Obese Child? They'll be taken away!

Options
1457910

Replies

  • sunkisses
    sunkisses Posts: 2,365 Member
    Options
    I'm considering fattening my kids up a bit.
    This is why we're friends.
    :heart:
  • emilex
    emilex Posts: 95 Member
    Options
    The current foster care system is over burdened and under funded. Given what's going on with the nation's budget issues it's not likely to get better any time soon. I have been a social worker for 12 years now and I can categorically tell you that removing children from their family of origin is a last resort to be used in cases of neglect or abuse. Losing your family and bouncing in and out of the system for years is not "better" and it's certainly not the answer for "obese" children. What it will do, is cause serious psychological and emotional issues for kids. Good luck with that. For the person who said it's better to have some trauma as a child than to have heart problems from being fat? Tell that to the systems of subsidized mental health care, special education, social security disability, and Medicaid. Those systems already can't handle the multitude of kids who have suffered trauma as a child. Tell that to those kids whose lives were ripped apart.
  • dayzeerock
    dayzeerock Posts: 918 Member
    Options
    I've only read a couple pages of comments, but my immediate reaction is, are you f***in kidding me? Have seen things like "blame McDonald's", "set up the parents to succeed", and "educate parents". The article is not talking about chubby, fat, overweight, or even obese children. It refers to "super obese" children. Kids that are almost at 100% chance of developing serious conditions and dying early because of their weight...isn't this the same thing as child abuse/neglect?

    The first two references to cases are a 90 pound three year old and a 400 pound thirteen year old. That's disturbing. Clearly, the parents did not give a sh** about their child's health or future. And clearly these children wouldn't just be thrown into foster care. They would have to be monitored to lose weight at a healthy/safe pace. If you lack the education to feed your child without them being 400 pounds, then I am confident in saying you lack the education (and should lack the option) to have a child at all.

    Yes! I'm pretty sure most people judged this without even reading the article given some of the hasty responses. I agree with you 150%.
  • lcarter25
    lcarter25 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    but your comment was simply about the kids in the article it was about all obese children!
  • kingkong123
    kingkong123 Posts: 184 Member
    Options
    but your comment was simply about the kids in the article it was about all obese children!

    (CBS/AP) Parents should lose custody of super obese children.

    That's what a controversial commentary in one of the nation's most distinguished medical journals argues. And its authors are not the first to say the government should intervene in extreme cases of childhood obesity.

    Those are the first few lines of the article...key words being "super" and "extreme cases".
  • Frappuzzino
    Frappuzzino Posts: 342 Member
    Options
    I understand the idea of this, but unless it's OBVIOUS that the parents don't care, I don't see the point. I was overweight as a child (not obese, but still noticeably overweight) but it wasn't because my parents didn't care. It was because of a medical condition. I dislike when people assume others are overweight/obese because of bad habits.
  • kingkong123
    kingkong123 Posts: 184 Member
    Options
    I've only read a couple pages of comments, but my immediate reaction is, are you f***in kidding me? Have seen things like "blame McDonald's", "set up the parents to succeed", and "educate parents". The article is not talking about chubby, fat, overweight, or even obese children. It refers to "super obese" children. Kids that are almost at 100% chance of developing serious conditions and dying early because of their weight...isn't this the same thing as child abuse/neglect?

    The first two references to cases are a 90 pound three year old and a 400 pound thirteen year old. That's disturbing. Clearly, the parents did not give a sh** about their child's health or future. And clearly these children wouldn't just be thrown into foster care. They would have to be monitored to lose weight at a healthy/safe pace. If you lack the education to feed your child without them being 400 pounds, then I am confident in saying you lack the education (and should lack the option) to have a child at all.

    Yes! I'm pretty sure most people judged this without even reading the article given some of the hasty responses. I agree with you 150%.

    To be honest, I didn't even read the whole thing through. I read something about it a couple weeks ago. A couple other cases in there include a girl who almost died at 16 and a 555 POUND 14 YEAR OLD.
  • vim_n_vigor
    vim_n_vigor Posts: 4,089 Member
    Options
    I've only read a couple pages of comments, but my immediate reaction is, are you f***in kidding me? Have seen things like "blame McDonald's", "set up the parents to succeed", and "educate parents". The article is not talking about chubby, fat, overweight, or even obese children. It refers to "super obese" children. Kids that are almost at 100% chance of developing serious conditions and dying early because of their weight...isn't this the same thing as child abuse/neglect?

    The first two references to cases are a 90 pound three year old and a 400 pound thirteen year old. That's disturbing. Clearly, the parents did not give a sh** about their child's health or future. And clearly these children wouldn't just be thrown into foster care. They would have to be monitored to lose weight at a healthy/safe pace. If you lack the education to feed your child without them being 400 pounds, then I am confident in saying you lack the education (and should lack the option) to have a child at all.

    Yes! I'm pretty sure most people judged this without even reading the article given some of the hasty responses. I agree with you 150%.

