MOMania

By Jesse's Girl

March 7, 2007 7:52 AM | Link to this

It gets more than a little muddy with this particular issue. The government simply cannot be given a free pass to dictate what constitutes a good parent….excluding obviously the physically, sexually, or mentally abusive parents. However, some would argue, and I am one one, that this is a form of physical and mental abuse. But at what point is the line drawn? I personally believe this mother should be punched in the face for allowing her child to run amok. But if he is otherwise happy and well adjusted…what can be done? Perhaps officials can get her to attend nutrition classes. Or they can show here his cardiogram….that cannot be good. But taking him away because he is fat is pushing the envelope a bit.

By past50mom

March 7, 2007 8:20 AM | Link to this

No, we should NOT allow the government to remove overweight children from their homes. In Georgia the foster care system is already overburdened with children who have no parents or have been removed from dangerous or abusive situations. The parents need to be educated about good nutrition. The American diet is full of crap, processed flour, sugar, saturated fat, and preservatives. Avoid processed foods, cut out anything white including sugar, flour, potatoes, rice and potatoes. Replace them with fresh vegetables and fruits, whole grain breads and cereals. Don’t bread and fry your food! Read food labels and anything (including juices, cookies, cereals, even tomato sauce!) with high fructose corn syrup should be avoided. This single ingredient is the main culprit in childhood obesity.

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 8:26 AM | Link to this

I don’t buy the whole “mental/ emotional” abuse category. I allow for physical and sexual because the parents that do that should be summarily shot. (Well, you don’t want to know what I would REALLY do to a dad that was being sexually abusive… FAR too graphic for polite society!)

On this issue: You get your rights when you leave my house. Until then, I am the law. Don’t like it? Tough. Government should have ZERO power in the home, excluding clear cut cases of physical/sexual abuse (and even then, I lean more towards other relatives/ friends of the family taking care of the situation before government has a chance).

Yet more evidence that people these days are FAR too giving with their freedoms….

By Keith

March 7, 2007 8:48 AM | Link to this

Morning everyone! On the Connor McCreaddie story, I meant to include a couple of links to give more details. You can find them here and here. These are British articles and weight is given in stones. One stone equals about 14 pounds.

The jist is his mother had missed “intervention” appointments in the past to discuss her son’s weight, and finally sat with a local social services board when the idea of removing him from her care arose. To keep him at home, she and the board made a formal agreement to protect Connor’s well-being.

So I assume the issue could come up again if the board deems the mother isn’t holding up her end of the agreement.

By TheOne

March 7, 2007 9:10 AM | Link to this

This mother should be slapped for allowing her child to become this unhealthy!!! As for the government ruling my house or any house - outside of sexual and physical abuse (I’m with you on the punishment for this Jeff)- H3LL NO!!!! Where will the attempted dictatorship end?!!!!

By abc

March 7, 2007 9:39 AM | Link to this

While it certainly would open up a Pandora’s box, it’s obvious that some parents aren’t up to the task, and that can apply to multiple and myriad topics.

Regarding obesity, if anyone was serious about doing something about it, the FDA would remove from the market foods which lack nutritional value. That they’re harmful to ones health is more than plain. After all, substances such as absinthe are illegal to manufacture and sell in the U.S. because they’re harmful.

Restaurant regulation is right around the corner, with voluntary removal of trans fats currently catching on as a marketing trend. Close all the fast food joints too, I say; no more MacDonalds, Burger Thing, Taco Hell, KFC. That these are considered American icons illustrates the depth of the problem.

By Landi

March 7, 2007 9:59 AM | Link to this

abc, I’m with you on the fast food closing idea. That stuff is deadly.

And isn’t it interesting that you have to get a license from the government to own a dog, but you don’t need anything to have a child? There are a lot of people who really have no business having children — like the mother in the story. No child that young should be obese (asbsent some rare medical disorder) because the PARENT who PARENTS the CHILD has absolute control over what a child so young eats. It’s that simple.

By Fulton County Mom

March 7, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

Jeff I am with you…sexual abuse and the physical abuse that sends kids to doctors and hospitals by all means lets protect them. If Susie and Billy’s feelings got hurt because Mom/Dad got after them tough!

