot, Docket No. FM 04-0021-8789 (Sup Ct, Fam Div, Camden New Jersey, Judge Orlando, 23 July 1993)

    Anderson v Newman, 190 West Virginia 577; 439 SE2d 442, 445 (21 Sep 1993) (father a smoker) (case cited by Hall, p 137, n 112)

    Masone v Tanner (California, 13 Oct 1993) (child lost 57% of breathing capacity)

    In re Marriage of Brian T. Diddens, 255 Illinois App 3d 850; 192 Ill Dec 878; 625 NE2d 1033; 1993 Ill App LEXIS 1933 (22 Dec 1993) (Details at ASH)

    Unger v Unger, 274 New Jersey Super 532; 644 A2d 691 (29 March 1994) (Details at ASH) (this is a well-reasoned custody case; it banned smoking; cited the Shimp precedent as showing the hazard is to those all around)

    Lizzio v Lizzio, 162 Misc 2d 701; 618 NYS2d 934 (New York, 1 July 1994) rev 226 App Div 2d 760; 640 NYS2d 330 (4 April 1996) (Details at ASH)

    Cooley v Cooley, 643 So 2d 408 (Louisiana App, 5 Oct 1994) (custody case, change in circumstances needed) (Details at ASH)

    Heck v Reed, 529 NW2d 155; 1995 ND LEXIS 35; 36 ALR 5th 849 (North Dakota, 28 Feb 1995) (Details at ASH) (issue became violence vs. smoking)

    Laura B. v Jeffrey B., Case No. CNA 93-06985; 1995 Delaware Family Ct LEXIS 40; 1995 WL 783009 (11 April 1995) (Details at ASH) (condition precedent, no smoking)

    In the Matter of the Marriage of Lesa L. Aubuchon, 913 P2d 221 (Kansas, 22 March 1996) (well defined issue as harm is enough to act on, without awaiting causing disease, at 223) (Details at ASH)

    Gwendolyn Figler v Neal Figler, 1996 Connecticut Super LEXIS 2787; 1996 WL 636479 (2 Aug 1996) (Details at ASH) (abusive smoker, inappropriate behavior, cigarettes child-accessible)

    Raymond Gilbert v Janice Gilbert, Case No. 093459; 1996 Connecticut Super LEXIS 2153; 1996 WL 494080 (16 Aug 1996) (Details at ASH)

    Matter of Becker, 144 Oregon App 237; 925 P2d 162 (23 Oct 1996) (contempt of court for smoking around child in violation of court order)

    Loretta Harrell v Douglas Harrell, No. 1084, 1987 WL 6716 (Tennessee App, 19 Feb 1987) (mother lost custody due to taking baby into smoking situations despite an injunction against doing so)

    Scott v Steelman, 953 SW2d 147 (Missouri App, 25 Sep 1997)

    Lamirande v Lamirande, 251 App Div 1071, 674 NYS2d 224 (New York, 10 June 1998) lv app den, 92 NY2d 809; 678 NYS2d 595; 700 NE2d 1231 (31 Aug 1998) (upholding banning smoking in house, pursuant to right to regulate the home conduct, as per alcoholic mother precedent, Mongiardo v Mongiardo, 232 App Div 741; 649 NYS 2d 45 (17 Oct 1996)

    Matter of Marriage of Heuberger, 155 Oregon App 310; 963 P2d 153 (5 Aug 1998)

    Hollister v Hollister, 254 App Div 580, 678 NYS 2d 820 (New York, 22 Oct 1998) (citing "unrealistic" and "ephemeral" educational goals for children by smoking ADC mother)

    Daniel v Daniel, 235 Ga App 184; 509 SE2d 117 (10 Nov 1998) (smoking mother lost custody) (cited in Sweda, Lawsuits, 2004, supra)

    Lauren Skidmore-Shafer v Steven Shafer, 770 So 2d 1097 (8 October 1999) cert den 1990572 (Alabama App, 14 April 2000) (cited in Sweda, Lawsuits, 2004, supra)

