|View Poll Results: Would you "let" your DH work at a Nuclear Power plant?|
|Voters: 56. You may not vote on this poll|
My DH is a laid-off construction worker, and has the opportunity for a 2-week gig in a nuke plant. It would be long hours, but the job itself is super easy. Money would be EXCELLENT.
They have to wear monitors, and would have to leave if over the threshold for okay exposure.
I have a newborn and 2 preschoolers.
If we didn't have kids, I wouldn't even hesitate to approve it (DH has asked me to make sure I am okay with it... he also is slightly concerned.) It seems like less radiation than an airplane ride ... if you can belive what you read online, anyway!!!
Probably. But I'm "letting" dh become a rad tech, so I may not be the best one to answer. With all the precautions they take, he'll probably be completely safe.
However, the threshold level is kind of misleading. Any exposure to any radiation can potentially cause problems, even if it's under the acceptable level.
I said yes. I would make sure he agreed to change clothes as soon as he got home and take a shower as well, just in case. Though I think in all likelihood that would be excessive. Would you be this concerned if it weren't for the recent troubles in Japan? I know it's hard to look at things objectively when the media has been talking for so long about radiation. My brother is currently doing work at a nuclear plant, I don't know how close he is to the actual reactor, likely not very close at all, but he's not all that concerned about it and neither am I really. Our mom's a bit more concerned, but that's part of being a mom no matter how old your kids are, she understands that while it's not her first choice it's a job and right now, that's a pretty darned good thing to have.
FWIW my dh's a software engineer. He spends his days surrounded by computers and server racks filled with servers so he's likely exposed to a fair amount of radiation and it's never really crossed my radar to be all that worried about it.
Other - in that I don't "let" him do anything. He's notoriously difficult that way
Seriously, though, I would be a little bit worried about it but since it's only two weeks I wouldn't be concerned enough to say no. I did see a program on TV once though, about the fact that some people are very sensitive to radiation, sensitive enough that for them one X-ray can cause cancer (apparently this is genetic). If he had a family history of early cancer then I might be more worried about it.
I wish I could find that program, I've looked for it before but I don't remember if it was on the CBC or an American station.
I voted No because a few years ago my dh considered working at one but I did not feel comfortable with him doing so. It was a long term job though. I might be more comfortable with 2 weeks.
Kim ~mom to one awesome dd (12)
why would you even think twice?
because of the news i guess. its so sad we are all so into the nuke situation in japan that we are not even looking at the best way to provide humanitarian aid to japan on their terms and not ours.
they've run out of bottled water.
ah!!! fearmongering just doesnt seem to ever stop here does it? there is always something round the corner.
I would have had this exact same question even before the tsunami in Japan. I can't watch the news, because I don't want to subject my babies to the negativity. So this has NOTHING to do with fearmongering. This is a valid question.
I voted yes, for several reasons. I believe these are hard times, and any job is a good job when the alternative is no job. And yes, because I believe the nuclear power is a pretty safe option. And yes, because, quite frankly, I don't control what my husband does when he decides how to provide for our family, short of immoral activities.
Well, I don't have a DH, and I don't "let" my DP do anything, but my DP works at a nuclear plant, and has since before we had kids. She worked there for the first 32 weeks of her pregnancy with our twins. I have zero qualms about it. A few points to clear up the usual misconceptions:
1 Most people working in a nuclear plant are not receiving significant amounts dose (exposure to radiation). On an average day my DP receives less dose than I do (from playing outside with kids).
2. If your DH is working in a higher-radiation area, he will get some dose himself, but unless he goes swimming in the reactor pool, the risk is only to him. He will not become a radioactive body and expose you or the children to anything. If this is the case he will be changing clothes when he goes in and out anyway. (No one is going to let a guy in street clothes wander around undervessel...)
3. The dose he will receive over 2 weeks is pretty much negligible, even in a higher dose area. It is very unlikely to affect him, his fertility, or any future children.....
Obviously, I'd support it 100%. The money is usually excellent, when working in a plant, btw. :-D
It's not a matter of "let".