My eldest was acting up in school. I told them to make her sit at silent lunch for a couple of days…restricting her social time works well…I was told by the principle that it might “embarass her, and we do not want to embarass the children”…hello??????

Tell the government to clean up their own backyard (interns, VA Hosp, etc) before they decide to police your living space.

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this

abc,

So you would limit MY freedoms because some idiot can’t control his kid?

See my earlier comment… many Americans these days are FAR to lax in their defense of their freedoms….

By Fulton County Mom

March 7, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this

Don’t close the fast food…vote with your dollars…don’t go to fast food….know why McDs has salad? Because the money went away …. same with apples on the menu….biggie sizes are less prominent too…..Be an educated consumer ….YOU DO NOT NEED LEGISLATION TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR YOUR FAMILY….(yes I meant to yell that from a roof top)

By lovelyliz

March 7, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

This story in the UK wasn’t about a boy who was overweight. It was about a young child who weighed 4 times what a healthy child his age should have and a mother who wasn’t putting any reigns on what he was being fed. It’s not like she was giving him fruits, veggies and lean protein, but then went elsewhere for his junk food. Junk (crisps, soda, candy, etc) was all that the mother was feeding him because it was what he liked. That is until the authorities threatened to take the boy into custody.

By abc

March 7, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this

Hahaha… you consider going to MacDonald’s a RIGHT? You think that their menu is going to change to have only healthy offerings? I haven’t been in a burger joint for 20 years… except when my kids wanted Happy Meal trinkets, then I’d buy the Happy Meal, remove the toy, and throw the rest away.

Have you ever noticed that you never see anyone in MacDonalds in any semblemce of good physical shape? EVERYONE in there is overweight. If one wishes to prevent parents from making their children obese, remove from the market foods which will cause it. That’s the topic of the day, after all.

By Suwanee Girl

March 7, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this

None of us are privy to this kid’s medical records, and none of us are his doctor. We don’t know all the facts and cannot draw conculsions about this child’s health. Therefore, it’s impossible for bystanders to determine if this is “abuse” or a medical issue.

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

abc:

Yep. Market Controls. a great bastion of Communism.

Funny, every society that has tried that route has failed or is MISERABLE. Even the world’s largest communist country - China - is becoming MUCH more capitalist….

By abc

March 7, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this

I’ll take a wild guess that you consider yourself a neo-conservative. Talking about removal of harmful substances from the market as if it were communism is just plain stupid, and obscures the topic.

By Jsmom

March 7, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

abc, no offense, but you are killing me. And I mean that in the nicest possible way. :)

The government shouldn’t come in and shut down fast food because your perception is that people can’t control themselves. YOU Vote with YOUR wallet. What did you prove by buying the Happy Meal just for the toy? Do you think McD’s cares that you threw away the meal? Nope, it was another sale of a meal to them. Buy the salad. Buy the water. Buy the yogurt. Or don’t go there.

And yes, I have seen people in great shape in mcdonald’s. Eating the Salad. Eating the Yogurt. Even gasp having a diet coke.

Want to prevent obesity? Put PE back in School. Turn OFF the TV. Send Johnny and Suzie to the backyard. Go to the playground with them. Take a walk. Kick a soccer ball around with them. PLAY! Pack a balanced lunch for school and don’t send them to get the crap they serve in the cafeteria.

By Ex-Medic

March 7, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this

In this case it was more than just taking an obese kid from his parents. This was an ongoing problem with the parents not getting the kid to appointments with dietitians, nutritionists, and doctors as directed. With morbid obesity to this degree, with a history of non-compliance on intervention attempts, the child should be removed. The mother says she is powerless, he steals food and cries if he doesn’t get his food. To contain my brother at one point my mother went to the grocery store for each meal, every day.

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

EWWWWW!!!!

I am NOT a neo-con.

I am a Jeffersonian Republican.

HUGE difference!

By Mike K.

March 7, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

abc you say that “Regarding obesity, if anyone was serious about doing something about it, the FDA would remove from the market foods which lack nutritional value.” What foods would those be? To a person who eats a low amount of carbs every day, that would be bread, pasta, and other high carb foods, while a vegetarian would say that meat should be eliminated.