    I read the article. I have seen kids in foster situations. I have seen some of the better foster situations. The government can't take care of their obligations as is. My thought is that in these extreme cases, there is likely a more 'routine' reason why these children should be in foster care. Neglect and other forms of abuse top this list. Assume that the particular child has a medical condition and the family is above the threshold for state sponsored health insurance, but don't make enough to buy their own. Does the state get to take that child away too? Then who does get to keep those children once they are taken away from their homes? Many foster homes (not all, some are excellent environments) provide low quality, high quantity, cheap food. That won't make the kids healthy. They may lose some weight, but they won't be healthy.
  • Schwiggity
    Schwiggity Posts: 1,449 Member
    Options
    I've only read a couple pages of comments, but my immediate reaction is, are you f***in kidding me? Have seen things like "blame McDonald's", "set up the parents to succeed", and "educate parents". The article is not talking about chubby, fat, overweight, or even obese children. It refers to "super obese" children. Kids that are almost at 100% chance of developing serious conditions and dying early because of their weight...isn't this the same thing as child abuse/neglect?

    The first two references to cases are a 90 pound three year old and a 400 pound thirteen year old. That's disturbing. Clearly, the parents did not give a sh** about their child's health or future. And clearly these children wouldn't just be thrown into foster care. They would have to be monitored to lose weight at a healthy/safe pace. If you lack the education to feed your child without them being 400 pounds, then I am confident in saying you lack the education (and should lack the option) to have a child at all.

    Yes! I'm pretty sure most people judged this without even reading the article given some of the hasty responses. I agree with you 150%.

    Your comment wasn't just about children in the article. Also, you didn't give a definition of what the cut-off was. I was close to super-obese as a child and adolescent. When I was 12 years old, my BMI was over the 95th percentile. Does this mean my mother didn't love or care about me as your sweeping generalization in your first post stated?
  • lcarter25
    lcarter25 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    but your comment was simply about the kids in the article it was about all obese children!

    (CBS/AP) Parents should lose custody of super obese children.

    That's what a controversial commentary in one of the nation's most distinguished medical journals argues. And its authors are not the first to say the government should intervene in extreme cases of childhood obesity.

    Those are the first few lines of the article...key words being "super" and "extreme cases".

    I think this ABSOLUTELY needs to happen. Children are not "born" obese. Children become obese because their parents don't love them enough to nurture them and give them good health. Children aren't "born" craving McDonalds and other *kitten* foods. They crave those things because their parents are too lazy to make them a healthy, balanced meal. And who are they supposed to learn physical activity from if their parents won't get off the couch and MOVE around with them? Unhealthy habits stay with a child their entire life, just like the emotional scars of abuse. THIS is why children deserve better and SHOULD be placed in a home where they will get a better life!

    I am sorry this is talking about obese...nowhere is super obesed mentioned it this post! Fist sentence "children are not born obese" no mention of super obese there.

    if i was 16 and my size (which I wish I was) I would be considered obese and taken from my parents...
  • dumb_blondes_rock
    dumb_blondes_rock Posts: 1,568 Member
    Options
    Even if the child is 500 pounds.....that doesn't mean the parents don't love them, it means they are weak. I have watched fat camp shows and there was a girl who was 16 i believe and 520 pounds....her parents sent her there as a last resort. she said she would sneak food, go in the fridge without anyone knowing and the parents have tried to work with her but when a child complains, lashes out, or even throws a fit and starts crying, the parents feel bad and give in, with the thinking that "one piece can't hurt them, they have been doing so good:"

    Should those GROSSLY obese children be taken away? I don't hink so, but knowing the government and the raidcals, soon it will be children who are just overwieght will be taken, and it will spiral into this mad witch hunt from the community, because people don't have anything better to do than judge their neighbors.

    Yes, when i see children eve just obese it makes my heart sad, but i think to myself "why don't the parents step in" not "oh man those parents must hate their children" because 9 times out of 10 thats not the case, its just they are weak and are enablers
  • lsd007
    lsd007 Posts: 435
    Options
    I've only read a couple pages of comments, but my immediate reaction is, are you f***in kidding me? Have seen things like "blame McDonald's", "set up the parents to succeed", and "educate parents". The article is not talking about chubby, fat, overweight, or even obese children. It refers to "super obese" children. Kids that are almost at 100% chance of developing serious conditions and dying early because of their weight...isn't this the same thing as child abuse/neglect?

    The first two references to cases are a 90 pound three year old and a 400 pound thirteen year old. That's disturbing. Clearly, the parents did not give a sh** about their child's health or future. And clearly these children wouldn't just be thrown into foster care. They would have to be monitored to lose weight at a healthy/safe pace. If you lack the education to feed your child without them being 400 pounds, then I am confident in saying you lack the education (and should lack the option) to have a child at all.

    Yes! I'm pretty sure most people judged this without even reading the article given some of the hasty responses. I agree with you 150%.

    Your comment wasn't just about children in the article. Also, you didn't give a definition of what the cut-off was. I was close to super-obese as a child and adolescent. When I was 12 years old, my BMI was over the 95th percentile. Does this mean my mother didn't love or care about me as your sweeping generalization in your first post stated?