    In re Julie Anne, Case No. 97-PR-755; 2 Ohio Misc 2d 1; 2002 Ohio 4489; 2002 WL 2022117 rev 2002 WL 31387441; 121 Ohio Misc 2d 20; 780 NE2d 635 (Ct of Common Pleas, Ohio Juvenile Div, Lake County, Judge William Chinnock, 27 August 2002 rev 15 Oct 2002) (judicial sua sponte child protection case, enforcing pure air rights, via thorough court analysis of pertinent facts, one of the best reasoned decisions ever)

    Johnita M. DeMatteo v. David D. DeMatteo, Case No. D-37432; 194 Misc 2d 640; 749 NYS2d 671; 2002 N Y Slip Op 22689 (Utica, New York, Judge Robert F. Julian, 9 October 2002) (The child, Nicholas, had complained of his mother's smoking at home and in the court, and sought judicial relief to obtain the long-standing "right to pure air." Smoker opposed the court taking judicial notice of cigarette hazards. The judge ruled:

    • "Even though Nicholas does not presently have asthma, exposure to Environmental [Behavioral] Tobacco Smoke apparently significantly increases his risks of developing, either as a child or as an adult, asthma, coronary artery disease, lung cancer, and certain chronic respiratory disorder[s], to name the most significant conditions." "With regard to health care, the state will intervene even to the extent of overriding the religious convictions of the parents."

    • "No element of American liberty is more highly cherished or jealously guarded than religious freedom, yet in its role as parens patriae, and for the protection of the health and welfare of children, the state may and will contravene a family's religious beliefs and obligations."

    • "The [mother's] interest in unhampered cigarette smoking cannot be said to be greater than the religious interests advanced by others wishing for parental judgment to overcome a child's best interests."

      Judge Julian cited scientific evidence on the generally adverse health effect of second-hand smoke, and found that continued exposure to environmental tobacco smoke is not in the best long-term interests of the child.) (Details at ASH.)

    In re Guardianship of a Minor Child, Probate and Family Court Dept, No 01P1072 (Hampden (MA) Division, 2003) (cited in Sweda, Lawsuits, 2004, supra)

    Tamara Silvius v Steve Silvius, Caroline Circuit Court, Virginia (23 February 2005) affirmed Va App No. 1466-04-2 (26 July 2005)

    Lisa L. Day-Carter v Billy G. Day (Case No. 04 COA 74, 5th App Dist, Grafton, Ohio), ___ Ohio App ___; ___ NE2d ___ (22 August 2005) (News Article, ASH Analysis, parent ordered to not smoke around child)

    Re Britney Spears v Kevin Federline, Los Angeles Superior Court (17 October 2007) (loss of custody and visitation rights, due to violation of prior court order for random weekly drug tests, in view of evidence that Britney Spears engaged in "habitual, frequent and continuous use of controlled substances and alcohol" -- typical smoker behaviors)

    Many of these cases can be found at your local law library.

             More information can be obtained from the following reference materials and sources:

  • Wanda Uhlich, "Best Interests of the Child: Considering the Effects of Passive Smoking When Making A Child Custody Adjudication," 68 North Dakota Law Rev (#3) 727-748 (1992),

  • Allison D. Schwartz, "Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Its Effect of Children: Controlling Smoking in the Home," 20 Boston College J Env't Aff Law Rev (#1) 135-171 (1993),

  • Jeffrey L. Hall, "Second Hand Smoke as an Issue in Child Custody/Visitation Disputes," 97 West Virginia Law Rev (#1) 115-139 (Fall 1994),

  • "Smoking As Factor in Child Custody and Visitation Cases," 36 ALR 5th 377-393 (1996),

  • Roberta Ferrence and Mary Jane Ashley, "Protecting children from passive smoking," 321 British Medical Journal (#7257) 310-311 (5 Aug 2000)

  • a website of another organization, with its links to law reviews generally, and

  • from another organization more involved in public-interest tobacco-related litigation, Action on Smoking and Health, Washington, DC, helpful with cases having no URL. See especially its custody and smoking issues section.