By abc

March 7, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

I DO exercise personal choice by not going to junk food joints — how do you think they acquired that moniker? And, who cares what McDonalds thinks of me tossing their happy meals, I was only after the toy for my kids anyway.

I find that people’s perceptions of what constitutes being overweight tends to vary with their own amount of denial concerning their own fatness. Note the appearance of the term ‘thick’ as applies to body type into the lexicon; this is an example of a fat person in denial.

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

BTW:

If you don’t know what a Jeffersonian Republican is, there is a fiction book that has a character - the President - that is a near PERFECT example of what I believe.

Pick it up some time:

Warrior Class by Dale Brown

By Fulton County Mom

March 7, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this

I have a Masters in Political Science….let me tell you that Market Control is Communisim (in some cases disguised as Socialism)…..We live in a FREE COMMERCE society (which is why I was yelling from the rooftops)….Keep blasting people with messages about healthy food…and SPEND YOUR MONEY where you want to…if it is on the organic good stuff HOOORAY if its on the fat laden crap well…Darwinism will win out eventually.

(that is not neo-conservative view….its a Freedom view)

By lwa

March 7, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

This is a gray area. There are a lot of us out here that do things that someone else would consider as abusive to our kids, either physical or mental. I spank my children. Someone else may consider this abuse. Someone else allows their children to talk to them any kind of way and not listen. I consider this abuse. We all raise our children differently. I don’t want the government to come into my home and dictate or rate the job that I am doing. A “good parent” is subjective. This mother is an un-educated parent. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t love her son.

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

FCM:

Check out Warrior Class. President Thorn (the Jeffersonian Republican) is introduced within the first few pages. You might like him. I just sent Mr. Wooten an email if I could have him or at least a Jack Ryan from Clancy’s Executive Orders…

By smf

March 7, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

So, everyone agrees children should be removed from families with bad parents in the case of physical abuse and things like that, but feel that it is not wrong for a parent to lead their children down a path that could lead to obesity, and much worse, diabetes? A child may not understand what they are doing, but a parent should.

By CD

March 7, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this

It’s funny how the government subsidizes unhealthy foods, and then takes custody of kids who eat them. The government subsidizes corn, corn, and corn. This basically makes products with corn syrup cheap, and meat from animals like cows and chickens who are fed corn cheap. Corn syrup adds lots of calories to food, but doesn’t fill the eater’s stomach up. So, people who drink coke are a lot fatter because they eat just as much as those who don’t drink coke, but consume many more calories. People who eat red meat are fatter and have higher cholesterol. Then, the government suddenly acts like the nanny in shining armor and seizes kids who get fat off of government cheese. Government officials act so confused when people are unhealthy after eating foods designed by “food scientists”. Have you been shopping lately? Have you noticed that vegetables and fruits are so expensive but corn syruped sodas are cheap? No wonder poorer people are fatter!

By FCM

March 7, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this

Jeff: You might like WEB Griffen’s stuff too….good reading…I’ll have to check out the Warrior Class….

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

actually, smf, I said that the parents’ family and friends should deal with the parent in those cases LONG before the government ever even knew their was a problem.

Matter of fact, my dad is a simple man. He’s always said that if any of his sons ever beat their wife or kids, they will answer to HIM. And he has made SURE we know that we DON’T want THAT to happen, REGARDLESS of what the government does!

(BTW: He was never abusive - though some parents here may try to paint him as such because he wasn’t afraid to whip out a belt and make sure we remembered that he had used it. AND.. if I have sons, I will have the same rule.)

By abc

March 7, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

Using the same rationale of free choice, why then is pot illegal? Why is cocaine illegal? Until legislated against in 1914, these were legally available through retail channels.

Regarding carbohydrates, it’s a faddish and relatively unproven notion that carb restriction is good for you. Certain types of fats are incredibly bad for you, and many common ingredients are known carcinogens. MSG is the first that comes to mind.

Regarding vegetarianism, one can mount a reasonable position that human anatomy and biology is better suited to a vegetarian diet rather than omnivorous. However, I’d say that vegetarians are actually pretty evenly split between that position, and animal rights. I somewhat ambivilent about it, frankly. I’m not a vegetarian.

I hope you all don’t stoop to the drivel that goes on in Wooten’s blog!

