Overweight children

Nebb · October 2009

http://tinyurl.com/yzaq5ko Thoughts? cn (kinda) - Should parents of overweight children lose custody? (sorry if this has already been posted, I find it interesting)

alixzafiris · October 2009

Depends on the case, I guess. If your child is just a bit of a chubby baby I don't see the issue with it (although I will admit, it shouldn't happen). However, if it's a situation where the child's health is called into question (ie: they are bombarded with oversized portions, processed foods and a generally unhealthy diet) then I think that's abuse and should be treated as so. Babies can't say no thanks, I think I'd prefer a carrot.

harbor_girl · October 2009

I can see both arguments. On the one hand, allowing your child to get to that point (absent a thyroid issue or other medical problem) is child abuse. On the other hand, it's a slippery slope. Where would the line be drawn?

arbolita · October 2009

Well, there's a different between overweight and morbidly obese - if a young child is morbidly obese, then yes, I do think someone should step in because that is just as harmful to a child's health as other factors that could be considered parental negligence. If you have been giving warnings that the way you are feeding your child is bad for them, and you're not changing, then you should be held accountable.

laladypoet · October 2009

the parents in the story either missed a court date or failed to comply with social services. so yes, in those cases. if a parent misses a child custody hearing, don't they lose their kids? (I'm actually asking, I don't know)

ndzenowski · October 2009

Definitely. Perhaps at morbidly obese? I don't know what the restrictions would be but having a severly overweight child and not doing anything to help them is putting your child's health at risk.

Mrs_AF · October 2009

I almost posted something about this yesterday. I was at the grocery store, and the woman in front of me and her daughter (I'm guessing was around age 7) were both seriously overweight. I couldn't help but look at their groceries, and it was all horrible foods. Little Debbies, chips, pizzas, soda, etc. It made me kind of sad because that girl is already on such an unhealthy path.

ivystar57 · October 2009

If it equates to negligence or abuse, yes. But I would have to see if efforts were being made on the part of the parents to try to reduce weight through diet and exercise. Like many things, it should be determined on a case by case basis... Taking a child away from his/her parents can do a lot of harm. The question is if the parents cause more harm than that of taking the child away.(ps, I didn't read the article)

Nebb · October 2009

I think if the kid is bordering on morbidly obese for their age, and its not caused by some underlying medical issue that would cause that to happen, something needs to be done about the parents. The kid isnt getting the food to make it overweight any other way, and it would seem that he isnt being encouraged to be active or eat less at any point. I tihnk its sad that so many children are obese/overweight now.

laurenclaire1386 · October 2009

I think that when parents can't be relied on to take proper care of their children, authorities should step in. To me, not insuring a proper diet for one's child counts as child abuse and should certainly be corrected. If a child were being starved, he'd certainly be taken away from his parents. So if the same child is being fed awful stuff, and the result is obesity, the parents should lose the child. Clearly, they can't take care of one of the child's basic needs properly.

ExpatPumpkin · October 2009

This is a tough issue. On the one hand, obesity is not always caused solely by a bad diet. On the other hand, I'm going to tell an anecdote: I taught 3rd grade for a year and one of my little girls was [i]very overweight[/i]. Her mother was also extremely heavy - so heavy that she couldn't climb to stairs to our 2nd-floor classroom. When we had class trips that required bagged lunches, however, she would pack her an entire package of Oreo cookies, among other junk... That's child abuse.

wadingmoose · October 2009

I don't see that as something that needs the children taken away. I could see mandatory counseling for the parents and the children. But managing that could be a nightmare - who pays? What if the parents can't afford to pay for that? Counseling is painfully expensive.I just don't think that removing the kids from the home is a solution to this any more than I'd advocate removing an anorexic child from their home.

ac_in_dc · October 2009

I think that if the government starts punishing parents for having overweight kids, it also needs to invest in more ways to encourage folks to eat better. I know we do a little bit of this already, but is there room to do more? I worry about overwhelming the foster care system, too.

laladypoet · October 2009

I think children should be taken away from parents if the parents are endangering their lives in any capacity. but it's not a black and white issue. however, force-feeding a toddler mcdonald's seven days a week is abuse in my book. not that that's always the case, but let's be honest--if you teach healthy eating habits at home, your kid is more likely to be healthy. just logically speaking.if a kid eats healthily at home and then eats junk at school, well, that's another story.

alixzafiris · October 2009

[i]What if the parents can't afford to pay for that?[/i]Said parents could stop buying overpriced processed foods and start making their own meals from scratch which is a) healthier and b) cheaper, thus allowing them to cover the cost of you-haz-major-stupidity-counseling. Ta da!

laladypoet · October 2009

btw, sending letters =/= taking the children away. your parents were afforded the chance to take their kids to the doctor. if the doc had said your siblings were actually unhealthy, your parents would have been afforded the chance to correct it.the parents in the story were given the same chances, and ignored them (court dates, orders from social services). ignoring those requests reads like neglect.

laladypoet · October 2009

What if the parents can't afford to pay for that?there's a great blog out there about a family of five living on a grand a month. just sayin.

SarahSmile23 · October 2009

I think if the kid is bordering on morbidly obese for their age, and its not caused by some underlying medical issue that would cause that to happen, something needs to be done about the parents.this is exactly what i think.

ac_in_dc · October 2009

Said parents could stop buying overpriced processed foods and start making their own meals from scratch which is a) healthier and b) cheaper, thus allowing them to cover the cost of you-haz-major-stupidity-counseling. Ta da!Unfortunately, making stuff from scratch can be cheaper, but when the reality of available time and available stores comes in to play then shiit like fast food or a 99 cent fried nasty POS from 7 11 becomes cheaper. A lot of poor folks don't have access to well-stocked grocery stores, or don't have the knowlege to make their meals from scratch.

lyndausvi · October 2009

I do not think that is the answer. Just like moose said are we going to remove a bulimic or anorexic?

tidetravel · October 2009

In extreme cases of child neglect, then maybe. But, it's a slippery slope.Where do you draw the line? Who makes those decisions? Who's going to pay? Who is accountable? When I was in elementary school, my principal told my parents that they were bad parents because they packed me a soda for lunch instead of milk. I hope they hold her to fuuck off.