    • Uhlich, p 738, n 65, cites the case of State v Gallegos, 384 P2d 967 (Wyoming, 9 Sep 1963) (offering a cigarette to a minor could be a criminal violation of health, welfare and morals of a minor, in the context of causing a tobacco effect).

    As the knowledge of cigarette dangers become more widespread, smokers will foreseeably increasingly be denied custody. Smoking is not a lawful choice, and is in fact the result of fraud, as legal terminology shows. Such professional terms underlie courts' support of childrens' right to a safe family.

    How Doctors Know Cigarette Effects
    Media Censorship of Cigarette Effects

    The article, "To Avoid Divorce, Move to Massachusetts," by Pamela Belluck (14 November 2004), cites data showing the divorce rate to be higher in the "red states" vs the "blue states" (election terminology). A major factor being overlooked in the media is that of smoking, combined with the positive role (variable) of education. See also,
  • U.S. Divorce Rates: For various faith groups, age groups, & geographic areas (27 April 2000), saying, e.g., "Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significently higher than for other faith groups, and for Atheists and Agnostics."

  • William V. D'Antonio, "Walking the walk on family values" (31 October 2004), saying, e.g., "The Associated Press, using data supplied by the US Census Bureau, found that the highest divorce rates are to be found in the Bible Belt. The AP report stated that "the divorce rates in these conservative states are roughly 50 percent above the national average of 4.2 per thousand people." The 10 Southern states with some of the highest divorce rates were Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. By comparison nine states in the Northeast were among those with the lowest divorce rates: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont."

  • "The religious right mocks and belittles marriage" (10 June 2006), saying, e.g., "If maintaining a two-parent home for the sake of children is a top priority of the religious right, the movement's leaders would do better to direct their energies inward and work to lower the divorce rate among born-again Christians instead of bashing same-sex marriage."

    • To do that, they should
  • Advocate the elimination of tobacco on moral grounds

  • Repent of their past, especially of the Religious Right's bad record in the marriage-destroyer, family-destroyer known as slavery

  • Admit the tobacco role in AIDS and its primary victims.

    • What this site is asking is your help in (a) getting the Michigan divorce prevention law (aka safe cigarettes act) enforced, and (b) getting all other governments to pass the same law in their areas. Please help us save lives and families, prevent premature deaths, by preventing unsafe cigarettes and their posing a risk factor in divorce.

             To fight this problem, here are four sample letters. Sample "A" is to Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm asking her to have the State Police enforce the Michigan law. Sample "B" is to Michigan Attorney General Michael Cox asking him to take "cease and desist" action to enforce the Michigan law. Each has the authority to help. As both the Governor and Attorney General are lawyers, the letters are written in "legalese." Sample letter "C" is to the State Police Director asking his agency personnel to enforce the law. Sample letter "D" is different, and is for you to send where the government still ignores the cigarette-divorce link. It is to be sent, for example, to the President, Congress, other Governors, and state legislators.

    * * * Sample Letter A * * *

    Honorable Jennifer Granholm
    Governor, State of Michigan
    P. O. Box 30013
    Lansing MI 48909-7513

    Dear Governor Granholm:

             This is a request that, to help prevent one of the risk factors in divorce, you assign the Michigan State Police to enforce the safe cigarettes law, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216.

              Cigarette "smoking is a predictor of divorce," see Bachman, et al., Smoking, Drinking, and Drug Use in Young Adulthood (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, Pub, 1997), p 70. Smokers have 53% more divorce than nonsmokers. See Doherty, et al., Cigarette Smoking and Divorce, 16 Families, Systems & Health 393-400 (1998).