By Jeff

March 7, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

abc:

All I’m saying is that there should be a TRULY COMPELLING reason before an individual’s rights are abridged. Just because you don’t like their decision is NOT a truly compelling reason!

By Fulton County Mom

March 7, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

Uh abc…I am now ignoring you….I don’t think you really want anyone to think for themselves you want the government to do it for you….BTW there are very good arguments for legalizing some alternative substnaces and putting them behind the pharmacy counter with your Valium.

By Mike K

March 7, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

abc,

My point was that who makes the decision about what food is bad for you? Nutritionists? Doctors? They can’t even agree with each other sometimes. I used the low carb and veggie folks because they’re pretty much on opposite ends of the food spectrum.

Ever since Atkins got big a few years ago there have been more studies about low carb diets and lifestyles. Most have backed up what the good doctor was saying for many years. Plus you have hunter-gatherers like the Intuits in Alaska and Canada that eat almost all meat and are healthy.

Interestingly, I read somewhere that it was meat eating that allowed our ancestors to develop large brains. Plus we have both carnivore and herbivore teeth and our digestive tract is sort of a combination as well. It is pretty interesting.

By Linda

March 7, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this

Fulton County Mom are you joking, or what?

You said “Market Control is Communism….” Oh, really?? Like regulating competition is Communism [there goes the DOJ!]?? Like tax incentives/payments are Communist [think farmers/non-profits]? Like trading securities [bye, bye NASD]? Like adjusting interest rates [see ya, Federal Reserve Bank]?

Thus I conclude, you must be joking. If not, you may want to check out whoever issued your “Master’s” degree because you were ripped off and emerged not a Master at all. Call the Better Business Bureau — oh, never mind, they are a bunch of pinkos, right?

By FCM

March 7, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this

Linda: settle down girl…go back and reread the WHOLE thread here….we were talking about shutting down certain food estabishments and taking foods off shelves to make sure we only get the “right” kind of sustances in our bodies. We were talking Free Enterprise vs. Market Control…..but now that you mention it I am totally against taxes so yes lets get rid of incentives and payments. I do not believe in subsidising farmers or non profits either…I don’t think the government should adjust interest—u don’t like your rate go somewhere that gives you a better one… nor should it penalize you for withdrawing YOUR money (IRA or bank account) I am against regulating competition….I am for Free Enterprise.

By TR

March 7, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this

Here is the thing: Everyone wants freedom, but no one wants to be held responsible for the effects of their free will.

I love children and want to protect them at all cost. However, we can not give this power over to the government. It will only lead to serious problems down the line. Here in California some bright politician wants to pass a law making it illegal to spank your child. Imagine that!

There are many parents that need to be educated. Let’s do that. However, let us please allow PARENTS to raise our children and not the government.

By anne

March 7, 2007 1:11 PM | Link to this

Market control is not Communism - it is the appropriate role of government when the market is not operating efficiently. Clearly (judging by the $30-plus billion annual increase in healthcare costs due to obesity) the market is not working - the burden of the healthcare costs of the fat (on Medicare in particular) represent a shift in resources.

Possible market solutions to this are a) tax the product that is making people fat; b) provide incentives for the skinny, at the expense of the fat or c) charge an increased Medicare premium for the fat. All these are reasonable government interventions to make the market more efficient and equitable.

While there are some links between FCM’s Libertian views and economic theory, those of us who are actually trained as economists believe that government does have a role in correcting market instabilities from time to time.

As for those whining about government infringement upon your “freedoms” - clearly, nobody has yet limited your ability to be an idiot.

By chart42

March 7, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

The 8 year old in Britian sounds like he could have Prader-Willi syndrome. You have to do genetic testing to determine it. Children with Prader-Willi have a plethora of health issues-the most prominent being obesity due to the fact that they feel hungry all of the time. It usually kicks in after 5 years of age. In some instances, parents have to lock refridgerators and cabinets to keep them from eating all of the time. They can also have severe behavioral issues.

By Edwina

March 7, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this

OH my! Yesterday a poster metioned [www.blameitonthebabymaker.com] blog about a new soon to be father, well it is hilarious. I just read today’s entry about the new dads visit to the obgyn with his wife and all I have to say is this guy is hilarious!

