Harvard/AMA study: Take obese kids from parents, put them in foster care

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guevara

Member
As the Western world gets fatter and fatter, the solutions to slimming it down get ever more draconian. In Britain yesterday, the government issued guidelines saying "children under the age of 5, including babies who can’t walk yet, should exercise every day." Today, in the States, a pair of Harvard scholars writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association advocate stripping away the custody rights of parents of super obese children. They're for real!

"Despite the discomfort posed by state intervention, it may sometimes be necessary to protect a child," said Lindsey Murtagh, a lawyer and researcher at Harvard's School of Public Health. The study's co-author, David Ludwig, says taking away peoples' children "ideally will support not just the child but the whole family, with the goal of reuniting child and family as soon as possible." Ludwig, an obesity specialist at Harvard-affiliated Children's Hospital, said his eureka moment was when a 90-pound, 3-year-old girl entered his obesity clinic a number of years ago," reports Lindsey Tanner at the Associated Press.

Her parents had physical disabilities, little money and difficulty controlling her weight. Last year, at age 12, she weighed 400 pounds and had developed diabetes, cholesterol problems, high blood pressure and sleep apnea.

"Out of medical concern, the state placed this girl in foster care, where she simply received three balanced meals a day and a snack or two and moderate physical activity," he said. After a year, she lost 130 pounds. Though she is still obese, her diabetes and apnea disappeared; she remains in foster care, he said.

But not so fast! The academic world isn't in agreement. In response to the JAMA article, University of Pennsylvania bioethicist Art Caplan is pushing back in a column for MSNBC. Here are his sticking points:

Legality "Our laws give enormous authority to parents and rightly so," he writes. "The only basis for compelling medical treatment against a parent’s wishes are if a child is at imminent risk of death — meaning days or hours — and a proven cure exists for what threatens to kill them. Obesity does not pass these requirements. The risk of death from obesity is real, but it is way down the road for kids."

Practical issues "The number of kids involved — an estimated 2 million children with body-mass index above the 99th percentile — would quickly swamp already overwhelmed social service departments," he writes. "And, no matter what you do with overweight children, sooner or later they are going back home where their often overweight parents will still be."

It's the wrong focus "Before we start grabbing porky youths out of their homes and sending them off to government fat camps, might we try to change our food culture? This means doing what we have done for smoking. Demonize the companies that sell and market food that is not nutritious. That means you, candy, soda, fried food and snack food outfits. Tax them too."
Click to expand...
The Atlantic
JAMA (if you have access): http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/306/2/206.extract
 
Unfortunately we have to let bad overfeeding parents ruin their kids if they want. Maybe the kids will be so fat they'll be unlikely to reproduce and stop spreading their fat family lifestyle and eating habits and it'll slowly work its way out of the population.

Practically, the article is right, we just have to let the parents do it unfortunately. No way social services could handle an influx of millions of obese kids, even if it was the right thing to take them away from their parents. It sucks for the kids, but we can't save them all.



Really really sucks for the kids actually. How do parents overfeed their kid so much that they're 90 pounds at 3 years old, and 400 pounds by 12 years old? That's pure child abuse. Parents control children's food intake at least to some degree for most of their pre-adult life, and completely for children as young as 3. These parents must be constantly overfeeding their kids.
 
Will the kids get any better food in foster care? I know the article gives one example, but if we start loading up foster families with kids then they will have to make their dollar stretch further for food and they will just buy the cheap, mass-produced crap that is causing some of these problems in the first place.
 
CF_Fighter said:
Will the kids get any better food in foster care? If we start loading up foster families with kids then they will have to make their dollar stretch further for food and they will just buy the cheap, mass-produced crap that is causing some of these problems in the first place.
Click to expand...

Eating crappy food can't make you 400 pounds by 12 years old unless you're massively overeating, which is usually the problem with these families. It's not the quality of the food, but the parents have a problem where they can't stop feeding their kids, and once their kids get used to constantly eating, they can't stop either.

Calories in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Calories out
 
Simply put, those scenarios described in the OP are indicative of child abuse. In those cases, children should definitely be taken away. If malnourished children are considered to be abused then obese children should too.
 
In the case of merely obese, I say let them eat cake.

If the child is morbidly obese like the one describes in the OP, obviously intervention will save them from early death or a lifetime of expensive medication.
 
I'm not sure what's worse, 400 pound 12 year old, or 90 pound 3 year old.