              The safe cigarettes act, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, bans unsafe cigarettes. It forbids "any person within the state" from action that "manufactures, sells or gives to anyone, any cigarette containing any ingredient deleterious to health or foreign to tobacco . . . ." Please, as a divorce prevention measure, assign the Michigan State Police to enforce it, and aid county sheriffs and local police departments to do likewise.

             All cigarettes are deleterious, their label admits they are, and most if not all are adulterated with additives. MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, puts personal responsibility on those with most knowledge of the contraband substance (manufacturers and sellers), not on unwary consumers, often children.

             State Police enforcement action is a normal action that they do in other state-wide law violation situations. There are precedents as well. Austin v State, 101 Tenn 563; 48 SW 305; 70 Am St Rep 703 (1898) aff'd 179 US 343 (1898); Shimp v N J Bell Tele Co, 145 N J Super 516; 368 A2d 408 (1976); Commonwealth v Hughes, 468 Pa 502; 364 A2d 306 (1976); and Smith v Western Elec Co, 643 SW2d 10, 13 (Mo App, 1982).

             As a matter of preventing divorce, the Michigan safe cigarettes law needs to be enforced. Please help. The law against this deleterious and adulterated product needs to be enforced. Please assign the State Police to protect abulic smokers, children, and nonsmokers, by enforcing the safe cigarettes act, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216. Please have them halt the rampant violations, and interdict deleterious and adulterated cigarettes.

    Respectfully,

    * * * Sample Letter B * * *

    Honorable Michael Cox
    Attorney General, State of Michigan
    P. O. Box 30213
    Lansing MI 48909

    Dear Attorney General Cox:

             This is a request that, to help prevent one of the risk factors in divorce, you take "cease and desist" action to stop violations of the safe cigarettes law, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216.

              Cigarette "smoking is a predictor of divorce," see Bachman, et al., Smoking, Drinking, and Drug Use in Young Adulthood (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, Pub, 1997), p 70. Smokers have 53% more divorce than nonsmokers. See Doherty, et al., Cigarette Smoking and Divorce, 16 Families, Systems & Health 393-400 (1998).

              The safe cigarettes act, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, bans unsafe cigarettes. It forbids "any person within the state" from action that "manufactures, sells or gives to anyone, any cigarette containing any ingredient deleterious to health or foreign to tobacco . . . ." Please, as a divorce prevention measure, take "cease and desist" action to stop the rampant violations of the law. "Cease and desist" action is an action you take in other state-wide law violation cases. Please, as a divorce prevention measure, do that in this situation.

             All cigarettes are deleterious, their label admits they are, and most if not all are adulterated with additives. MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, puts personal responsibility on those with most knowledge of the contraband substance (manufacturers and sellers), not on unwary consumers, often children.

             "Cease and desist" action is a normal action that you do in other state-wide law violation situations. There are precedents, for example, Austin v State, 101 Tenn 563; 48 SW 305; 70 Am St Rep 703 (1898) aff'd 179 US 343 (1898); Shimp v N J Bell Tele Co, 145 N J Super 516; 368 A2d 408 (1976); Commonwealth v Hughes, 468 Pa 502; 364 A2d 306 (1976); and Smith v Western Elec Co, 643 SW2d 10, 13 (Mo App, 1982).

             As a matter of preventing divorce, the Michigan safe cigarettes law needs to be enforced. Please help. The law against this deleterious and adulterated product needs to be enforced. Please take "cease and desist" action to protect abulic smokers, children, and nonsmokers, by enforcing the safe cigarettes act, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216. Please take "cease and desist" action to halt the rampant violations.

    Respectfully,

    * * * Sample Letter C * * *

    Col. Peter C. Munoz, Director
    Department of State Police
    714 South Harrison Road
    East Lansing MI 48823

    Dear Col. Munoz:

    This is a request that, to help prevent one of the risk factors in divorce, you assign officers to enforce the safe cigarettes law, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216.

