Is it fair to fine fat people for not dieting?

tladame

I don't see it so much as 'fining people for being obese', as I see it as the government taking back a little of the money they're giving them. I think it's reasonable to put a condition (following your doctor's orders) on free money. Hey, getting healthy never hurt anybody!

cenafan

I live in Canada and we have fully paid for health care. I totally have issue with the fact that my tax money goes to care for people who smoke, do drugs and yes, have health issues due to bad lifestyle choices (including lack of exercise and bad food choices). and before anyone says anything...I have no health issues...only see a doctor when I am very ill or normal check ups...(IE...normal care).

I would be totally fine with a tiered system here.

crisanderson27

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.

I agree 100%!! (My statements below are certainly not in disagreement...more stating a circumstance that would have to be taken into consideration)

The only question I would have at that point, is how will they determine if a patient is 'overweight'?

I'm 5'7", 187lbs. Sounds fat eh? Well...I don't know what my bodyfat percentage is precisely at the moment, but it's low enough I can see my upper abs, with the lowers starting to poke out. My main bodyfat is mostly on my sides lol. As you can see by my picture I'm not some huge bodybuilder either...just a 'stocky' (muscle wise) short guy lol. My weight is in my shoulders, chest, and thighs.

By the BMI index...I'm at 29.3!! That's borderline obese lol!!

Cris

PeachyKeene

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.

I agree 100%!! (My statements below are certainly not in disagreement...more stating a circumstance that would have to be taken into consideration)

The only question I would have at that point, is how will they determine if a patient is 'overweight'?

I'm 5'7", 187lbs. Sounds fat eh? Well...I don't know what my bodyfat percentage is precisely at the moment, but it's low enough I can see my upper abs, with the lowers starting to poke out. My main bodyfat is mostly on my sides lol. As you can see by my picture I'm not some huge bodybuilder either...just a 'stocky' (muscle wise) short guy lol. My weight is in my shoulders, chest, and thighs.

By the BMI index...I'm at 29.3!! That's borderline obese lol!!

Cris

But it would be easier to controll it with foodstamps. If you qualify for medicaid you for sure qualify for food stamps.

PeachyKeene

It's hard to reach the people who most need the help. They may seem lazy and dishonest, but everyone has a story. If you are raised by deadbeat parents, never taught how to be a functional adult, in schools run by people who profit while you flunk, and you can't go too far unless your in a gang or slanging rocks.... how do you turn 18 and suddenly become responsible. You don't and you don't know any other way. Period The cycle continues. How do you punish someone for that? Why not first educate, then you have a leg to stand on after you've attempted to change the situation.

I can see your point, but I strongly disagree with the above quote. We are all afforded many opportunities and people in these cases are afforded even more than others. Having a thrive to survive is not taught, you are basically born with it.

Making people on a government assistance(medicaid) eat a healthy balanced diet prescribed by a doctor is not punishment. It is only right when someone else is forking out the money for their doctor bills. Especially, when the doctor bills are being made because they are obese because they just don't care. This will hopefully force them to learn to eat proper meals. The better place to begin changing this would be limiting what they are allowed to buy on food stamps. Such as little debbies, chips, soda, etc. I think it would be harder to enforce imposing a fine.

PeachyKeene

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

Couldn't have said it better myself, except it begs the question of whether socialized healthcare has any place in a free society.

When someone else if forking out the money, they should have every right to tell them to follow their doctor's recommendation or be fined. It is the only form of socialized healthcare I believe in. If I am paying for my health insurance, my copays, my med bills, my meds, then I have every right to have a choice, but if someone else is paying them, I will do what I'm told and shut my mouth!

Lleldiranne

Hmmm... it slides both ways. See, the people it is talking about are on Medicaid - they are getting free health care courtesy of the govt (don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the program, believe me I've had my times I've needed it too). And since obesity is linked to a whole gamut of health issues, which will then cost the government more, a fine seems reasonable.