By abc

March 7, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

So then, what’s the difference between allowing junk food that’s clearly detrimental to one’s health, but prohibiting substances such as pot and cocaine? Was Prohibition in the 30’s successful? Abuse of pot and cocaine, on a percentage basis, is the same now as it was before legislation in 1914. 60% of the prison population is there on drugs charges. It seems that legalization of currently illegal substances has enough merit to at least be seriously discussed, but it isn’t.

You can’t have it all ways. If you’re against removal of young children from parents that irresponsibly allow them to become obese through mis - non-management of their diet, but don’t restrict supply of dietary elements that clearly contribute to obesity so that such poor parenting has less of an effect due to restricted or eliminated supply, can you still bemoan that the phenomenon exists and consider yourself as contributory to a discourse about what could possibly be done?

By FCM

March 7, 2007 1:49 PM | Link to this

Anne, I can respect that an economist would see things differntly. Just as a sociologist would see this issue differently.

I can also agree that there are market solutions that could reduce obesity (or a number of other things).

However, a desire to have limited government and to encourage people not to hand away the freedoms others are literally dying to get, is neither whining nor idiotic.

By ChrisD

March 7, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this

What do you mean “MOST people agree that children should be removed from parents who are physically or sexually abusive”? Expose anyone who does not agree so we can beat them publicly. They’re obviously involved in this kind of behavior.

By InWonder

March 7, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

It would be nice IF we could educate the parents, but it is often these parents with kids who are being more and more overweight who scream on how busy they are. Too busy working and being social bumble bees to notice that their kids are not healthy. They don’t say “no” at the food stores so that they don’t have to deal with any screaming or temper tantums. Yet, how dare us say anything negative about their child - who to them isn’t overweight but “thick” or “they still have their babyfat”. Every excuse in the book to cover the fact that they are too consumed over themselves than their kids while claiming that they are perfect parents because their kids are “happy” and that they do take them to the doctor, to school - all that which is part of deal when you have a kid….(but will not admit that at work they complain that they can’t stand having to take the kids to the doctor, etc because it distrups work and they wish someone else could do everything for them - suddenly they have amesia - trust me parents, I have heard it way too many times and it just sad. You should of thought of that before you had kids).

By julie

March 7, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

So some of you want to ‘out law’ fat now? Penalize the overweight and give rewards to the non-overweight? You people (anne) are nuts!

By LC

March 7, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this

There are way too many dim-witted parents out there who do not even realize that something such as fried chicken and mashed potatoes and gravy is not a healthy nutritious choice for a meal. Stupid parents = fat kids.

By FCM

March 7, 2007 4:13 PM | Link to this

ChrisD I will help you beat the people.

InWonder-I would put my schedule and grocery bill up against any “busy” parent. It is pure laziness that keeps “busy” parents from buying good food. My children know that they may not get ice cream but they can have no sugary yogurt. They may not get candy but raisins and fresh fruit (bananas, apples, etc)are fair game. As I have written in this blog many times, my Pre-schooler often asks for salad for dinner.

It is most definately up to the parent to make sure that what they purchase and set out is “good”. However, to govern it is “bad”…Probably the worst a parent could do (and my ex is very guilty of this) is buying healthy food for kid and then eating the “junk” in front of them….Parents set an example and do your job. However, if you are part of the concerned “masses” try educating your friends, or volunteer at the school when they teach nutrition…offer to bring snacks for the whole class….do NOT ask GOVERNMENT to pass laws because some Parents lack brain power….(yes, add a belief in “survival of the fittest” to my list of character flaws).

By LM

March 7, 2007 4:39 PM | Link to this

My daughter eats…pretty much anything but can’t get enough weight on her, she does not have an eating disorder, but we struggle to have her gain weight. I, on the other hand struggle with my weight.

My neighbors are is good shape but their son is very heavy, they struggle with his diet, restrict his food and are making healthy food choices with him. When he is not in their supervision he eats non-stop. They force him outside to play, they don’t allow him freedom over tv and computer time. Yet he still is overweight.

I don’t think the goverment should have the right to remove a child from the care of the parents, even if they (the goverment)deem he/she were overweight or underweight for that matter.

