Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Adoption - Should Fat People Be Allowed to Adopt?

245

Replies

  • 4legsRbetterthan2
    4legsRbetterthan2 Posts: 19,590 MFP Moderator
    Lounmoun wrote: »
    Should adoption agencies look at a person's overall health (including obesity) when considering if someone is suitable to adopt?

    Or should those sort of things not matter because a loving home is more important than a stable home (health stability I mean)?

    I think physical and mental health can be an important factor in someone's ability to physically care for a young child and should be considered. Young children need physical care and someone incapable of providing it should not be top of the list to adopt. A tv show like that probably exaggerated/manipulated the situation but there is some common sense in not adopting out to those who can not care for a child to a certain minimum standard.

    I know one adoptive couple where one person had MS, was bipolar, unstable family background, older (had grown children/teens), smoker and they were able to eventually adopt an infant. Neither was overweight. They later divorced. They gave the child a home but it certainly was not a stable home environment over the years. If their only issue had been one of them was obese I think things would have been more stable.

    I think this is a good point. Someone previously mentioned "my 600 lb life". Those are cases of extreme obesity, there are mental health reasons behind one getting that large, and lots of physical restrictions with being that large that I think would prevent you from being an acceptable care taker. I do not allowing someone in that situation adopt.

    I have not seen this specific show, but googling images these people appear overweight, but still able to function normally. I would place less emphasis on BMI and more on interviews and interactions with the person if I were making the decision. If they want to be loving parents I say let them. There are plenty of biological parents that are just as large and/or larger than the people I am seeing from this show that are good parents to their children.
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    Lounmoun wrote: »
    Should adoption agencies look at a person's overall health (including obesity) when considering if someone is suitable to adopt?

    Or should those sort of things not matter because a loving home is more important than a stable home (health stability I mean)?

    I think physical and mental health can be an important factor in someone's ability to physically care for a young child and should be considered. Young children need physical care and someone incapable of providing it should not be top of the list to adopt. A tv show like that probably exaggerated/manipulated the situation but there is some common sense in not adopting out to those who can not care for a child to a certain minimum standard.

    I know one adoptive couple where one person had MS, was bipolar, unstable family background, older (had grown children/teens), smoker and they were able to eventually adopt an infant. Neither was overweight. They later divorced. They gave the child a home but it certainly was not a stable home environment over the years. If their only issue had been one of them was obese I think things would have been more stable.

    Well and assuming the person with bipolar had a stable diagnosis, it's the unstable family background (I'm assuming you mean the home wasn't stable), a chronic progressive terminal illness, and smoking that were the issues.
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,423 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    Lounmoun wrote: »
    Should adoption agencies look at a person's overall health (including obesity) when considering if someone is suitable to adopt?

    Or should those sort of things not matter because a loving home is more important than a stable home (health stability I mean)?

    I think physical and mental health can be an important factor in someone's ability to physically care for a young child and should be considered. Young children need physical care and someone incapable of providing it should not be top of the list to adopt. A tv show like that probably exaggerated/manipulated the situation but there is some common sense in not adopting out to those who can not care for a child to a certain minimum standard.

    I know one adoptive couple where one person had MS, was bipolar, unstable family background, older (had grown children/teens), smoker and they were able to eventually adopt an infant. Neither was overweight. They later divorced. They gave the child a home but it certainly was not a stable home environment over the years. If their only issue had been one of them was obese I think things would have been more stable.

    Well and assuming the person with bipolar had a stable diagnosis, it's the unstable family background (I'm assuming you mean the home wasn't stable), a chronic progressive terminal illness, and smoking that were the issues.

    It was 19 years ago. The couple was not prevented from adopting a child despite any of their issues.
    Unstable family background means close relatives in jail frequently, abusive family, drug abusers/alcoholics, undertreated mental illness. After adopting the home and adoptive parents became more unstable as well.
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    Lounmoun wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    Lounmoun wrote: »
    Should adoption agencies look at a person's overall health (including obesity) when considering if someone is suitable to adopt?

    Or should those sort of things not matter because a loving home is more important than a stable home (health stability I mean)?

    I think physical and mental health can be an important factor in someone's ability to physically care for a young child and should be considered. Young children need physical care and someone incapable of providing it should not be top of the list to adopt. A tv show like that probably exaggerated/manipulated the situation but there is some common sense in not adopting out to those who can not care for a child to a certain minimum standard.

    I know one adoptive couple where one person had MS, was bipolar, unstable family background, older (had grown children/teens), smoker and they were able to eventually adopt an infant. Neither was overweight. They later divorced. They gave the child a home but it certainly was not a stable home environment over the years. If their only issue had been one of them was obese I think things would have been more stable.

    Well and assuming the person with bipolar had a stable diagnosis, it's the unstable family background (I'm assuming you mean the home wasn't stable), a chronic progressive terminal illness, and smoking that were the issues.

    It was 19 years ago. The couple was not prevented from adopting a child despite any of their issues.
    Unstable family background means close relatives in jail frequently, abusive family, drug abusers/alcoholics, undertreated mental illness. After adopting the home and adoptive parents became more unstable as well.

    What I was pointing out was that bipolar (among various other mental illnesses), if treated, shouldn't be an issue with regards to adopting a child (or raising a child really). I too know someone with bipolar who is an adoptive parent. In her case it was 7 or 8 years ago and she had been stable for a very long time. Saying someone has bipolar doesn't actually tell one anything about how functional the person is.

    But yes, it sounds like the situation you're talking about was not a good one for a number of reasons. So many reasons.
  • tibby1971
    tibby1971 Posts: 25 Member
    As someone who has looked into adoption. It all depends on the agency and sometimes the country.
    There are agencies who won’t let you adopt with them if you aren’t the right religion, too fat, health issues or a history of depression.
    Some countries have limits on BMI, income, mental health etc.