Has anybody ever applied for private insurance? (Not through work). I bet they charge people more who are obese. Just like they charge smokers more, and other health issues.

But, since it's the government doing it, it does have an air of unconstitutionality. I wouldn't be happy if it was me... unless it got some people I love dearly to loose the weight they need to in order to be around for years to come. But, more likely, they'd just gripe about the unfair fine and keep eating the way they are anyway.

dietcoke281

I absolutely think it's fair. Fat people are fat because of themselves (obviously discounting those with medical conditions as the article did). Why is it fair that the average taxpayer has to pay for their hospital and medical bills because of their weight? At least they'd be subsidising it a bit. And giving them an incentive to lose weight.

1234lbsgone

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.

I agree 100%!! (My statements below are certainly not in disagreement...more stating a circumstance that would have to be taken into consideration)

The only question I would have at that point, is how will they determine if a patient is 'overweight'?

I'm 5'7", 187lbs. Sounds fat eh? Well...I don't know what my bodyfat percentage is precisely at the moment, but it's low enough I can see my upper abs, with the lowers starting to poke out. My main bodyfat is mostly on my sides lol. As you can see by my picture I'm not some huge bodybuilder either...just a 'stocky' (muscle wise) short guy lol. My weight is in my shoulders, chest, and thighs.

By the BMI index...I'm at 29.3!! That's borderline obese lol!!

Cris

But it would be easier to controll it with foodstamps. If you qualify for medicaid you for sure qualify for food stamps.

Thats not true. I qualify for medicaid because of an illness, and after I exhausted my savings on medical bills. But couldn't get foodstamps.... No, excuse me, I was awarded $16 per month for myself and my child.

1234lbsgone

It's hard to reach the people who most need the help. They may seem lazy and dishonest, but everyone has a story. If you are raised by deadbeat parents, never taught how to be a functional adult, in schools run by people who profit while you flunk, and you can't go too far unless your in a gang or slanging rocks.... how do you turn 18 and suddenly become responsible. You don't and you don't know any other way. Period The cycle continues. How do you punish someone for that? Why not first educate, then you have a leg to stand on after you've attempted to change the situation.

I can see your point, but I strongly disagree with the above quote. We are all afforded many opportunities and people in these cases are afforded even more than others. Having a thrive to survive is not taught, you are basically born with it.

Making people on a government assistance(medicaid) eat a healthy balanced diet prescribed by a doctor is not punishment. It is only right when someone else is forking out the money for their doctor bills. Especially, when the doctor bills are being made because they are obese because they just don't care. This will hopefully force them to learn to eat proper meals. The better place to begin changing this would be limiting what they are allowed to buy on food stamps. Such as little debbies, chips, soda, etc. I think it would be harder to enforce imposing a fine.

I would like to see where the veteran who lives behind the dumpster on McNichols and Woodward can find an oppurtunity. His name is Joe and because of budget cuts, he's back on the street. Again, you cannot lump everyone together like that. Have you ever lived in the ghetto? There are no oppurtunities. Even the teachers in the schools know that those kids won't make it past elementary school. The thrive to survive is what puts 7 year olds on the corner slanging rocks so he can get himself a bag of cheetos. Where are the social workers? In the suburbs those kids would be taken and put in foster care immediately, but not in the ghetto.

