Should Parents Of Extremely Obese Children Lose Custody?

[Rapture]

Harvard University child obesity expert Dr. David Ludwig's recent claim that some parents should lose custody of their severely obese children has sparked outrage among families and professionals across the country.

The national outcry led one family to share how its personal experience with the matter damaged their lives.

Ludwig, an obesity expert at Children's Hospital Boston and associate professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, shared his divisive idea in an opinion piece that ran in the Journal of the American Medical Association Wednesday: that state intervention can serve in the best interest of extremely obese children, of which there're about 2 million across the United States.

"In severe instances of childhood obesity, removal from the home may be justifiable, from a legal standpoint, because of imminent health risks and the parents' chronic failure to address medical problems," Ludwig co-wrote with Lindsey Murtagh, a lawyer and researcher at Harvard's School of Public Health.

The topic has quickly generated controversy, and the majority of experts contacted by ABC News disagreed with Ludwig and Murtagh's ideas.

A family in Albuquerque, N.M., disagreed with the idea, based not on any medical expertise but on a painful personal experience that they say tore the family apart more than a decade ago.

In a case that shocked many people across the country, 3-year-old Anamarie Regino, weighing 90 pounds, was taken from her outraged parents by government officials and placed in foster care. "Literally, it was two months of hell. It seemed like the longest two months of my life," mother Adela Martinez said. As it turned out, it was two unnecessary months of hell. Anamarie didn't improve at all in foster care, and she was returned to her parents. The young girl was later diagnosed with a genetic predisposition.

"They say it's for the well-being of the child, but it did more damage that any money or therapy could ever to do to fix it," Martinez said.

Anamarie, who is now 14, agreed.

"Well, state intervention is no guarantee of a good outcome, but to do nothing is also not an answer," Ludwig said.

Ludwig said he believes that children should only be removed in the most extreme cases, and that state officials should first offer counseling and education to parents.

"It should only be used as a last resort," he said. "It's also no guarantee of success, but when we have a 400-pound child with life threatening complications, there may not be any great choices."

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/childhood-obesity-call-parents-lose-custody/story?id=14068280

I read about this in the newspaper a couple of days ago. I think its outrageous. There should never be a reason for the government to be able to take a person's child away from them...ever. Unless there are obvious indications of neglect or abuse. Like in the case of the girl in this story...they can't always prove that the parents are being neglectful of their child because it could be genetic...so why put a family through so much unnecessary stress and heartache in the first place?

Instead of going to such extremes as this, wouldn't it make more sense to address the childhood obesity problem before it starts through education in schools and well-child visits at the child's pediatrician ...as well as working with the restaurants and etc...to provide more healthy alternatives? It also doesn't help that healthy food at the grocery store costs substantiallly more than the processed foods for those who are low income and etc...

If the case is found to be genetic then if a healthy lifestyle through education about healthy foods and exercise is found to not be beneficial...then a wait until the child could obtain a lapband system or gastric bypass would make sense.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

I think that many of the problems the children strive through in this day and age can be traced back to the parents, whether it is mental problems, severe fatness, unhealthy habits or just being raised as cruel or ignorant or racist people.

I think that many parents of our generation are nothing more then pathetic children themselves. Honestly just because you can teach your kids to eat healthy, or to be open minded or good people, it does not mean that the parents are doing this. I have seen so many fucked up parents I can not personally believe it.

Second, you have to understand a child's mind. they do not think mature like me and you do. You can slam healthy eating and stuff into their heads all day long, but it doesnt mean that they going to learn it through school. Its just like math, some people just do not get it. Being a kid and making life changing decisions without the assistance of a grown adult that can be a figure in their lives can be next to impossible. Plus not to mention you have biased teachers who have children of their own and are not going to reach out and take this childrens hand. I remember early years of school, I was too busy playing with my friends to understand any of the shit they were trying to teach me. It is even harder when they sit next to their friends and do not understand why they can not eat the same thing.

There are parents spitting out babies at age 18 and even younger in some cases. I find that parents should not be allowed to care for a child until they have learned to care for themselves. So in a way I disagree with you because just because me or you came from a suitable family it does not mean that other children would not be better off without their immature non caring parents crippling their mind when it absorbs the most.

Not to mention divorce messes with a kids mind, and in America people have gotten so used to high divorce rates that they do not even take it seriously....when it is indeed a serious thing, especially if you have children.

