Obese kids to be taken into care.

Quote:

---

Dangerously overweight children will have to be taken from their parents and put into care because of Britain's worsening "obesity epidemic", council leaders have warned.

One million children will be clinically obese within four years on current trends, storing up future problems from heart disease, strokes, high blood pressure and diabetes.

---

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...ts-898972.html

Is it just me being cynical? This smacks of the governments 'targets' for removing children from thier parents and placing them in care. As it is, the family court system in the UK often resembles kangeroo courts, all reasons and decisions are kept secret, on pain of imprisonment.

I can't comment on the UK family court system, but I agree with that part of the article wich argues that letting kids become extremely fat is child neglect. To me it will depend on where they draw the line and how all this will be put to practice.

I predicted this four years ago. A rather fat member protetsed about smoking in public places and I told him obesity would be the next target of the scare industry. This is it. The same arguments are raised: why should one person have to pay for another's obesity/obese child? If this goes on, all natural solidarity and sense of community in societies will be destroyed because every social contact will be based on cost-benefit analysis.

We will be a sick society if we stick to free marketeering concepts of individual health.

Some prominent Brits have refused to have their kids weighed by the government. I hope more will follow.

Yeah, ok.... The government should AID, not FORCE...

Like for example reducing taxes on healthy food and support local sports teams for minors. Not ship people off to concentration camps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by article

A public health expert, David Hunter, of Durham University, this week warned that rising obesity levels posed as a grave a threat to Britain as terrorism and urged "bold action"...

---

He must be working the statistical analysis side of the question, right? Otherwise, that's a silly, alarmist statement, IMO.

If you guys implement this, I imagine many ugly scenes, with law enforcement being called in. Talk about "cost" then.

It's Nu-labour all over. Why bother to encourage when you can fine/imprison/coerce.

Horetores suggestion is much more sensible, if you want to reduce obesity. I suspect though that this is part of the governments target of having a certain % of children in care. The local authorities get a cash bonus if they meet the targets for child placement/adoption and I can tell you as an ex- local government officer, my erstwhile colleagues will carry out their tasks diligently. :shame:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

The local authorities get a cash bonus if they meet the targets for child placement/adoption...

---

You're pulling our leg, right?

No.

It's a national disgrace but one that has slipped largely under the radar. One of the results of prison sentences being handed down from the judges in family courts, mainly to parents who objected to having their children removed and placed into care.

I hunt around for some links.

This is sick. While letting your kid get fat is abuse. This is the worst solution possible. What are they...heck are they even thinking?

Hmm, well on the one hand you have the collective "tax-payers" who are beginning to feel pissed at having to pay out for fat kids who's parents couldn't give a toss. These people pay money damn it! Why shouldn't they get their pound's worth out of society?
It's like a new form of social conscience.

I mean, the reason we have to go to hospital is because we are human right? Humans get sick, injured or killed by doing stupid and unhealthy things. The idea that you stop all this for the sake of the "tax-payer" is ridiculous. It's like society is creating ever more stringent insurance policies. Its the wrong way to go about it imho.

Over here, they are whining on about fatter kids, yet the govt. says P.E is not mandatory after 4th form. Why?

I agree that promoting healthy food and education on the subject is always better, but it will not be enough for some. Not adhering to the best possible diet isn't child abuse per se and of course kids who are only moderately overweight should be left alone.
If a couple has neglected their kid to the point that he/she weighs over 60 kg at the age of 11 though, it's preposterous to believe that a couple of flyers at school or a 10 cent reduction on fat-free foods is going to convert them into capable, caring parents.

So I think that at its basic core, it's not a bad idea - provided that the assessment is done by actual doctors and not based solely on weight, and that they're using child removal as a last resort. The bit about targets is alarming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenring

If a couple has neglected their kid to the point that he/she weighs over 60 kg at the age of 11 though, it's preposterous to believe that a couple of flyers at school or a 10 cent reduction on fat-free foods is going to convert them into capable, caring parents.

---

Yes, that is a major disadvantage in our society, we are incapable of thinking long term, everything has to be fixed this instance. We only look at the consequences, we never look at the mechanism that cause the problem.

Here's a link for adoption targets and payments.