And, I would love to see someone tell my father that he can't buy his diet pepsi on his food card. That man worked manual labor his whole life and is now disabled, had 4 brain surgeries, 3 heart attacks, and a stroke. Meanwhile, he devoted 30 years to building up the city, cleaning up drug infested neighborhoods, and setting up programs in the public schools... all as a volunteer. Now he sits in a scooter in his apartment in a senior center and his one indulgence every evening is a diet pepsi. Tell me why he can't have that? Because some other idiot had 5 a day and a bunch of other crap and now needs to be taken care of? Does the time he devoted to his community without being paid count for giving him a liberty or two now that he can no longer take care of himself? Thats not fair. Not everyone on foodstamps is unhealthy. Not everyone is abusing the system. And paying taxes has been mandatory since the dawn of civilization. It doesn't mean that because you pay them now you get to dictate the lives of others. You can't force anyone to eat a healthy diet.And making someone with no money pay you for not eating a healthy diet is a punishment. Remember, no access to good food, no reason to expect anyone to be healthy. And have you ever been to a medicaid doctor? They push out double the patient load of a regular doctor because medicaid doesn't pay half of what is needed to cover expenses. These people ARE NOT getting decent care. We should be more worried about how our money is being wasted on these things than who is getting the crappy help. You have to go back to the source.

crisanderson27

We should be more worried about how our money is being wasted on these things than who is getting the crappy help. You have to go back to the source.

Well said, that's another subject entirely though.

This one is basically should the government be able to 'fine' people who are on government assisted medical coverage, who are incurring even more medical costs due to being willfully overweight. Depending on how they define 'overweight'...the simple answer is 'yes'.

The other ethical/moral obligations of our government could take 50 years to debate. For example, a court recently ruled that the children of a woman with stage IV breast cancer no longer be in her care/custody, and they were moved out of her town to live with their father. From my understanding, she was still able to care for them...and the scenario was a 'well, you won't be able to soon' type thing, and 'custody to the father'.

Complete BS.

Cris

1234lbsgone

We should be more worried about how our money is being wasted on these things than who is getting the crappy help. You have to go back to the source.

Well said, that's another subject entirely though.

This one is basically should the government be able to 'fine' people who are on government assisted medical coverage, who are incurring even more medical costs due to being willfully overweight. Depending on how they define 'overweight'...the simple answer is 'yes'.

The other ethical/moral obligations of our government could take 50 years to debate. For example, a court recently ruled that the children of a woman with stage IV breast cancer no longer be in her care/custody, and they were moved out of her town to live with their father. From my understanding, she was still able to care for them...and the scenario was a 'well, you won't be able to soon' type thing, and 'custody to the father'.

Complete BS.

Cris

I agree, the simple answer is yes. But they are stricly targeting the poor and that opens a whole can of worms that can't continue to be ignored. My rant is more directed to the lady who thinks that poor people have no rights based on what she sees at her welfare office. It's this kind of sterotyping that ruins the simple answer. It went off topic.

And that story about the woman is the same reason I feel so passionately about things like this. It's time for the little guy to win one for a change! I'll always be supporting the underdog because I am the underdog.

PeachyKeene

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.

I agree 100%!! (My statements below are certainly not in disagreement...more stating a circumstance that would have to be taken into consideration)

The only question I would have at that point, is how will they determine if a patient is 'overweight'?

I'm 5'7", 187lbs. Sounds fat eh? Well...I don't know what my bodyfat percentage is precisely at the moment, but it's low enough I can see my upper abs, with the lowers starting to poke out. My main bodyfat is mostly on my sides lol. As you can see by my picture I'm not some huge bodybuilder either...just a 'stocky' (muscle wise) short guy lol. My weight is in my shoulders, chest, and thighs.

By the BMI index...I'm at 29.3!! That's borderline obese lol!!

Cris

But it would be easier to controll it with foodstamps. If you qualify for medicaid you for sure qualify for food stamps.

Thats not true. I qualify for medicaid because of an illness, and after I exhausted my savings on medical bills. But couldn't get foodstamps.... No, excuse me, I was awarded $16 per month for myself and my child.

It is true where I am from. I don't have any saving, much in medical bills over 50,000.00, a brain tumor removed, undergoing testing for Luekemia or Lymphoma, and crappy insurance. I still don't qualify.

