The topic of banning smoking in public places has been a recurring theme in IELTS Writing Task 2 exams. Based on analysis of past papers and current trends, this subject is likely to appear frequently in future tests. It’s a globally relevant issue that touches on public health, personal freedom, and social responsibility – all key themes in IELTS essays. Let’s examine a recent question on this topic and explore sample responses across different band scores.
Should smoking be banned in public places? This question has appeared in various forms in past IELTS exams, reflecting its ongoing relevance and importance. Let’s focus on a specific variant of this question:
Some people believe that smoking should be banned in all public places, including outdoor areas like parks and beaches. Others think that people should have the freedom to smoke wherever they want. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Analyzing the Question
This question requires candidates to:
- Discuss arguments for banning smoking in all public places, including outdoor areas
- Present views supporting people’s freedom to smoke where they choose
- Provide a personal opinion on the issue
The task involves balancing public health concerns against personal freedoms, requiring a nuanced approach and well-structured argument.
Sample Essay 1 (Band 8-9)
The debate over smoking bans in public spaces, including outdoor areas, is a contentious issue that pits public health concerns against personal freedoms. While both sides present valid arguments, I believe that a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places is necessary for the greater good of society.
Proponents of smoking bans argue that such measures are essential for protecting public health. Secondhand smoke is a known carcinogen, and exposure to it in public spaces can have serious health consequences, particularly for vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, and those with respiratory conditions. Moreover, banning smoking in outdoor areas like parks and beaches helps reduce environmental pollution, as cigarette butts are a major source of litter and can harm wildlife. Additionally, smoke-free public spaces promote a healthier lifestyle and may encourage smokers to quit or reduce their tobacco consumption.
On the other hand, opponents of comprehensive smoking bans contend that such restrictions infringe on personal freedoms. They argue that individuals should have the right to engage in legal activities, including smoking, in open-air public spaces where the impact on others is minimal. Some also point out that outdoor smoking bans may be difficult to enforce and could lead to unnecessary confrontations between smokers and non-smokers. Furthermore, there are concerns that blanket bans could negatively impact businesses, particularly in the hospitality sector.
While I acknowledge the importance of personal freedoms, I firmly believe that the right to clean air and a healthy environment supersedes the right to smoke in public spaces. The potential harm caused by secondhand smoke, even in outdoor areas, cannot be ignored. Moreover, comprehensive smoking bans send a strong message about the societal norm of prioritizing public health. They create an environment that supports those trying to quit smoking and protects future generations from the normalization of tobacco use.
In conclusion, while the debate over smoking bans in public places involves complex considerations of health, freedom, and social responsibility, the evidence overwhelmingly supports comprehensive restrictions. By prioritizing public health and environmental concerns, we can create cleaner, healthier spaces for all members of society to enjoy.
Smoking ban: Public health vs personal freedom
Sample Essay 2 (Band 6-7)
The issue of banning smoking in all public places, including outdoor areas, is a topic of much debate. Some people think it should be completely banned, while others believe in the freedom to smoke anywhere. This essay will discuss both viewpoints and provide my opinion.
Those who support banning smoking in all public places argue that it is necessary for public health. Secondhand smoke is dangerous and can cause health problems for non-smokers, especially in enclosed spaces. Even in outdoor areas like parks and beaches, smoke can be bothersome and harmful to others, particularly children and those with respiratory issues. Banning smoking in these areas also helps reduce litter from cigarette butts, which is good for the environment.
On the other hand, people who oppose a complete ban say that it infringes on personal freedom. They argue that smoking is a legal activity and that smokers should have the right to smoke in open spaces where the impact on others is less. Some also worry that strict bans could hurt businesses like bars and restaurants that have outdoor seating areas.
In my opinion, I believe that smoking should be banned in most public places, but with some exceptions for designated outdoor smoking areas. This approach balances the need to protect public health with respecting the rights of smokers. Indoor public spaces should be completely smoke-free, but outdoor areas could have specific zones for smokers that are away from main gathering spots.
