Phillips Richard, Amos Amanda, Ritchie Deborah, Cunningham-Burley Sarah, Martin Claudia
Public Health Sciences, Division of Community Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Medical School, Edinburgh EH8 9AG.
BMJ. 2007 Sep 15;335(7619):553. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39301.497593.55. Epub 2007 Sep 9.
To explore the accounts of smokers and non-smokers (who live with smokers) of smoking in their homes and cars after the Scottish smoke-free legislation; to examine the reported impact of the legislation on smoking in the home; and to consider the implications for future initiatives aimed at reducing children's exposure to secondhand smoke in the home.
A qualitative cross sectional study involving semistructured interviews conducted across Scotland shortly after the implementation of the legislation on 26 March 2006.
A purposively selected sample of 50 adults (aged 18-75) drawn from all socioeconomic groups, included smokers living with smokers, smokers living with non-smokers, and non-smokers living with smokers.
Passive smoking was a well recognised term. Respondents had varied understandings of the risks of secondhand smoke, with a few rejecting evidence of such risks. Children, however, were perceived as vulnerable. Most reported that they restricted smoking in their homes, with a range of restrictions across social classes and home smoking profiles. Spatial, relational, health, and aesthetic factors influenced the development of restrictions. Children and grandchildren were important considerations in the development and modification of restrictions. Other strategies were also used to militate against secondhand smoke, such as opening windows. The meaning of the home as somewhere private and social identity were important underlying factors. Respondents reported greater restrictions on smoking in their cars. There were diverse views on the smoke-free legislation. Few thought it had influenced their smoking in the home, and none thought it had affected how they restricted smoking in their homes.
These data suggest two normative discourses around smoking in the home. The first relates to acceptable social identity as a hospitable person who is not anti-smoker. The second relates to moral identity as a caring parent or grandparent. Awareness of the risks of secondhand smoke, despite ambivalence about health messages and the fluidity of smoking restrictions, provides clear opportunities for public health initiatives to support people attain smoke-free homes.
探讨在苏格兰实施无烟立法后，吸烟者以及与吸烟者共同生活的非吸烟者（以下简称“非吸烟者”）对于在家中和车内吸烟情况的描述；研究该立法对在家中吸烟的影响；并思考其对未来旨在减少儿童在家中接触二手烟的举措的启示。
一项定性横断面研究，于2006年3月26日该立法实施后不久，在苏格兰各地开展半结构化访谈。
从所有社会经济群体中，有目的地选取了50名年龄在18 - 75岁之间的成年人，包括与吸烟者共同生活的吸烟者、与非吸烟者共同生活的吸烟者以及与吸烟者共同生活的非吸烟者。
被动吸烟是一个广为人知的术语。受访者对二手烟风险的理解各不相同，少数人否认此类风险的证据。然而，儿童被视为易受影响群体。大多数受访者表示他们在家中限制吸烟，不同社会阶层和家庭吸烟情况的限制方式各异。空间、关系、健康和审美因素影响了限制措施的制定。子女和孙辈是制定和调整限制措施时的重要考量因素。还采用了其他策略来对抗二手烟，比如开窗通风。家作为私人场所的意义以及社会身份是重要的潜在因素。受访者表示在车内吸烟受到更多限制。对于无烟立法存在不同看法。很少有人认为它影响了他们在家中的吸烟行为，也没有人认为它影响了他们在家中限制吸烟的方式。
这些数据表明在家中吸烟存在两种规范性话语。第一种涉及作为好客之人且不反对吸烟的可接受社会身份。第二种涉及作为关爱子女或孙辈的父母或祖父母的道德身份。尽管对健康信息存在矛盾态度以及吸烟限制的灵活性，但对二手烟风险的认知为公共卫生举措提供了明确机会，以支持人们实现无烟家庭。