PeachyKeene

It's hard to reach the people who most need the help. They may seem lazy and dishonest, but everyone has a story. If you are raised by deadbeat parents, never taught how to be a functional adult, in schools run by people who profit while you flunk, and you can't go too far unless your in a gang or slanging rocks.... how do you turn 18 and suddenly become responsible. You don't and you don't know any other way. Period The cycle continues. How do you punish someone for that? Why not first educate, then you have a leg to stand on after you've attempted to change the situation.

I can see your point, but I strongly disagree with the above quote. We are all afforded many opportunities and people in these cases are afforded even more than others. Having a thrive to survive is not taught, you are basically born with it.

Making people on a government assistance(medicaid) eat a healthy balanced diet prescribed by a doctor is not punishment. It is only right when someone else is forking out the money for their doctor bills. Especially, when the doctor bills are being made because they are obese because they just don't care. This will hopefully force them to learn to eat proper meals. The better place to begin changing this would be limiting what they are allowed to buy on food stamps. Such as little debbies, chips, soda, etc. I think it would be harder to enforce imposing a fine.

I would like to see where the veteran who lives behind the dumpster on McNichols and Woodward can find an oppurtunity. His name is Joe and because of budget cuts, he's back on the street. Again, you cannot lump everyone together like that. Have you ever lived in the ghetto? There are no oppurtunities. Even the teachers in the schools know that those kids won't make it past elementary school. The thrive to survive is what puts 7 year olds on the corner slanging rocks so he can get himself a bag of cheetos. Where are the social workers? In the suburbs those kids would be taken and put in foster care immediately, but not in the ghetto.

And, I would love to see someone tell my father that he can't buy his diet pepsi on his food card. That man worked manual labor his whole life and is now disabled, had 4 brain surgeries, 3 heart attacks, and a stroke. Meanwhile, he devoted 30 years to building up the city, cleaning up drug infested neighborhoods, and setting up programs in the public schools... all as a volunteer. Now he sits in a scooter in his apartment in a senior center and his one indulgence every evening is a diet pepsi. Tell me why he can't have that? Because some other idiot had 5 a day and a bunch of other crap and now needs to be taken care of? Does the time he devoted to his community without being paid count for giving him a liberty or two now that he can no longer take care of himself? Thats not fair. Not everyone on foodstamps is unhealthy. Not everyone is abusing the system. And paying taxes has been mandatory since the dawn of civilization. It doesn't mean that because you pay them now you get to dictate the lives of others. You can't force anyone to eat a healthy diet.And making someone with no money pay you for not eating a healthy diet is a punishment. Remember, no access to good food, no reason to expect anyone to be healthy. And have you ever been to a medicaid doctor? They push out double the patient load of a regular doctor because medicaid doesn't pay half of what is needed to cover expenses. These people ARE NOT getting decent care. We should be more worried about how our money is being wasted on these things than who is getting the crappy help. You have to go back to the source.

Are you telling me he doesn't choose to do any better for himself, does he choose not to apply for assistance(living, food, etc.) or does he choose to settle with it. Or could he have not taken the GI bill to go to school to become something else, or did he choose to settle for veteren pay for the rest of his life. It is unfortunate that the people that have fought for our country have to lose some of their pay, and I totally don't agree with, but that is another subject. The point is he had opportunities he never took. I have a good friend whose husband was seriously wonded in the war and he received wounded vet benefits, but made the choice to do something more with the resources he has. He has no legs and only one arm, and continued to work as a civilian and receive his benefits as he was allowed. He had a thrive to survive.

No I have never lived in the getto. Selling crack on the street corner for a bag of cheetos is a thrive to survive at that age. Not the best way, but possibly the best way he knows how. But, he is still using the resources he knows to get what he needs. You are definately right that is a thrive to survive for a starving 7 year old.

It is all great what your dad did, to volunteer. But, to volunteer is to do something to help others, not for self fulfillment or to be allowed to buy your diet pepsi when you become disabled and can't afford to pay for it. Being able to buy what you want on foodstamps is not a right, it is a privilege and it doesn't have to be so.