I think there are a great number of reasons to take protective custody of a child and that parents should only be given so many chances when it comes to handleing another persons life, and that includes letting their children eat shit 24/7

I do not however agree with forceful protective services, I think that the child must have a very informed reason why he should have to decide in the first place, and if he or she chooses to live in an abusive enviorment then I think it should be mandatory for the parents to seek proffesional help or phsycology for themselves and their child to change negative lifestyles that they will one day regret but are too young to understand it.

 

[Will Graham]

I am actually in agreement with the main thrust of what this guy is trying to say, morbid obesity is a very dangerous health risk. I don't mean a few pounds or puppy fat, I mean the weight where you are looking at heart problems, diabetes, and respiratory difficulties and all of that.

The article mentions 'education and counselling first' and I assume they would also have tests to determine a genetic disorder. In regards to obesity it is far more likely to be McDonalds-itis than a bona fide condition. People are making it sound like they are going to snatch up any child who doesn't look like a twig

 

[Shu]

Of course I agree with this. No offense but Obese children, and Overweight children are two different things.

If the parents took them to the doctor in the first place and found out it was because of genetic disposition, then they would have probably had a case in the first place to never lose the kid.

The underlying theme here is... YES it's neglect. When you choose to cook your kids ramen noodles which are high in sodium, then you subject them to high intakes of sodium in which causes extreme complications later down the road, when you could have easily cooked something a bit healthier.. but you wanted to "save" well.. that's neglect.

Neglect is when you choose to save money to buy a new car and over look for your kid's health. In some families when the kid becomes as big as the mother, we often times say "well it must be genetic." Yea.. really.... Hmm.. it's so genetic to not want to work out. Does anyone really ENJOY working out and eating healthy? No. We live in America though where friend food is mostly accessible 5 miles away (especially in the south) for very cheap.

We don't give our kids the needed fiber/protein/vitamins in order to actually replace them when they sweat/build muscles from growth/metabolize. Along with this exercise practice goes along way. If the parents are lazy, well the kid is going to be lazy, unless they choose to be self aware. We blame way too much on genetics these days. Geneology does go along way these days, but unless it's a disease, then get another excuse. Stop bitchin, and take away the coke products (high fructose = almost impossible to break down and metabolize)/ High Fatty Foods/ Sweets.

It will save their teeth, manage their health, and damn make the person feel better as well, not just about themself but breathing/muscle pains.

 

[Ilyena]

I remember watching a video a couple of years ago about a 7 year old child that weighed over 400 pounds. This girl could not walk; she had to drag herself across the floor. She could barely breathe when she moved. It was both sickening and sad. This wasn't a case of genetics. It was a case of her parents giving her whatever she wanted and giving in whenever she cried and complained. I'm sorry but allowing your child to gain so much weight that she can't walk or breathe properly because you can't bear to discipline them is neglect and abuse in my eyes. If you aren't adult enough to tell your child no, then don't have children. YOU are the adult and the parent, it's your job to teach/discipline your child and lay down the rules not the other way around.

So yes, I think if people can't properly discipline or teach their children, then they shouldn't have them and cases like this fall into proper discipline and education. Some children are chubbier than others and everyone has their own ways of eating, cooking, etc. But when it gets to the point where your child is morbidly obese, someone definitely needs to step in because something is definitely wrong.

 

[Linnaete]

The thrust of his argument seems rather reasonable to me. The possibility behind the genetic argument can only go so far. A child may be naturally born as being a bit overweight for their age or compared to their peers, but that's completely different to what a morbidly obese child actually is. A morbidly obese child doesn't get there simply through genes, it's the environment as well. The parents have the responsibility for their children's wellbeing and if they prefer to just laze around on the couch preferring to order takeaway meals, microwave meals and other kinds of fast food for their children day in and day out, that's fundamentally neglect. It's the dangerous compromise of a child's wellbeing by allowing that to happen on a daily basis, and I'm sure everyone knows that this problem is not just a cosmetic one, which is the least of your worries if you are morbidly obese.

The outcry is understandable to an extent. This is pure state intervention, and yes, the idea of snatching children away from their parents with the possibility of subjecting psychological discord to them does seem a frightening prospect, particularly in the States. It's not like hundreds of thousands of kids will be snatched away and totalitarianism has slipped in, no one will ever allow that. For the most serious and extreme cases, I don't see why the prospect of threatening parents of very seriously obese children deserves that much outroar. There was apparently a 12 year old who weighed 400-pounds and it was only in foster care that 130 was shed.