Nebb · October 2009

I know im not going to be agreed with on this, but I think its such a cop out when people complain that eating healthy costs too much and thats why they eat junk (im talking about the people who are buying kids junk/fast food). I think what it comes down to is laziness - its easier to go through a drive through, microwave or stick on a cookie sheet rather than cook dinner for your kid from scratch. My grocery list has shrunk dramatically since I started eating more vegetables and natural foods, so I dont buy that excuse for a second. I know there are other factors contributing to a lack of time, and thats why they choose the quick option, but i still think its mostly laziness.

vicmo5 · October 2009

I just keep thinking of the Maury Povich episodes when the mothers would feed their kids orange soda in a bottle and an entire rack of ribs and then denied any wrong doing.

rhodesign · October 2009

I don't know about this...it sounds a little too close to a nanny state type of government that people are always so afraid of. People make bad choices for their diet and pass those habits along to their kids. It's unfortunate and unhealthy, but to take kids away for it? We have enough kids in foster programs and something like this would just add to the problem and take away from those who are really severely troubled. If we start doing this, then we're getting dangerously close to telling people how to raise their kids in accordance to...what? That if they homeschool, they're deprivig kids of socializing with others in school? Feeding them vegan diets is depriving them of protein and socially isolating them from peers who eat hamburgers at parties? I know this is extreme, but it just seems like a slippery slope. Curbing the obesity problem in this country is important, but I just can't get on board with this as a way to fix it. I think it would REALLY depend...

wadingmoose · October 2009

Wouldn't it be better to attempt to help the parents parent their children rather than adding them to an already somewhat overburdened public foster care system?For the record, I ate perfectly healthy at home. I started gaining weight when I got a job and went to a school with vending machines and a shop where I could buy crap to eat for lunches and snacks. Not that I became obese at that point because I was pretty active, but I made it to a size 8.In my opinion, most kids won't get to that size without having an eating disorder. Throwing them in a weight loss program and taking them from their parents probably won't actually address the cause of the eating disorder. THey may lose the weight, but they'll probably just regain it.Would you advocate taking kids with anorexia or bulemia away from their parents?

alixzafiris · October 2009

[i]Unfortunately, making stuff from scratch can be cheaper, but when the reality of available time and available stores comes in to play then shiit like fast food or a 99 cent fried nasty POS from 7 11 becomes cheaper. A lot of poor folks don't have access to well-stocked grocery stores, or don't have the knowlege to make their meals from scratch.[/i]I think that's a major difference between US & Canada also. Here they do free cooking classes at our Loblaws grocery stores and their weekly fliers always have quick and easy "blue menu" (healthy stuff) recipes in them. Our local news channels always have a quick and simple food piece on them as well. There's an abundance of farmers markets and farm stalls and near-everythign (produce-wise) you buy comes with a recipe card.And - it may just be my area but around the GTA at least - we have almost an overabundance of grocery stores. They're seriously everywhere, no joke. Sure, there are still people who are obese for reasons that are clearly because they live on processed foods but, in an area like mine at least, I view that as pure laziness. It takes 10 minutes to make a simple vegeterian stir-fry and 20 to bake a frozen pizza.

jfgrad06 · October 2009

I think it's a tricky situation. Babies and small children can't say no, I agree with that. But at what age are they competent enough to decide what's healthy to eat? Even if the child is smart enough to know the food isn't healthy, they aren't the ones buying the groceries. That does make it the parents fault.But when you see obese parents, it's obvious they aren't smart enough to handle their own diets and it's scary to think they are in charge of their childrens food. In that case, they may be ignorant or uneducated, but are they intentionally harming their kids?I can see how it can be compared with abuse, but I think there are too many variables to consider. Maybe it could be taken on a case-by-case basis, but it would be extremely hard to enforce any laws concerning it.

lyndausvi · October 2009

Nebb I really think it depends where you live. Down here fruits and vegatables cost a lot of money because everything needs to be shipped in. Not that I would not buy them because of the cost. But I can see where people go that route.

ac_in_dc · October 2009

And the question of whether to pay for counseling is not an ideological one, but a practical one. Is it better for the govt to fund nutritional counseling for kids? Or subsidize the health care for folks that are sick enough from obesity-related conditions? I guess you could say "neither" but that isn't practical either. As much as we like to argue about whether people deserve entitlements, the fact is that we couldn't lower entitlement levels much below what they are now without causing some very expensive social unrest.

laladypoet · October 2009

are we going to remove a bulimic or anorexic?if the parents are starving the kid or forcing the kid to throw up, yes.let's not get bogged down in semantics. if someone thinks a child is in danger, and report it, and the kid is checked out and found to indeed be unhealthy/abused/in danger, then go from there. the last resort should be that the kid is taken away. in between the kid being proven unhealthy, there should be a myriad of options. which, doesn't WIC have nutritious food?

wadingmoose · October 2009

I'm talking about an ability to afford to pay for counseling for the family - parents and children.Where I am, family counselors cost between $150-200/hour. That's not easy to afford on $1000 a month.I was not talking about being able to afford to eat healthy. It's cheaper to eat healthy than it is to eat junk food. I agree with that.

Overweight children

Re: Overweight children

Choose Another Board

Search Boards