Losingitin2011

That's the thing. SO many people making judgments on how people should or should not eat have NEVER been in the situation where they are forced to choose between healthy and starve for half the month, or unhealthy and survive. There are some who have, and they are generally more compassionate about it because they've been there.
If someone wants to buy diet soda, let them. Don't pass judgment when you've never been there. It would be like me judging the rich as all being stuck up and conceited because they're rich.

PeachyKeene

It is easy to justify your case by saying I am sterotyping, or lumping eveyone together. Although, I have made it clear in several of my post, that there are exceptions.
BUT, I WILL ALWAYS BELIEVE IF YOU ARE RECEIVING GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE (MEDICAID, FOODSTAMPS, ETC.), NO MATTER WHAT IT IS, YOU DON'T COMPLAIN ABOUT WHAT THEY SAY YOU CAN OR CAN'T DO, OR WHAT YOU MUST DO TO BE IN COMPLIANCE.

Losingitin2011

It is easy to justify your case by saying I am sterotyping, or lumping eveyone together. Although, I have made it clear in several of my post, that there are exceptions.
BUT, I WILL ALWAYS BELIEVE IF YOU ARE RECEIVING GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE (MEDICAID, FOODSTAMPS, ETC.), NO MATTER WHAT IT IS, YOU DON'T COMPLAIN ABOUT WHAT THEY SAY YOU CAN OR CAN'T DO, OR WHAT YOU MUST DO TO BE IN COMPLIANCE.

Actually, I find you're being very rude and appear to have a lot of resentment towards anyone who points it out to you. I sincerely hope that you're never in a situation where you find your rights being compromised by other people who have no idea what its like to have to live it.

PeachyKeene

That's the thing. SO many people making judgments on how people should or should not eat have NEVER been in the situation where they are forced to choose between healthy and starve for half the month, or unhealthy and survive. There are some who have, and they are generally more compassionate about it because they've been there.
If someone wants to buy diet soda, let them. Don't pass judgment when you've never been there. It would be like me judging the rich as all being stuck up and conceited because they're rich.

I have been there and chose to buy real food and not the junk and we never starve for half the month. We did feed our faces full of junk food or soda either. But, we had 3 square meals a day and usually fruit for in between snacks.

Losingitin2011

That's the thing. SO many people making judgments on how people should or should not eat have NEVER been in the situation where they are forced to choose between healthy and starve for half the month, or unhealthy and survive. There are some who have, and they are generally more compassionate about it because they've been there.
If someone wants to buy diet soda, let them. Don't pass judgment when you've never been there. It would be like me judging the rich as all being stuck up and conceited because they're rich.

I have been there and chose to buy real food and not the junk and we never starve for half the month. We did feed our faces full of junk food or soda either. But, we had 3 square meals a day and usually fruit for in between snacks.

Here's a question for you. I am on food stamps. I am overweight. Did I stuff myself full of junk or did I attempt to make healthy choices?

PeachyKeene

It is easy to justify your case by saying I am sterotyping, or lumping eveyone together. Although, I have made it clear in several of my post, that there are exceptions.
BUT, I WILL ALWAYS BELIEVE IF YOU ARE RECEIVING GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE (MEDICAID, FOODSTAMPS, ETC.), NO MATTER WHAT IT IS, YOU DON'T COMPLAIN ABOUT WHAT THEY SAY YOU CAN OR CAN'T DO, OR WHAT YOU MUST DO TO BE IN COMPLIANCE.

Actually, I find you're being very rude and appear to have a lot of resentment towards anyone who points it out to you. I sincerely hope that you're never in a situation where you find your rights being compromised by other people who have no idea what its like to have to live it.

I will say once again getting assistance from the government is not a right it is a privilege. If you are finding me being rude for expressing my opinion then don't read them. Go on about your business. I am entitlied to my opinion, it is my RIGHT!