We would discuss it for sure. I'd have some concerns. I'm sure he'd have some concerns.
However, short of an armageddon-like disaster, I don't think there would be huge risk to him, and in the even of an armageddon-like disaster, well, there are all kinds of ways to be in danger, nuclear plant being only one of them.
Why is everyone focusing on "let"? My DH and I discuss things, and he told me that if I was uncomfortable with it, then he wouldn't do it. The fact that "letting" somebody else do something sounds kind of icky, is exactly why I put it in quotes.
I knew how you meant it -- I thought the intent behind the quotes was pretty clear. And I agree that it's a valid question.
My answer would be yes, I would support my DH working there, although I'd have some of the same concerns that you have.
when i was in 10th grade people from a nuclear pwer plant 3 hours away came to my school to try to recruit future workers. their propagandandizing was blatant. it was clear that they thought that they had us while we were young and naive enough to believe them. it was soooo creepy. it turned me off of ever working in that industry. i wouldnt be compatible with a spouse who would ever want to work with nuclear energy.
"Let" is a touchy word for some people. I don't "let" my DH work, my OB didn't "let" me labor for 45 hours...
Yes, my father worked on a nuclear powered submarine his whole career until retirement as a health physicist, his job was to ensure everyone was protected from radiation.
The protections in place to keep workers free of radiation are extensive. I would be more worried about someone working in a factory and getting exposed to airborne metals and toxins.
I get you. I don't "let" dh do things, either, but your initial post made it obvious that your dh wanted to know how you felt about this, so that's not really what it's about, imo.
Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) , Emma (5/03) , Evan (7/05) , & Jenna (6/09)
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing Aaron Ambrose (11/07)
Not the OP. :)
Not if there was any way around it. We would have government assistance, borrow money, or whatever we had to do first. More because of the fact that I know a factory job would be soul crushing for DH, not so much the "nuclear" part.
Holly and David
Adaline (3/20/10), and Charlie (1/26/12- 4/10/12) and our identical twins Callie and Wendy (01/04/13)
But this isn't necessarily a factory job. My brother is currently working at a nuclear plant because he's a steamfitter and they needed work done on their pipes. It's in his area of expertise it just happens that this time it's at the nuclear plant (he works all different places).
Yeah, given that it's spring, and he's a construction worker, and they only want him for two weeks, I'm assuming the plant is shutting down (all plants have a planned shut down every 2 years, usually in spring or fall, for routine maintenance) and has some construction work they want done. I doubt it's any kind of "factory" type work - they have regular employees for the day-to-day stuff.
I wouldn't mind if it was only for 2 weeks.
I would be a nervous wreck, and would voice my concerns if it was a full time job. I grew up in the Ukraine, and I was 4 years old when Chernobyl blew up. The images of people that died in those few days, burned, throwing up blood, skin scorched without ever being touched by the fire, as well as stories of people who died from horrible diseases in the few years that followed, always haunted me. Three legged cows, polluted soil and water, babies born with a million of scary complications, the dead city - too much to deal with. I don't think working day to day is dangerous, but the fear of an accident (and they DO happen) is what would make me uncomfortable. My heart goes out to the people of Japan, who will have hard time getting over this mess. You can't just "gather up" radiation and put it away.
As far as "letting" comment goes, I think it's difficult to phrase such questions, but it is a very valid question. A couple is a unit, and we discuss our plans for OUR future together. We talked about me getting a job with 2 hours of commute, we talked about me getting a summer job (DP would prefer that I stayed home, because we have a lot going on this summer, and what I make probably would be minimal after puppy daycare costs, and figuring out what to do with a troubled teenage we just welcomed into our house). We discussed DP's plans on jobs that involved international travel 25% of the time. We discuss DP's plans on getting a job with a long commute but more money vs. short commute but less pay. I don't think it's unnatural to make such decisions together. In our relationship my voice counts, and I like that.
Raising Alice in Wonderland (DSD, 17), and in love with a Superman