    ^^^^^^
    Schwig = 1
    OP= 0
  • lcarter25
    lcarter25 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    Even if the child is 500 pounds.....that doesn't mean the parents don't love them, it means they are weak. I have watched fat camp shows and there was a girl who was 16 i believe and 520 pounds....her parents sent her there as a last resort. she said she would sneak food, go in the fridge without anyone knowing and the parents have tried to work with her but when a child complains, lashes out, or even throws a fit and starts crying, the parents feel bad and give in, with the thinking that "one piece can't hurt them, they have been doing so good:"

    Should those GROSSLY obese children be taken away? I don't hink so, but knowing the government and the raidcals, soon it will be children who are just overwieght will be taken, and it will spiral into this mad witch hunt from the community, because people don't have anything better to do than judge their neighbors.

    Yes, when i see children eve just obese it makes my heart sad, but i think to myself "why don't the parents step in" not "oh man those parents must hate their children" because 9 times out of 10 thats not the case, its just they are weak and are enablers

    *this*
  • chelekaz
    chelekaz Posts: 871 Member
    Options
    the initial post was not about the parents in the article.... it was a general statement related to families w/ overweight / obese children. i am hoping that this was coming from good intentions and that, just like the possibility whenever something is written, it just came across horribly incorrect. And, if in fact people think that this is a good thing then let's see...

    1 - at what % overweight does the intervention to remove child begin?
    2 - how much more will this cost tax payers having another child in an over crowded foster care system in relation to paying the foster family and the psych bills?
    3 - how will you be sure that those kids considered to be healthy weight are also being fed nutritious food (not just fatties eat bad)
    4 - where will this end? what will the next reason be to take kids away???
  • Qarol
    Qarol Posts: 6,171 Member
    Options
    Why not start with mandatory meetings/classes for these parents?
    I'm ALL for this. For all parents, actually. If you want the great responsibility and moral privilege of raising a child, then you need to be educated. You need a license to drive, fish, hunt. Why not to become a parent?

    And I don't buy the argument that the parents are just "weak." Grow a pair and be a parent!
  • kingkong123
    kingkong123 Posts: 184 Member
    Options
    Maybe I didn't read the original comment closely enough. I was going by what the article was talking about. Super crazy, extreme cases. I also think you have to look at the simple decision - whether to remove the child from the home when, as the article says, all other reasonable options have been exhausted. You could argue for years about the foster care system or post-removal conditions, but that's not the point and I don't know enough about it to comment.

    Love also has nothing to do with it. You could, in exactly the same way, love someone and feed them drugs. You're excuse would be weakness? Being an enabler? The one girl in the article almost died at 16? It would have been okay that she died because her parents loved her?

    This will be just come down to a difference in opinion, but yes, I think if your child is a teenager and weighs 500 pounds (which means immediate and future health risks, including death) they should be removed and monitored. The parents are clearly incapable of caring for a child.

    What if that child died and then they have another child who also became super obese and died as a teen? By your logic, it's okay for this to continually occur. It's not.
  • AlsDonkBoxSquat
    AlsDonkBoxSquat Posts: 6,128 Member
    Options
    but your comment was simply about the kids in the article it was about all obese children!

    (CBS/AP) Parents should lose custody of super obese children.

    That's what a controversial commentary in one of the nation's most distinguished medical journals argues. And its authors are not the first to say the government should intervene in extreme cases of childhood obesity.

    Those are the first few lines of the article...key words being "super" and "extreme cases".


    Ah, she quoted an article then made a blanket statement about obese, not super obese, children. If she had simply quoted the article and not thrown in her random .02 rant in there about obese children in general this would be a completely different discussion all together. I read some of the article and the post all at the same time.
  • kingkong123
    kingkong123 Posts: 184 Member
    Options
    but your comment was simply about the kids in the article it was about all obese children!

    (CBS/AP) Parents should lose custody of super obese children.

    That's what a controversial commentary in one of the nation's most distinguished medical journals argues. And its authors are not the first to say the government should intervene in extreme cases of childhood obesity.

    Those are the first few lines of the article...key words being "super" and "extreme cases".


    Ah, she quoted an article then made a blanket statement about obese, not super obese, children. If she had simply quoted the article and not thrown in her random .02 rant in there about obese children in general this would be a completely different discussion all together. I read some of the article and the post all at the same time.

    Yea, I'm starting to understand that just now unfortunately haha. Still, I think it's a good article to debate.
  • lcarter25
    lcarter25 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    but your comment was simply about the kids in the article it was about all obese children!

    (CBS/AP) Parents should lose custody of super obese children.

    That's what a controversial commentary in one of the nation's most distinguished medical journals argues. And its authors are not the first to say the government should intervene in extreme cases of childhood obesity.

    Those are the first few lines of the article...key words being "super" and "extreme cases".


    Ah, she quoted an article then made a blanket statement about obese, not super obese, children. If she had simply quoted the article and not thrown in her random .02 rant in there about obese children in general this would be a completely different discussion all together. I read some of the article and the post all at the same time.

    ditto
  • AudgePaudge
    AudgePaudge Posts: 537 Member
    Options
    No WAY!! Children should not be taken away from their parents!! I think providing help and education for the parents on how to fix the problem would be a much better solution! That is just cruel.....