As someone deeply interested in public health, and as someone who works in helping people address tobacco dependence, I am generally in favor of promoting smoke-free/tobacco-free environments. That being said, I believe that the recent proposal from the city of Seattle to forbid smoking in our parks is likely to create a larger problem than it promises to correct. While framed as a way to make the parks a more pleasant place to visit, there is a real likelihood that the ban would result in disparate enforcement. More vulnerable individuals, such as people experiencing homelessness, would likely face the brunt of a new law.
From the outset, it seems probable that the policy would not be enforced equally upon all residents of Seattle. Given Seattle’s problem with racial bias among the police, it also seems reasonable to assume that people of color might receive disproportionate attention.
In terms of protecting people from secondhand smoke, Seattle Parks and Recreation already requires that individuals smoking be 25 feet away from others or play areas. From a strictly “health-focused” perspective, the science simply does not support the contention that secondhand smoke poses a significant health risk from this distance, especially outdoors. Professionals in the field of tobacco control have warned against overstating the case of outdoor exposure, and a representative from the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is on record as stating, “There is not a lot of science around outdoor-smoking bans … There is some science, but you have to be very close to the smoke in an outdoor setting … The last thing we want to do is put our credibility on the line with regard to the science.”
It was actually something that Christopher Williams, the current acting superintendent of Seattle Parks and Recreation, said that made me decide to actively oppose the ban. He stated,
“Visitors come to parks to enjoy healthful, outdoor recreation. When there are smokers in a park, it diminishes others’ ability to do that.” This is a deeply concerning statement. Tobacco use may be considered undesirable by many, but we should not invoke a public health argument to mobilize public sentiment/policy against people who often already experience marginalization.
Tobacco use is a serious public health problem. It is the leading cause of preventable death and disease in the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, approximately 480,000 people die every year of tobacco-related illness. That’s more than 1,200 people every single day. This is a crisis that we have become numb to and that we have largely stopped taking seriously.
While we have made progress, not all have benefited from that progress equally. LGBTQ individuals, aggressively targeted by the tobacco industry, smoke at twice the rate of their heterosexual counterparts. Many people of color face worse health outcomes from tobacco use, due to inadequate access to health care and other structural inequalities. The list goes on, and tragically, approximately 200,000 of those 480,000 deaths each year are among people with significant mental health concerns or other chemical dependency issues.
Tobacco is an incredibly pressing public health and social justice issue, and a ban in Seattle parks will do nothing to address this crisis. What it will do, however, is increase the stigmatization of people who use tobacco, and act as another way for vulnerable people to be removed from our public spaces. If we are serious about addressing the health impact of tobacco use, we have many tools at our disposal, should we choose to use them. At the very least, we should adequately fund cessation resources and make sure they’re appropriate for the most affected groups. The state legislature has failed to do this year after year, and in the absence of any meaningful support, a parks ban seems especially unfair.
Maloney holds a master’s degree in public health from the University of Washington and was part of the university’s Tobacco Scholars Program.