There are adults that are 90 pounds.




If the 400 pound kid is 5ft tall, that's a BMI of 78

The BMI scale goes:
< 18.5 underweight
18.5–24.9 normal weight
25.0–29.9 overweight
30.0–34.9 obese

Above that there are varying terms but one set used says:
&#8805; 35 - 39.9 severe obesity
&#8805; 40–44.9 morbid obesity
&#8805; 45 - 50 super obesity
 
ThisWreckage said:
Simply put, those scenarios described in the OP are indicative of child abuse. In those cases, children should definitely be taken away. If malnourished children are considered to be abused then obese children should too.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. Is there really a difference between malnourishing a child and overfeeding them? I know the former can land you in jail pretty easily, why not the latter?
 
I was 300+lbs when I was 12 years old and morbidly obese. After almost ten years of constant exercise and healthy living, I still haven't fully recovered from how fat I was. I totally support taking kids away from parents who let them get in that condition; it fucks up their life in more ways than one.
 
Cause we know ripping a kid out of his/her family and tossing them to strangers is not gonna impact the kid at all *rolleyes*
 
crazygambit said:
That's a good point. Is there really a difference between malnourishing a child and overfeeding them? I know the former can land you in jail pretty easily, why not the latter?
Click to expand...
This is where I've been for years on this issue. There is no excuse for a child weighing 90 lbs at the age of 3.
 
Oh I'm sorry I thought this was America.

I say let the piglets eat until you have to use a forklift to get their fat diabetic asses out of the house.
 
Seems like an odd study/solution. It blindly suggests that over eating will be the only problem the kid will ever face. What if they get put into a foster home then face ridicule every day at the hands of their new school mates? What if their new family forces them to wear crocs or something?

There are too many factors here. In summary, theyre screwed either way. Let them have their poptarts.

Against.
 
Why do people want to solve the "fat problem" anyway? Where would a generation of conceited thin Americans be without fat people to viciously mock?

Got to squeeze that drop of anemic joy from somewhere.
 
Megadragon15 said:
This seems like the right thing to do if we were a Fascist state. Are we a Fascist state yet?
Click to expand...

Is there a logical reason why parents overfeeding their children is ok, but underfeeding them isn't?
 
Kaijima said:
Why do people want to solve the "fat problem" anyway? Where would a generation of conceited thin Americans be without fat people to viciously mock?

Got to squeeze that drop of anemic joy from somewhere.
Click to expand...
There's still smokers to berate! What's the next public health crisis?
 
Obsessed said:
Is there a logical reason why parents overfeeding their children is ok, but underfeeding them isn't?
Click to expand...
Well there is a different degree of danger. Malnourishment can lead to serious health concerns and even death very quickly. Being Chubby wont be an issue for decades after they left home
 
antonz said:
Well there is a different degree of danger. Malnourishment can lead to serious health concerns and even death very quickly. Being Chubby wont be an issue for decades after they left home
Click to expand...
I think a 400 lb kid has a very real risk of heart failure.
 
If you have a 400lb child then, yes, the kid needs to be helped.

Holy fuck. I cant even imagine a 400lb little kid.
 
Coins said:
If you have a 400lb child then, yes, the kid needs to be helped.

Holy fuck. I cant even imagine a 400lb little kid.
Click to expand...

I don't think they'd be very little.

Edit:


antonz said:
Well there is a different degree of danger. Malnourishment can lead to serious health concerns and even death very quickly. Being Chubby wont be an issue for decades after they left home
Click to expand...

This article isn't talking about taking away children who are just chubby, it's talking about taking children who are severely obese and placing them in a healthy environment.
 
antonz said:
Well there is a different degree of danger. Malnourishment can lead to serious health concerns and even death very quickly. Being Chubby wont be an issue for decades after they left home
Click to expand...

Except that it will a lot harder to lose weight and they will have have to make some very drastic lifestyle changes, likely in the midst of depression and social stigmatization. It's one of the reasons I wouldn't date/marry a very out of shape person.
 
