Is it fair to fine fat people for not dieting?

dcmat

OK - let's see how many responses this Topic gets.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13397306

Dave

_SusieQ_

Hmmmmm....I think I am actually torn on this one. On the one hand, I feel like Big Brother invades enough privacy and who are they to tell ME how to live. What happened to free will. BUT, on the other hand, should BB have a say so if they are the ones handing out the money? Interesting topic, I think I'll sit back and see what others think on this one.

Sunshine_Girlie

We've been going on about it earlier. lol
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/242352-is-it-fair-to-fine-fat-people-for-not-dieting

angryguy77

No free society should be that intrusive. But socialized healthcare will force a state to take more and more action as costs rise.

P90XCertifiedCoach

Im over weight ( obesely), pretty much by laziness( No medical issues) and I am a realist... So I say yes. I think there are exceptions for medical reasons( medical reason not being your Fat). You hit me in the pocket book and I am more likely to get into compliance. Now if I had to pay it for it I would definetly be griping.

Crystal_Rudolph

So what, are they going to go off the BMI chart? (Which is grossly WRONG!)

Also, what about the doctor telling the patient to lose weight, but the doc is fat too?

snowman6124

This is a very loaded subject in my opinion. However, I'm gonna jump in and say that I feel that if you are doing nothing to at least keep yourself as healthy as you can then you can't expect others to take up the cost. I know that I am not a healthy weight and it only increases my health issues that I can not change. I am fine paying more. I am trying to change the things I can about my health so that I can actually see my kids graduate and having to pay more to insurance companies or the governments helps give me a bit of motivation too. I don't feel they should go by BMI though unless the entire test is done. My DH does have a few lbs to shed but he is very ( and I mean very) tall and has a lot of muscle...the chart at the dr says he is borderline obese but even the dr ( who is very fit) admitted that he would need to go through the actually testing because he was not by anymeans Obese.

Bviera

My initial reaction upon reading the headline was, "The government has no need to meddle in an individual's personal health and lifestyle." HOWEVER, upon reading the article, it's clear that this would only apply to Medicaid recipients who ignore their doctor's orders. My view is that if it's a benefit paid for by the government, then it's fair for the government to impose fines for making them spend even more money when it could be avoided by following doctor's orders. '

Everyone is free to live as unhealthy a lifestyle as they wish. But when others have to pay for your choices, then it does become fair to step in and meddle. I believe you can be denied SSI benefits in the US if it is found that you are responsible for causing your own disability (through drug use, etc.). If you're responsible for your own unhealthy lifestyle and you can otherwise avoid it, then you should also be responsible for your own medical bills.

liquidjem

As a simple answer--NO. No one has the right to tell you what to do with your body. Dr.s will tell you to lose weight to help with health issues and what not and I get that, but if you do not listen and follow directions, you have no one to blame but yourself. Not everyone is going to conform to societal standards and they shouldn't have to. Should I become anorexic cause magazines tell me to? Why are women in fashion mags not getting fined for being just as unhealthy as an overweight person. When that happens, then sure, I'll support it. Just my 2 cents...

GLJezebel

MMMMM......everyone has an opinion and this could be debated back and forth forever with no "side" winning. I know that when I had to take out a medical insurance policy on my own last year because my employer didn't have a group plan, I had to pay a higher premium because of my weight. To be honest, it was embarrassing. Our tax dollars help to fund Medicaid and it kind of pisses me off to think that people who have the ability to get off their *kitten* and make a change won't do it. I'm NOT talking about the elderly, people with health problems or disabilities, etc. I could also go on forever about the use of High Fructose Corn Syrup in everything from cough syrup to crackers to bread to Campbell's soup to ketchup, etc. Read the labels on the food items and note that almost every product lists HFCS as an ingredient. It doesn't cost much more to buy products without HFCS and since I cut it from my diet the main thing I noticed is that I no longer crave sweet stuff. So, to answer the question....I think it is fair to fine people who have the ability to make a change and refuse to do it when they are receiving government assistance.

Hannah_Banana

As an overweight person.... I like it. I hate the new 'healthcare system', but since its being forced upon me, this is an excellent companion to it. Not only does it encourage people to be healthy, it encourages doctors to take the time to promote it. Are there extenuating circumstances? Sure. But I've seen brave people on MFP overcome many medical and physical limitations (Viv, I'm talking about you!) to be healthier.

This is already common practice in many countries. I don't consider it that 'radical'.

angryguy77

So if your for this it's because you don't have self control and want someone else to do it for you? What if your kids are overweight, do you want the state to take them away from you because you are a bad parent?