Of course one should seek to exhaust some alternatives first, but aren't they already doing some of that? Aren't restaurants being pressured about this issue and aren't schools already placing heavy emphasis on drilling awareness into elementary school children? Yet there are still around 2 million obese children in the States and frankly, the big business nature of the country means that fast food joints are unlikely to be that wholehearted towards tackling the problem of obesity. Alternative methods are well and good - if they are effective of course - but a lot of the time they're not and in the extreme cases they demand some extreme action before it's too late. A parent who cannot at all address the issue of their child's weight and health is neglect, which is also a fair enough reason to tell them that if they cannot look after the wellbeing of children sufficiently enough, they shouldn't be having children and allowing them to build up serious health risks.

 

[Bambi]

I am actually in agreement with the main thrust of what this guy is trying to say, morbid obesity is a very dangerous health risk. I don't mean a few pounds or puppy fat, I mean the weight where you are looking at heart problems, diabetes, and respiratory difficulties and all of that.

The article mentions 'education and counselling first' and I assume they would also have tests to determine a genetic disorder. In regards to obesity it is far more likely to be McDonalds-itis than a bona fide condition. People are making it sound like they are going to snatch up any child who doesn't look like a twig

This pretty much

If it's merely a case of over eating, and pandering to a child screaming because they want to what shite all the time and its extremely obese then I comepletely agree they should be at least temporarily, put in care. Its not fair on the child in the long run, they dont know better than to want to fill their faces with shit, and then just lead to problems as they grow up.

I cant understand how (medical shit aside) a child can even get to that point, it's disgusting that parents would allow them to eat more than some adults do. Children are supposed to be active, what kind of childhood are they gunna have sat on their backsides, fair enough if they try to seek help, but if they dont and let their children get dangerously fat then it serves them right. They are onlyu condemning them to poor health and an early grave anyway

If someone just refuses to adress the issue and lets this happen, then they should ahve their children taken away, its pretty much just neglect in the form of general health, unintentional abuse whatever, but either way, there's just no excuse to let your kid get anything more than a bit chubby.

 

[Bambi]

they will be spending more money on the excess amounts they must eat through though

I couldn't ever get that fat, quite simply because I just couldn't afford to, so I don't think that's a good excuse at all, it's laziness

 

[Harlequin]

The problem with the letter of the law is it's too black and white when life is grey. I'm partially in favour of it, mainly because the vast majority of people who are morbidly obese are eating far too much and doing far too little about it, but there are those who suffer conditions which make is considerably harder to do something about it.

My good pal Licky summed it up quite nicely and even though I'm not entirely for telling people what to do, my taxes certainly shouldn't be wasted on treating them if they don't want to control their eating habits.

 

[Gingerbread Lesbian]

I don't think taking the children away from their parents is addressing the problem, at all. Just because extremely obese children are taken from their parents doesn't mean they're going to get any better or even lose any weight, nor do I think every parent who lets their child get to that stage should automatically be branded as a "bad" parent. What seems obvious to most people won't be for others, if the parents are brought up like that themselves and maintained that lifestyle throughout their whole life they may not see any problem with it. Taking away their children isn't exactly helping them learn how to raise their children in a healthy manner.

Some form of counseling should be legally imposed if the child becomes obese but taking their child away from them should be an absolute last form of action.

 

[Bambi]

Its kinda hard to relate because fruit and veggies arent really expensive for us. Fresh meat tends to cost an arm and a leg, the frozen options are much cheaper. I've learned to be really thrifty with my food shopping, I know which 'cheap' options are good enough, and which to avoid. It's worth paying abit extra for milk and butter, alot of things though, the value cereal is just as good as the expensive shit, same with the bananas, Ive no idea why theres the cheapo ones and the ones that cost more. A bananas a banana...

I do agree families need educating, and I also agree it should be a last resort, if I wasnt clear about that Im not for families ahving their cjildren taken away willy nilly, but if they are getting help, and refusing it or just not sticking to it because it's 'too hard' then that's when something drastic needs to be done I think.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

I don't think taking the children away from their parents is addressing the problem, at all. Just because extremely obese children are taken from their parents doesn't mean they're going to get any better or even lose any weight, nor do I think every parent who lets their child get to that stage should automatically be branded as a "bad" parent. What seems obvious to most people won't be for others, if the parents are brought up like that themselves and maintained that lifestyle throughout their whole life they may not see any problem with it. Taking away their children isn't exactly helping them learn how to raise their children in a healthy manner.

Some form of counseling should be legally imposed if the child becomes obese but taking their child away from them should be an absolute last form of action.

I agree that its a last form of action, but I think it could potentially be more healthy for the kid in an enviorment where they are not fed fatty shit everyday. Children are like sponges in their young age and the sooner you squash problems that are not being handled then the sooner they can change.

The children can grow up getting fatter and fatter, and one day hate their parents for letting it come to this way, or even worse they can assume there is nothing wrong with what they did, thus setting a standard that consumption of crap is just fine.