Why not send them to a fat camp/school instead? That way they can stay with their family and learn about nutrition at the same time. The psychological issues alone would not be worth sending them into foster care. Besides, does our already overwhelmed system need another burden? :/
 
Bay Maximus said:
Except that it will a lot harder to lose weight and they will have have to make some very drastic lifestyle changes, likely in the midst of depression and social stigmatization. It's one of the reasons I wouldn't date/marry a very out of shape person.
Click to expand...
Forcibly removing what is likely to be a happy child from a loving family is going to be pretty damning on the kid in its own ways too
 
actually just had dinner with my parents tonight. they are both MD's, with my mother being a pediatrician, and they both agree with this article. letting your kid get that fat is child abuse. it just isnt the type of abuse most people are familiar with. we dont associate giving a child too much food as being a terrible thing. I mean you are providing for them one of the basic needs in life, food. you just arent providing them with good food and/or just way too much of it that it is negatively impacting the child's life.
 
The_Technomancer said:
A little over that maybe, that's about where I'd put my 11 year old sister. Maybe 4'6"
Click to expand...

Damn, when I was 12, I was 5'4" or 5'6". Are kids really that short?

Also yes, taking crappy care of kids and allowing them to become obese IS child abuse. The average person wouldn't feed their kid dog food, and yet it's still probably healthier than some of the stuff a lot of parents are giving their kids.

I guess a parent allowing their kid to become obese is more neglect than outright abuse, but it's still incredibly careless. I was definitely an overweight kid, but seriously, some of these stories are ridiculous.
 
Art is a dick, and I'm willing to bet he's only making those arguments so it can be known that there is someone in the world named "Art" who has an opinion.

edit: he's also a biochemist and not a lawyer, doctor, or cps agent.
 
RevDM said:
Art is a dick, and I'm willing to bet he's only making those arguments so it can be known that there is someone in the world named "Art" who has an opinion.

edit: he's also a biochemist and not a lawyer, doctor, or cps agent.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to Antonz?
 
Cut sugar and refined grains. Problem solved. It's funny how easy it is solve this, but marketing, the US Food Bill, which keeps foods derived of cheap calories very cheap, and lack of education mire the issue.
 
entrement said:
Cut sugar and refined grains. Problem solved. It's funny how easy it is solve this, but marketing, the US Food Bill, which keeps foods derived of cheap calories very cheap, and lack of education mire the issue.
Click to expand...


Yeah, its really pretty complicated to fix all of these problems, its a huge problem that would have to be fixed on a corporate and government scale to change our food around.. and to educate people on shitty food...Plus, its a natural thing to want to keep eating and eating and eating, its biological aint it? From when we were cave men and shit we ate until there was no more..theres a lot more now.

But in any case it can be fixed, but it relies on the parents the most to learn about healthy food..and then pass that on to their kids..If they dont want to, then thats their choice.. Passing on their eating habits to their kids is basically the same as passing on anything else right..sticky situation
 
The government tells parents and kids that they should have half of their energy in carbohydrates. Excessive carbohydrate intake makes people sicker, fatter, and more tired. Since the government has done their job giving out dangerous guidelines, they now want to put these kids into a foster care system for following them? Talk about an abuse of government.
 
I would reluctantly approve of a policy that allowed select morbidly obese kids—I'm talking preteens that weigh hundreds of pounds—to be placed in foster care, provided there were strict protocols in place to minimize error. Parents mustn't be stripped of custody unless they can be proved to be endangering their children purposefully or by neglect.
 
Zzoram said:
I'm not sure what's worse, 400 pound 12 year old, or 90 pound 3 year old.

There are adults that are 90 pounds.




If the 400 pound kid is 5ft tall, that's a BMI of 78

The BMI scale goes:
< 18.5 underweight
18.5–24.9 normal weight
25.0–29.9 overweight
30.0–34.9 obese

Above that there are varying terms but one set used says:
&#8805; 35 - 39.9 severe obesity
&#8805; 40–44.9 morbid obesity
&#8805; 45 - 50 super obesity
Click to expand...

She could be all muscle though
 
Lambtron said:
There's still smokers to berate! What's the next public health crisis?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that shit's almost put to bed though. Guess what HeavyGAF? You're next on the list of things people will want to regulate the shit out of.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Got laid off today AMA
44
3K
The Pleasure replied
  • Poll
Do you put pennies in your penny loafers?
2
56
2K
Days like these... replied
  • Locked
Harvard to Launch Groundbreaking Course on “Hawk Tuah Girl” Phenomenon
1
591
EviLore replied
Crazy footage. Cop goes from telling kids to wear seatbelts to running towards rifle fire in 5 minutes.
16
2K
lughnasadh123 replied
  • Locked
Be careful where you get your news from
News 
47
2K
Dr.Morris79 replied
Top Bottom