Quote:

---

Cash prize for council that hit adoption targets

Telegraph April 14 2008

Hammersmith and Fulham council, in west London, was paid £500,000 as a reward for placing more than 100 children for adoption in three years.

---

http://www.fassit.co.uk/adoption_statistics.htm

As I said, it's a national disgrace. Another Blair lagacy. :shame:

I cannot see how removing obese children from their parents, and the extreme anxiety and heartbreak this will cause can be a healthy solution. What's next...children of parents who smoke must be removed to foster care because of the health dangers of second hand smoke.

Quote:

---

The local authorities get a cash bonus if they meet the targets for child placement/adoption

---

If that isn't a recipe for abuse of authority for profit...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

every social contact will be based on cost-benefit analysis.

---

Huh?
Is there anything else you could rationally base them on? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Huh?
Is there anything else you could rationally base them on? :inquisitive:

---

An individuals free will, for example.

Anyway, now that having a fat son is child abuse, what else can be deemed as such? A daughter who has sex before she's 16? How can we tolerate parents who let their kids become such sluts? Jail seems reasonable if the daughter gets knocked up too. And it goes without saying that a child who has smoked a cigarette or drinks alcohol needs to be put away from such horrible parents...

:wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Huh?
Is there anything else you could rationally base them on? :inquisitive:

---

Financial costs and benefits of certain acts and transactions between individuals can be calculated, but not the true costs and benefits of institutions, behaviours and customs to a given society.

If you doubt this, I challenge you to calculate the costs and benefits to your country of, say, something elementary like telephony. You don't have to nail them down to the last euro. The last million would be sufficient. For instance what's the financial benefit of a granny talking to her grandchildren over the phone?

I'll see you in 2031 when you have given up.

A simpler way of looking at this would be to grasp Kukrikhan's remark about the costs of the legal, human and institutional hassle of a structural adoption policy for obese children. The true costs and benefits of it to society can never be calculated, even if we all agreed on the values that should rule our society. We don't have the statistical apparatus for it.

Someone said in another thread that it was a parent's responsibility to get their child to adulthood in a healthy state. I'd agree with this.

In Britain, the number of fat kids is increasing. If parents can't be bothered to encourage their kids to exercise and cook decent meals for them, then I say we should stop waisting time and find someone who will.

:clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Craterus

If parents can't be bothered to encourage their kids to exercise and cook decent meals for them, then I say we should stop waisting time and find someone who will.

---

Thereby breaking the bond between parent and child which is most important in all areas of the child's education and well-being. Physical health is not the be-all and end-all of education, it is only a part. To concentrate on it in this obsessive manner is not useful, it is vengeful and stupid and betrays little wisdom, personal experience or empathy on your part. Children should be taken away from their parents only as a last resort. The added scandal of the cash bonus for adoption targets makes this whole scheme ever more detestable.

Hmm, guess I'll add the big fat joke stamp ex post facto.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Craterus

Hmm, guess I'll add the big fat joke stamp ex post facto.

---

Um, yes. To be honest I didn't see what was supposed to be funny about it, but I do apologize if it was really meant as a joke. :bow:

I hope social services will intervene in the case of clinically obese children. Good plan, great measure. Society is much too lax when it comes to parental child abuse or neglect.

Quota's are an excellent tool to measure and encourage good governmental functioning. Even if it holds the danger of creating it's own dynamic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

it is vengeful and stupid and betrays little wisdom, personal experience or empathy on your part. Children should be taken away from their parents only as a last resort.

---

Pah. http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys3/bootyshake.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

I hope social services will intervene in the case of clinically obese children. Good plan, great measure. Society is much too lax when it comes to parental child abuse or neglect.

Quota's are an excellent tool to measure and encourage good governmental functioning. Even if it holds the danger of creating it's own dynamic.



Pah. http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys3/bootyshake.gif

---

https://img516.imageshack.us/img516/...dsmileykf9.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis

Even if it holds the danger of creating it's own dynamic.

---

Louis channels Pindar, lol.

This is a draconian idea.

The government should be there to engineer situations where the public will tend towards the desired result, not waste a fortune in scarring families.

So, of course this is a futile - not to mention expensive - course of action.