By DKB

March 7, 2007 6:01 PM | Link to this

I am definitely against the government getting involved in family matters except in the case of severe physical (such as beating—not spanking—or starving) or sexual abuse. As has been mentioned by others, everyone interprets proper parenting differently. Who’s to say who’s right and who’s wrong?

My family has been one of those who has been HARASSED wrongly by DFACS because of some busybody, holier-than-thou person who came into our home (uninvited, I might add) and decided that it wasn’t as clean as they would like it to be. I’m not the best housekeeper and fully admit it. However, I spend quality time with my children, clothe them and feed them well, take them on nice vacations and to cultural events and they are excellent students at school. I’m so sick of other people deciding what the right way to raise a child is. What’s important to one person is secondary to someone else. It doesn’t in any way dictate abuse or neglect.

Kids need to be spanked and disciplined when necessary. What’s wrong with kids today is that parents and teachers are afraid to discipline because they might be sent to jail. Kids know they have the upper hand and use it. I had my share of spankings when I was a kid and I wasn’t scarred for life. In fact I think I’m a rather well-adjusted, productive adult and citizen.

My kids are happy, healthy and loved. They are definitely not abused. My kids have been raised in the same house, with the same two parents. One is slim and athletic, the other is a bit overweight. Explain that! I myself have battled my weight since I was a toddler. Sometimes it’s just in the genes.

By DKB

March 7, 2007 6:25 PM | Link to this

I am definitely against government involvement in family matters except in the case of severe physical (such as beating—not spanking—or starving) or sexual abuse. As has been mentioned by others, everyone interprets proper parenting differently. Who’s to say who’s right and who’s wrong except in extreme cases?

My family has been one of those wrongly HARASSED by DFACS because of some busybody, holier-than-thou person who came into our home (uninvited, I might add) and decided that it wasn’t as clean as they would like it to be. It was a very traumatic and unnecessary experience for the whole family. I believe it was much more damaging than any way my children could be raised. I’ve known quite a few other people who have gone through similar experiences for disciplining their children in public or because their child was simply overheard telling a friend about being disciplined at home and DFACS was called. Their whole families ended up in therapy due to their experiences. People need to make sure they get their stories straight and learn all the facts before turning someone in for something they know nothing about.

I’m not the best housekeeper and fully admit it. However, I spend quality time with my children. We’re extremely close. I work hard to clothe them and feed them well, take them on nice vacations and to cultural events and they’re excellent students and well liked at school. I’m so sick of other people deciding what the right way to raise a child is. What’s important to one person is secondary to someone else. It doesn’t in any way dictate abuse or neglect.

Kids need to be spanked and disciplined when necessary. What’s wrong with kids today is that parents and teachers are afraid to discipline because they might be sent to jail. Kids know they have the upper hand and use that knowledge to their advantage…or detriment, depending on how you look at it. I had my share of spankings when I was a kid and I wasn’t scarred for life. In fact, I think my parents did a great job teaching me right from wrong. I believe I’m a rather well-adjusted, productive adult and citizen.

On the weight issue specifically, my kids are happy, healthy and loved. They are definitely not abused. My kids have been raised in the same house, with the same two parents, and gone to the same school. One is slim and athletic, the other is a bit overweight. Explain that! I myself have battled weight gain since I was a toddler. Sometimes it’s just in the genes.

Yes, we and a lot of other people need to live healthier lifestyles. If the government wants to put information out there for the people to access, that’s great. But then back off and stay out of our business. This is not a communist society, but we’re getting there day by day.

By DKB

March 7, 2007 7:08 PM | Link to this

Oops, sorry. Didn’t mean to post twice. Went back to flesh it out and didn’t realize the original version already posted.

By past50mom

March 7, 2007 7:30 PM | Link to this

We don’t need government to take more control of private enterprise! We need more nutrition education from pediatricians and schools, healthier lunchroom offerings, and citizen pressure on restaurants to eliminate the trans fats, to offer more non-fried foods, and eliminate high fructose corn syrup. Step by step we can change things without the government setting arbitrary standards and seizing our children!