              Cigarette "smoking is a predictor of divorce," see Bachman, et al., Smoking, Drinking, and Drug Use in Young Adulthood (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, Pub, 1997), p 70. Smokers have 53% more divorce than nonsmokers. See Doherty, et al., Cigarette Smoking and Divorce, 16 Families, Systems & Health 393-400 (1998).

              The cigarette-divorce link occurs because of cigarettes' numerous toxic chemicals. The safe cigarettes act, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, bans unsafe cigarettes. It forbids "any person within the state" from action that "manufactures, sells or gives to anyone, any cigarette containing any ingredient deleterious to health or foreign to tobacco . . . ." Please, as a divorce prevention measure, work with prosecutors on this subject, assign officers to enforce the law, and aid county sheriffs and local police departments to do likewise.

             All cigarettes are deleterious, their label admits they are, and most if not all are adulterated with additives. MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, puts personal responsibility on those with most knowledge of the contraband substance (manufacturers and sellers), not on unwary consumers, often children.

             State Police enforcement action is a normal action that officers do in other state-wide law violation situations. There are precedents as well. Austin v State, 101 Tenn 563; 48 SW 305; 70 Am St Rep 703 (1898) aff'd 179 US 343 (1898); Shimp v N J Bell Tele Co, 145 N J Super 516; 368 A2d 408 (1976); Commonwealth v Hughes, 468 Pa 502; 364 A2d 306 (1976); and Smith v Western Elec Co, 643 SW2d 10, 13 (Mo App, 1982).

             As a matter of preventing divorce, the Michigan safe cigarettes law needs to be enforced. Please help. The law against this deleterious and adulterated product needs to be enforced. Please assign officers to protect abulic smokers, children, and nonsmokers, by enforcing the safe cigarettes act, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216. Please have them halt the rampant violations, and interdict deleterious and adulterated cigarettes.

    Respectfully,

    * * * Sample Letter D * * *

    President George W. BushU.S. Senator _______U.S. Representative __Governor ___ State Senator __State Representative __
    1600 Pennsylvania AvenueSenate Office BuildingHouse Office BuildingState CapitolState CapitolState Capitol
    Washington DC 20500Washington DC 20510Washington DC 20515City State ZipCity State ZipCity State Zip

             This is a request that you take action to get a law passed that will serve as a divorce prevention law. Michigan already has such a law. It is law number MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216. It deals with the cigarette link to divorce.

              Cigarette "smoking is a predictor of divorce," see Bachman, et al., Smoking, Drinking, and Drug Use in Young Adulthood (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, Pub, 1997), p 70. Smokers have 53% more divorce than nonsmokers. See Doherty, et al., Cigarette Smoking and Divorce, 16 Families, Systems & Health 393-400 (1998).

              The Michigan safe cigarettes act, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, bans unsafe cigarettes. Please, as a divorce prevention measure, get a copy of that law, which in essence forbids "any person within the state" from action that "manufactures, sells or gives to anyone, any cigarette containing any ingredient deleterious to health or foreign to tobacco . . . ."

             All cigarettes are deleterious, their label admits they are, and most if not all are adulterated with additives. MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, puts personal responsibility on those with most knowledge of the contraband substance (manufacturers and sellers), not on unwary consumers, often children. Michigan's well-written divorce prevention act deals with one of the key risk factors, unsafe cigarettes, and bans them. We need the same law for the protection and benefit of everyone. Smokers should not be discriminated against by being the only people regularly sold a deleterious product. Other deleterious products are recalled and taken off the market.

             As a matter of preventing divorce, everyone needs you to take action to get a safe cigarettes act passed. Please take action to copy the Michigan safe cigarettes law, MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216, so all of us can benefit from its wise prevention-oriented approach.

    Respectfully,

    * * * * *

    Please re-type, add recipient addresses where unlisted,
    add your name and return address, sign, and mail the above letters.
    The person you save may be yourself or your friend.
    If you wish, you can use different wording.

