header-logo header-logo

19 June 2008 / Neil Allen
Issue: 7326 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Constitutional law , Mental health
printer mail-detail

A human right to smoke?

Has the government struck the right balance between the freedom of smokers and the welfare of non-smokers? Neil Allen reports

Our freedom to choose when and where to smoke is now regulated by the Health Act 2006 and its accompanying regulations which, broadly speaking, ban smoking in enclosed public places and work premises. Smoking in one's own home is not forbidden. Other types of accommodation, such as prisons, care homes and hospices, are similarly exempted from the prohibition. Hospitals are not, so patients must brave the weather if they wish to smoke. However, that is not an option for many patients detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.

The government originally intended to exempt designated smoking rooms in mental health units providing long-term residential accommodation. However, the public's response to its consultation opposed such a move. As a result, and unlike the position in Ireland and Scotland, reg 10(3) of the Smoke-free (Exemptions and Vehicles) Regulations 2007 merely provides a 12-month “sunset clause” to the ban. From 1 July

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DAC Beachcroft—Clare Dewar

DAC Beachcroft—Clare Dewar

DAC Beachcroft strengthens Scottish real estate capabilitywith partner appointment

Womble Bond Dickinson—Brendan Ryan

Womble Bond Dickinson—Brendan Ryan

Womble Bond Dickinson appoints Brendan Ryan as partner in Public Law Projects team

Parklane Plowden Chambers—five appointments

Parklane Plowden Chambers—five appointments

Parklane Plowden Chambers welcomes five new barristers

NEWS
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
Police powers targeting concealed identities at protests come with procedural conditions that could determine whether prosecutions succeed
back-to-top-scroll