Obese kids to be taken into care.

[InsaneApache]

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.

[Kralizec]

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.

[Adrian II]

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.

[HoreTore]

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.

[KukriKhan]

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.

[InsaneApache]

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.

[Kralizec]

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.

[HoreTore]

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.

[Husar]

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

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

[HoreTore]

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

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...

[Adrian II]

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

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.

[Craterus]

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.

[InsaneApache]

Here's a link for adoption targets and payments.

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.

[Hosakawa Tito]

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.

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...