PeachyKeene

I think if they are on welfare, they should not only be required to follow the rules, such as, having proper diet, but they should also be randomly drug tested.

These are people living off of welfare, getting free medical help, food, etc.

If they don't work for a living the least they can do is work at being healthy to live!

It's not like they trying to make them do something unbearable!

GameOn2011

Had to read it....they want to charge the disadvantaged, absolutely NOT! Too many loop holes and Doctors who don't have time to support patients anymore....

Bviera

So what, are they going to go off the BMI chart? (Which is grossly WRONG!)

Also, what about the doctor telling the patient to lose weight, but the doc is fat too?

This is a very good point. The real question here is, what standards will be used to decide whether a person is at a point where they *have* to lose weight for their own health? Sometimes it's a clear cut case, but sometimes it's more of a gray area and I don't want people to get stuck paying fines over a stupid technicality. The process they'll use to make this determination and also determine whether the person is complying with the doctor or not (will there be someone monitoring their midnight eating binges? how are they going to know whether the person complies with their doctor or not?) is key.

emmajane_2288

Very controversial subject but I think to an extent its fair.

Every year obesity costs the NHS billions of pounds. In my opinion, this money could be better used elsewhere in most cases!!

I dont think people should be fined just because they cant follow a diet, cos I would be guilty of this nearly all the time! But if a person expects to receive treatment free on the NHS I think there should be some enforcements taken if they arent doing all they can to prevent this. Fining is one thing, I dont know how well that can be enforced though.. I cant see it ever coming about in England anyway.
More should be done to prevent obesity before it happens, rather than afterwards

Hannah_Banana

Everyone is free to live as unhealthy a lifestyle as they wish. But when others have to pay for your choices, then it does become fair to step in and meddle. I believe you can be denied SSI benefits in the US if it is found that you are responsible for causing your own disability (through drug use, etc.). If you're responsible for your own unhealthy lifestyle and you can otherwise avoid it, then you should also be responsible for your own medical bills.

Well said. The trade off for 'government care' is 'government control'. You can't get away from that. I'd prefer the government let us get by on our own merit, but since we don't, bring on the fines.

angryguy77

I think if they are on welfare they should not only be required to follow the rules, such as, having proper diet, but they should also be randomly drug tested.

If they don't work for a living the list they can do is work at being healthy to live!

I can agree with this to an extent. If you are on assistance you should give up some personal liberty. However, with us moving toward socialized medicine, I fear the gov can use this as an excuse to tax all Americans "for the greater good".

sociable15

Here's the problem in the US though-- the food that is easiest to afford is the stuff that is the worst for you. Obesity is not simply a result of overblown portion sizing among the poor in the US. It's also a result of process, packaged, nutritionally vacuous foods being the cheapest to get. People are vastly undernourished in this country, lacking the nutrients needed to sustain life. They are missing entire meals just to make ends meet. If you want to fine them, than you're fining them for being a victim to a system set up to keep them down, not help them. Sure dictate what you want to a person about eating healthy and exercising but if they can't afford the food that's good for you they just can't and we all know wages aren't adjusting to the cost of living. Plain and simple. And before anyone starts, food stamps don't last the month in the vast majority of cases. Grocery stories are far away from many impoverished urban centers, needing public transportation to access that can take so long that fresh meat based proteins spoil before you get home, especially in the summer and many stores closest to urban impoverished neighborhoods carry little, if any, fresh vegetables of any nutritional value and frozen stuff defrosts before you get home. So unless you're lucky enough not to rely on public transit or have the ability to ask for a ride every week to the store, it's not going to happen very often. That is IF you can afford the gas prices on top of the food.

arwensb

I like the two quotes listed on the side of the article:
Would a fine encourage weight loss?

"It's a silly idea. Overweight people are motivated to lose weight but it's very hard. Only 5% of people lose weight and keep it off for five years. The state would be wiser to change the conditions driving obesity rather than penalising people that have it."
Kelly Brownell, Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, Yale University

"The reason people are obese is complicated and saying 'eat less' is not enough. People don't have access to grocery stores that carry healthy foods, don't have the funds to buy them and don't have the education to know what to buy."
Ziporah Janowski, Camp Shane weight loss camp, Arizona

PeachyKeene

Had to read it....they want to charge the disadvantaged, absolutely NOT! Too many loop holes and Doctors who don't have time to support patients anymore....

They have more advantages than the working person! They don't pay taxes on money they have worked hard for. They effing sit at home and are taken care of by my hard earned money. Some may be an exception, but the majority of people I see coming out of my welfare office, is women with 3 or 4 kids who don't know how to keep their legs shut and each child has a different dead beat dad. Some people believe they have so many children just to live off of welfare and yes I am a believer.