To conclude, while there are valid arguments on both sides, I think a balanced approach that prioritizes public health while still providing options for smokers is the best solution. This way, we can protect non-smokers from secondhand smoke while not completely restricting smokers’ freedoms.
Sample Essay 3 (Band 5-6)
Smoking in public places is a big problem that many people talk about. Some think it should not be allowed anywhere in public, even outside. Others say people should smoke where they want. I will talk about both ideas and give my thoughts.
People who want to ban smoking in all public places say it’s bad for health. Smoke from cigarettes can hurt people who don’t smoke, especially kids and old people. They also say that cigarettes make places dirty, like parks and beaches, because people throw cigarette butts on the ground.
But some people think banning smoking everywhere is not fair. They say smoking is legal, so people should be allowed to do it outside where the smoke goes away faster. They worry that if smoking is not allowed anywhere, it might be bad for some businesses like restaurants with outdoor seating.
I think smoking should not be allowed in most public places, but maybe there can be some special areas for smokers outside. This way, we can keep most places clean and safe for everyone, but smokers still have some places to go.
In conclusion, smoking in public is a difficult issue. We need to think about everyone’s health but also be fair to people who smoke. Having some rules about where people can smoke might be a good idea.
Explanation of Band Scores
Band 8-9 Essay:
- Fully addresses all parts of the task with a well-developed response
- Presents a clear position throughout the essay
- Uses a wide range of vocabulary with very natural and sophisticated control
- Uses a wide range of complex structures with full flexibility and accuracy
- Ideas are coherently organized with clear progression throughout
Band 6-7 Essay:
- Addresses all parts of the task, though some parts may be more fully covered than others
- Presents a relevant position, although conclusions may become unclear or repetitive
- Uses an adequate range of vocabulary with some errors in word choice
- Uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms
- Information and ideas are arranged coherently and there is a clear overall progression
Band 5-6 Essay:
- Addresses the task only partially; the format may be inappropriate in places
- Expresses a position but development is not always clear
- Uses limited range of vocabulary; errors may occur when expressing complex ideas
- Uses a limited range of structures with some attempts to use complex sentences
- Presents information with some organization but may lack overall progression
Key Vocabulary to Remember
- Contentious (adjective) – /kənˈtenʃəs/ – causing or likely to cause disagreement
- Carcinogen (noun) – /kɑːˈsɪnədʒən/ – a substance capable of causing cancer
- Infringe (verb) – /ɪnˈfrɪndʒ/ – to violate or break (a law, agreement, etc.)
- Comprehensive (adjective) – /ˌkɒmprɪˈhensɪv/ – complete; including all or nearly all elements
- Confrontation (noun) – /ˌkɒnfrənˈteɪʃn/ – a hostile or argumentative situation or meeting
- Supersede (verb) – /ˌsuːpəˈsiːd/ – to take the place of; to replace
- Nuanced (adjective) – /ˈnjuːɑːnst/ – characterized by subtle shades of meaning or expression
- Prioritizing (verb) – /praɪˈɒrətaɪzɪŋ/ – to designate or treat as more important than other things
- Blanket ban (noun phrase) – /ˈblæŋkɪt bæn/ – a complete prohibition or restriction
- Normalization (noun) – /ˌnɔːməlaɪˈzeɪʃn/ – the process of making something normal or standard
In conclusion, the topic of banning smoking in public places remains a relevant and challenging subject for IELTS Writing Task 2. It requires candidates to consider multiple perspectives and articulate a well-reasoned opinion. To prepare for similar topics, practice writing essays on related themes such as:
- The government’s role in regulating personal habits for public health
- Balancing individual freedoms with societal well-being
- The effectiveness of public health campaigns versus legislation in changing behavior
We encourage readers to practice writing their own essays on this topic and share them in the comments section for feedback and discussion. This active engagement is an excellent way to improve your writing skills and prepare for the IELTS exam.