  • seltzermint555
    seltzermint555 Posts: 10,740 Member
    edited January 2019
    panda4153 wrote: »
    As someone who was in the foster system as a child this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. To deny a child in need of a loving home because the person who wants desperately to be a parent is too large in my opinion is so very wrong. This in no way protects the child. It probably puts the child at a higher risk. No child should have to live in the foster system or an orphanage. Honestly, these types of rules are made by people who have no idea what it’s actually like for the children living in those situations. 🤬

    My knee jerk reaction was "that shouldn't be a rule" and the response above sealed the deal.

    I could see it being a true issue if the prospective adoptive parent was both a single parent AND already had serious medical issues due to their weight. Otherwise, not so much.

    While it's not that closely related, I feel similarly about some of the rules on surrogacy. My friend was 27 years old, a mother of three young children, who had easy pregnancies and deliveries, but was 50 or 60 lb overweight post-partum (and had always been at least 30 lb overweight even as a college basketball player). She was very healthy otherwise and she deeply wanted to be a surrogate for her sister-in-law, but the doctors warned that her obesity would prevent this from being an option at all. I don't know all of the ins and outs but in her particular situation, I found that absurd. I believe there may have been some added risk but for the most part it sounded like she would be an ideal surrogate.
  • spinnerdell
    spinnerdell Posts: 233 Member
    In 1971 I adopted a child categorized as hard to place. The financial requirements were waived, but my husband, two children and I were required to pass physical exams and mental evaluations. I understand the need to insure the child's well-being, but my heart hurts for those children who fail to be adopted due to overly-rigid regulations. Very few families are ideal, in my experience.
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    For what it's worth I do know at least one person who was abandoned by his adoptive parents. By abandoned, I mean kicked out. I suspect it's less common that the various abuses that can happen in foster homes, but it happens.

    While I have never been in the child welfare system, I think the reality is that it's more complex than "we just need to get children in homes".


    I've known more than one person who was kicked out by biological parents as a minor teenager, so unless someone has found some way of predicting which parents will do that, I'm not sure what the value of pointing out that it happens with adoptive parents as well is. Because otherwise the only remedy is to allow no adoptions at all, which doesn't seem like a good outcome.

    I do as well and I know people online who have been kicked out before their teenagers. That said, we can't actually ethically tell people not to have children (and on the can of historical and contemporary worms that this could open up). My point, which may have been missed, is that adoption is in no way a cut and dry, "you can adopt this child" sort of situation.
  • whitpauly
    whitpauly Posts: 1,483 Member
    amandaeve wrote: »
    whitpauly wrote: »
    ...if I was a parent less kid I'd want to be in a home that made me feel loved but I'd also rather not hafta have a parent,depend on me for everything either

    I have not heard of the show in discussion, but I’ll chime in anyway.

    I think a child’s quality of life depends on a complex tangle of things like adequate food, shelter, health care, emotional support, access to education, and physical/mental challenge/reward. If data could argue that a parent is significantly less likely to provide these things by being past a certain BMI, then I would side with that decision. However, parenting capacity isn’t eliminated just because a parent is in need of help. Both of my parents became disabled when I was a child. Sure, it took a lot to care for them as an only child, and I lost some “privilege” doing so, but they did everything they could as parents. I am SO grateful to have the childhood I did compared to a lot of my friends with “normal” parents. Plus, I think I turned out OK :)

    Good point,the parents in this particular show DID show alot of love for their kids despite the kids having a lot of responsibility in caring for the parents and I think it is a better life for the kids than being shuffled from one place to another or no place at all
  • fishgutzy
    fishgutzy Posts: 2,807 Member
    edited January 2019
    They screen for obvious potential health risks.
    A former colleague was a life long distance runner. Track I n high school. Clubs in college. Built like a distance runner. Very lean, ran every day at lunch. Loved the absolute picture of health.
    He died 200 yards from finishing a half marathon in Raleigh. Cardiac arrest. Had no prior health or heart issues.
    He was 32 years old.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    moe0303 wrote: »
    I personally have serious doubts as to the usefulness of BMI as a single indicator towards a person's overall health.

    Is your point that you don't think the woman whose experiences are recounted in the OP is actually obese and that BMI is misleading in her case? Or that you agree she's obese but you don't think this tells us anything relevant about the potential for health problems in her future?
  • moe0303
    moe0303 Posts: 934 Member
    moe0303 wrote: »
    I personally have serious doubts as to the usefulness of BMI as a single indicator towards a person's overall health.

    Is your point that you don't think the woman whose experiences are recounted in the OP is actually obese and that BMI is misleading in her case? Or that you agree she's obese but you don't think this tells us anything relevant about the potential for health problems in her future?

    It was a general statement, not related to a specific case. I think body composition is often assumed based on BMI, but BMI by itself is, in my opinion as a lay person, limited in its ability to indicate overall individual health.
  • moe0303
    moe0303 Posts: 934 Member
    moe0303 wrote: »
    moe0303 wrote: »
    I personally have serious doubts as to the usefulness of BMI as a single indicator towards a person's overall health.

    Is your point that you don't think the woman whose experiences are recounted in the OP is actually obese and that BMI is misleading in her case? Or that you agree she's obese but you don't think this tells us anything relevant about the potential for health problems in her future?

    It was a general statement, not related to a specific case. I think body composition is often assumed based on BMI, but BMI by itself is, in my opinion as a lay person, limited in its ability to indicate overall individual health.

    BMi isn't meant to indicate overall individual health, so I'm not sure what the point is here.

    I think that is my point. It seems to be being used as such, or did I read that wrong?
This discussion has been closed.