Much better to add a tax on foods with saturated fats above a certain level, and possibly the same for other ingredients. If you want to, then subsidise healthier options - although I imagine this half is too cumbersome.

Most tend towards excessive fats and sugars as they are cheap, easy and give one a quick boost. If this option was going to hurt the wallet then more would opt for other options.

If people still insist on taking the calorie-laden ones, then the money raised could be used for such things as sports projects to at least help burn the fat off again.

~:smoking:

Vegetables are generally quite cheap. If broccoli, and the like, tasted like chocolate candy there wouldn't be a problem. People chose to eat these high processed foods, not because of cost, but because they are conveniently available, advertised to excess 24/7, and they taste good.

I would rather see the government initiate programs with food manufacturers to change their ingredients (eliminate that high fructose corn syrup and saturated fats) and require fast food chains and restaurants to use healthier ways to prepare what they serve. Require education/counselling for families in this predicament. It can't cost anymore than the law suits, civil disobedience and possible violence that this over-the-top policy will generate.

Removing children from their families for this reason sounds like something Kim Jong Il would do. This is Nanny State run amok imo.

I doubt taking away morbidly obese children from their parents is going to make them lose wieght. Now it might scare some families into getting thier children on a proper diet, but not many. I'd definately support forced summer fat camps though, but thats my own opinion and I hate seeing fat children.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

The government should be there to engineer situations where the public will tend towards the desired result, not waste a fortune in scarring families.

So, of course this is a futile - not to mention expensive - course of action.

Much better to add a tax on foods with saturated fats above a certain level, and possibly the same for other ingredients. If you want to, then subsidise healthier options - although I imagine this half is too cumbersome.

Most tend towards excessive fats and sugars as they are cheap, easy and give one a quick boost. If this option was going to hurt the wallet then more would opt for other options.

If people still insist on taking the calorie-laden ones, then the money raised could be used for such things as sports projects to at least help burn the fat off again.

---

Fats and sugar's are not neccesarily bad and can't be properly regulated well. It's the over abundance of fructose/glucose with alot of saturated fat that is the problem. Just go pick up a gallon of skim milk and look at the sugar content. It's not exactly what you can call low, so not all sugar's are created equal. I think by focusing on sugar and fats we also forget about over acidicy and cronic minor acidic body composition. By suggesting the consumption of grains instead of sugars and fats your not going to be losing any wieght and your going to be boosting your body's acid level's which leads to worsening health over all. Also we can't forget about enviromental estrogens and phytoestrogens that are found in overabundance in a modern society. Soy, flax oils and such have heavy amounts of phytoestrogens something which is incredibly bad in high doses. A recent short term study found that 6 servings of soy a day cuased men to start forming mamaries/moobs in as little time as 10 weeks. Not to mention increased fat storage in the legs and hips...

Obesity in a modern society is not just based on diet alone, we have grain fed cattle, a plethora of plastic eating utensils, estrogens, hormones, and many other problems. The average person has a omega 3 to omega 6 fatty acid ration of 1/20, healthy or even normal is 1/1, with most scientists suggesting we evolved with a 1/2 ratio. There's alot of things wrong with the western diet and punishing parents so cruely is not the answer, education is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigTex

There's alot of things wrong with the western diet and punishing parents so cruely is not the answer, education is.

---

We have education on the subject, and it's just not enough. Incentives have to exist. Maybe a tax reduction for having normal weight children or something like that.

I think in serious cases something has to be done as these children are having their lives ruined, and its not really their own fault. I suppose its easy to say "Oh no! The big bad government is stepping in again", but whatever inconvenience these proposed measures would cause to parents is negligible compared to the damage they are doing to their own children's lives. This would only be for serious cases though, when the problem is caused by neglect.

I think one reason children are getting fatter nowadays is not necessarily due to neglectful parents, but the fact that they have less time to cook proper meals due to work etc. Both my parents work, and when I was younger I would end up either at a fast foot place every night or getting a frozen meal because they were too stressed or just didn't have the time to do anything else. Both my brothers are still doing this, one used to be pretty fat and the other's somehow got a beer belly and he's only ten. I tend to just go aneamic when I'm unhealthy, so I wouldn't have to worry about fat camps.