Secondhand Smoke Exposure among Hispanics/Latinos Living in Multiunit Housing: Exploring Barriers to New Policies

Abstract

Purpose Despite a high prevalence of voluntary home smoking bans and laws protecting Californians from exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) in the workplace, many Hispanic/Latino (H/L) residents of multiunit housing (MUH) are potentially exposed to SHS from neighboring apartments. An advocacy/policy intervention was implemented to reduce tobacco-related health disparities by encouraging H/L living in MUH to implement voluntary policies that reduce exposure to SHS. This article presents findings from qualitative and quantitative data collected during development of the intervention, as well as preliminary results of the intervention. Design, Setting, and Subjects MUH residents in Southern California participated in focus groups (n = 48), door-to-door surveys (n = 142), and a telephone survey (n = 409). Measures Exposure to SHS, attitudes toward SHS, and attitudes toward policies restricting SHS in MUH were assessed. Results H/L MUH residents reported high levels of exposure to SHS and little ability to protect themselves and their families from SHS. Respondents expressed positive attitudes toward adopting antismoking policies in MUH, but they also feared retaliation by smokers. The cultural values of familismo, respeto, simpatía, and personalismo influenced their motivation to protect their families from SHS as well as their reluctance to ask their neighbors to refrain from smoking. Nonsmokers were more likely to favor complete indoor and outdoor smoking bans in MUH, whereas smokers were more likely to favor separate smoking areas. The Regale Salud advocacy/policy intervention, implemented to reduce SHS exposure, prompted the passage of seven voluntary policies in apartment complexes in Southern California to prevent smoking in MUH. Conclusions H/L in California support voluntary policies, local ordinances, and state laws that prevent exposure to SHS in MUH, especially those that are consistent with H/L cultural values and norms for interpersonal communication.

Support for Smoke-Free Multi-Unit Housing Policies among Racially and Ethnically Diverse, low-Income Seniors in South Florida

“…In our study, a clear majority of elders living in the low-income housing properties surveyed support no-smoking policies for individual apartments, common areas and outdoor areas. Overall, our findings are consistent with other studies exploring support for smoke-free MUH policies among residents which ranged from 42 to 79 % support (Ballor et al 2013; Hennrikus et al 2003; Baezconde-Garbanati et al 2011; Hewett et al 2012; Licht et al 2012; King 2010). After adjusting for population characteristics, there were no differences among support for prohibitive smoking policies by exposure to SHS, smoking-related comorbidity (is) or race.…”

Smoke-free multiunit housing: a review of the scientific literature

“…Survey size ranged from 142 10 to 5936 20 residents, with response rates ranging from 16% 11 to 86%. 10 Prevalence of cigarette smoking varied across studies, from 8% 10 to 48%. 17 Half of the studies focused on lowincome residents and/or low-income housing.…”

“…10 Among current smokers, smoke-free home rules ranged from 6% 17 to 53%. 11 Two national studies revealed similar results on the percentage of MUH residents with smoke-free homes.…”

“…10 11 13-15 17 20 21 In all but two studies, 10 14 the majority of residents expressed a preference for a smoke-free building. In one study with less than a majority expressing preference for a smoke-free building (37%), the question was worded as a complete indoor and outdoor smoking ban; 10 in the other study where less than a majority (42%) expressed preference for a building policy, 32% of residents indicated that they had no preference. 14 Residents' support for smoke-free MUH was assessed by many demographic and behavioural characteristics.…”

Neighborhood Social Context and Individual Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Exposures Associated with Child Cognitive Test Scores

“…The association may reflect the presence of multiple exposures to immigrants and minority families with limited English skills who are more likely to live in crowded housing (Burr et al 2010; Standish et al 2010), have exposure to secondhand smoke (Baezconde-Garbanati et al 2011), experience food insecurity (Cutts et al 2011; Standish et al 2010), and develop poor overall health (Helm et al 2010). Others have likewise found infrastructure and neighborhood-level problems to be associated with poor child development, educational and health outcomes (Evans 2006; Grady 2011; Helm et al 2010; Patacchini and Zenou 2010; Tarter et al 2009).…”