    * * * * *

    RELATED WEB SITES
    Clergy Role Education Decline Extradition Legal Definitions Mass Death Prosecution

    Overview Site Sponsored by
    Action on Smoking and Health
    A Separate Organization

    Perhaps you feel that the media should alert the public to tobacco effects in a meaningful way, instead of just writing sob stories without genuine causation-related data. For an exposé of media censorship on the subject, see the tobacco taboo.

    One factor in smokers' disproportionate divorce rate is abulic impairment of impulse controls, i.e., the "instant gratification" concept, marrying too young and without thought. A recent study showed a significant marriage-success advantage in terms of two specific factors:

    Age Difference At MarriageMale 0-4 Years OlderEither 5-9 Years OlderMale 10+ Years Older
    Divorce Rate33%±30%26%

    This means, the greater the age split, the lower the chance of divorce.

    Secondly, more success (least divorce) was with husband 45 years old or more when married. Worst (highest) divorce rates were when either married under age 25.

    Reference: Study of 134,000 Couples by the National Center for Health Statistics, cited in Greg Cutfield, "Older Men, Younger Women: The Greater Your Age Split, The Lower The Chances Your Marriage Will: The Surprising Truth About December-May Romances," Men's Health, pp 39-40 (Jan-Feb 1995).

    Late 50's - early 60's for men, are when for a happy marriage, love and sex are especially important to them. Unfortunately, that period is when same-aged women deem them less important. Source: Prof. John Gottman, Ph.D., Reader's Digest, Feb 2003. And see his "We're Not a Team Anymore," Reader's Digest (Oct 2001).
    Also note possible issues of (a) birth order, and (b) height difference.

    Credit Check on
    A. Fiancé
    myfico.com
    myvesta.org
    equifax.com
    on B. Yourself
    mortgageratesplus.com/free-credit-report.htm

    Recommended Reading:
    Charles B. Towns, Ph.D.
    Habits That Handicap (1915),
    page 174 (why counselors
    don't tell you the above information)
    Margery Wilson,
    How to Make the Most of Wife
    (Philadelphia and New York:
    J. P. Lippincott Co, 1947)
    Gary Smalley and John T. Trent, Love is a Decision: Ten Proven Principles to Energize Your Marriage and Family (Dallas: Word Pub., 1989)

    Expanded Interests:
    Example of Arts
    City of Florence: Arts
    Florence: Tourist Guide
    Uffizi
    City Life
    Sightseeing
    Walking Tour
    Accommodations
    Guide
    Art Tour
    Hotels

    Practical Tips
    Drive Europe
    Europe Cheap Monasteries
    How to Tie a Necktie
    Repairclinic.com
    E Shoes
    Tall Shoes
    Short Support
    Ferret Teen Holiday Jobs
    Romance Tips
    Reviews Dating Sites
    Snag Teen Holiday Jobs
    Unicru Teen Holiday Jobs
    Q D I
    Garden Styles
    S B Greenhouses
    public-records-now
    Macomb County Dental

    Automobile Engine RPM
    LevelMPHRPM
    Good702500+
    Better702000
    Best701500

    Automobile Purchase Sites
    cbi.carsbelowinvoice.com
    scbt.secretcarbuyingtips.com
    autos.automotive.com
    nc.newcar.com
    www.autodiscountgroup.com
    Florida Cars

    Airline Tickets
    orbitz.com
    cheaptickets.com
    travelocity.com
    expedia.com
    ata.com
    malaysiaairlines.com
    BookingBuddy.com
    lastminute.com
    ShermansTravel.com
    bestdealsononline.com

    Maps
    mapquest.com

    Discussion Group: More Participants Welcome

    To return to the top of this page, click here.

    This site is sponsored as a public service by
    The Crime Prevention Group

    Email@TCPG

    Copyright © 1999, 2001, 2003 TCPG