By mom3boys

March 8, 2007 6:44 AM | Link to this

I agree the government needs to butt out of this one, but what can we do when the parents turn a blind eye to the issue? I have a student who is at least 100 pounds overweight in 8th grade. I’ve known him 3 years…no change (except to get larger). Mom is upset he gets picked on…of course he does!! Yet, she won’t stop buying unhealthy snacks for him. It’s not the lunchroom’s fault; it’s mom’s!! What do we do here?? If he were mine, I’d like to think it would never have gotten to this point. He can’t play sports anymore because he just can’t move. He’s at risk for heart disease and diabetes. Now he’s at the cusp of high school, and his social life will be a shambles, so there goes the self esteem. I’d love to help him, but how? I’ve tried talking to mom, and I get no where. She said to me one time, ” I can’t lock the fridge…” No, well you can stop stocking it with Ho Ho’s! Any ideas?

By Fulton County Mom

March 8, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Follow up on this issue: If the government wants to get involved let it clean up its’ own problems first. I went in the school cafe this morning…they serve both Strawberry and Chocolate milk (both are 1/2% low fat)…Second ingredient on the lable is high fructose corn syrup. Yeah right its Mom and Dad making these kids fat….It certainly could not be that even in elementary school they get sugary milk, candy for being good, ice cream and other treats are available in cafe AND 3 choices of meals…..what Kindergartener is choosing healthy over pizza, chicken nuggets, or other “stuff” (which are all available daily)?

Forget the McDs—tell the government to close the school cafeteria!

By catlady

March 8, 2007 7:29 PM | Link to this

We have a child at our school, 9 years old, who is less than 5 feet tall and weighs over 300 pounds. He can’t walk, he can’t breathe, he can’t stay awake,his skin rots where it rubs together, he can’t play. His body is crushing his bones. He can eat, but even then he gasps in-between bites. It is one of the saddest things I have ever seen. He is on his second hip replacement. Meanwhile he moves as little as possible and eats heavily. Dad says he is going to be as big as him (Dad is probably 6’5” and weighs about the same.—not petite). At school he eats the fatty,salty breakfast and lunches and brings lots of junk food treats. His teachers have asked for help from DFCS, the school social worker, administrators, to no avail. This child’s life could be saved. We just pray he doesn’t die in our rooms, in front of the other kids.

By catlady

March 8, 2007 7:47 PM | Link to this

Here is what works: Have a supply of food okay to eat at will—carrots, celery. At mealtime, fix a good balanced meal (no jello, no cake, low carbs, low glycemic index) A piece of fruit for desert. He can eat whatever is served, as much as he cares for, UNTIL YOU RUN OUT. (this is key). Then, that is it for the meal—no special cooking. Only Okay food is available, and everyone gets a serving first. Water to drink. Snack at school: cheese, crackers with peanut butter, a piece of fruit. Nothing else. If begging from other students is a problem, he sits inside during recess (at that weight he is probably not moving around except to feed from others anyway. ) Mom should provide his lunch each day from the same protocol, with water. If he trades up, he has to be isolated during mealtimes or assigned to a parapro for monitoring. Little assignments should be given to encourage movement: pass out papers, take a letter to the mailbox. This will get the weight off, and the more it comes off the better he will feel on every level. The less comment on the food/diet the better. Keep nothing in the house for anyone that is not okay for him, and lock the cabinets if you must.

My first babysitter had a son who was the sorrlest, fatest, pastyest looking kid because “he won’t eat anything but sweet tea and soda crackers.” She marveled because my daughter would eat almost anything. I told her to cut that off cold turkey, and within a week he would be eating a few normal things. If she stuck to it, the feeding problem would be over. He threw quite a tantrum for days and dad tried to intervene and let him eat the trash but mom stood firm and in 6 months he was a good-eatin boy. Ended up being tall, strong, and healthy.

If a parent continues to deliberately ignore dangerous situations of any kind for their child, interventions should be made. If after the interventions the behavior continues, parental rights should be restricted.

By Fulton County Mom

March 9, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=74841&m=1FNU309&c=ldydicqoqubbehh

New bill in for revising school lunches….thought other parents would want to know.

By Casey

March 13, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this

The parents control the food in the house where small children are concerned. Any parent that allows a young child to become extremely obese is guilty of child abuse. It’s a fact - obesity leads to early death. Fat people like to play dumb and ignore facts, but it’s true.

A child who allows their child to die (by obesity) is abusive and should lose the child and go to prison.

Case closed.