I feel that if it is settled before hand then the children (who did not realize it at the time) will grow into the understanding of what happened, and possibly not make the same mistakes.

Now I think that if it IS the parents who let them get to that stage (and not genetics or disease) then I would indeed label them "bad" parents in my own personal perspective.

 

[Will Graham]

Some form of counseling should be legally imposed if the child becomes obese but taking their child away from them should be an absolute last form of action.

That's exactly what the guy said, that counselling and education of parents would happen far before the children were removed from the home

And if the parents ignore or disregard that, well the child has a better shot of being placed in the care of people who are educated on this issue and willing to adhere to a healthier diet. Plus there are fairly priced healthy foods available

Also it's not about buying ridiculously healthy expensive foods, just cutting back on junk and making sure a child gets exercise. Plus there are some really expensive fast foods available too, in fact the majority are very pricey here I'd dare to say

Not to mention fast food is much less filling so a child would end up eating far more of it anyways imo

 

[Roland_Deschain]

That's exactly what the guy said, that counselling and education of parents would happen far before the children were removed from the home

And if the parents ignore or disregard that, well the child has a better shot of being placed in the care of people who are educated on this issue and willing to adhere to a healthier diet. Plus there are fairly priced healthy foods available

Also it's not about buying ridiculously healthy expensive foods, just cutting back on junk and making sure a child gets exercise. Plus there are some really expensive fast foods available too, in fact the majority are very pricey here I'd dare to say

Not to mention fast food is much less filling so a child would end up eating far more of it anyways imo

Thats exactly right.

If parents took only a few minutes to use the vast amount of resources available you would realize that you can take three different kinds of low priced vegetables and make a very good meal from it.

It all boils down to being lazy, people bitch and moan that food is so expensive when they spend more then a grocery bill on potatoe chips and fast food meals.

Even the food they already eat, can be healthy. Pizza can come with vegetables, Fast food joints have salads, and you cant get cans of green beans to put as a side of anything for dirt cheap.

 

[Bambi]

It's cheaper to buy cordial (squash, diluting juice, whatever the hell you want to call it) that the bucket loads of fizzy stuff that people go through as well

I've never once let Ellie have anything fizzy, unless it's a sip, but I don't drink it myself, and I will about rugby tackle anyone to the ground that tries to give it to her. As a treat I'd rather get her some sweets or something (IN MODERATION!) than a fizzy drink. It just seems pointless, its that full of shit that if I want to give her shit, Id at least give her something edible,it's not a habit I want her getting into. Because it's liquid people seem to think it's not as bad as junk food, when it can be worse just becasue you can consume so much in one day, with all the junk food on top of that, oh but its only a drink. Yeah

I still dont understand why people have fizzy drinks. (alcohol aside) you drink because you are thirsty, yes it's better if it tastes nice, but coke and all that shite doesn't quench your thirst, it pumps you full of sugar, just because it's wet, people seem to think it will do a good job of keepingyou hydrated. Then people make the mistake of confusing thirst with hunger

 

[Shu]

Trust me, my thing is early onset diabetes. I have two friends that suffer due to their Type 2 diabetes. I remember growing up with one of them and he was allowed excessive juice in the morning, donuts in the mornings and at lunch cokes/mtn dews. The parents would stop by McDonalds at night, and his nickname was named Cheeseburger. His insulin levels were just retarded. He couldn't maintain and his damn pancreas developed it over time.

He weighed around 125lbs at the age of 7 and his height was around mine. I weight 75 lbs and I was a medium build, though I maintained it all through many years of sports. He didn't at the time have to use insulin or glucogen but now I believe he does due to irregularities.

That's the sad part, some people can't help but have health problems later in life because of the way their parents raised them. If they could afford mcdonalds, they could also afford sandwich meat + bread that would last for many more days than one meal.

I don't see the argument here.

 

[Rydia]

It really depends. A parent that is only serving their child junk food and nothing much of nutritional value could certainly be accused of neglect. However, if a parent is neglecting to monitor the food their child eats, then they are probably neglecting other parts of parenting too.

However, I wonder if this is fair to low income families. Should they be held to the same standard if they have difficulty affording healthy food, and instead choose the inexpensive affordable food? Also those that may lack nutritional education?

There are also diseases that can cause obesity.

One of my friends had type 1 diabetes. When she first started taking insulin, she had a rapid weight gain and had difficulty losing all the weight. She changed her diet (which was difficult) and tried her best to exercise, but her diabetes was causing her to be tired almost all the time.

Also Willi Prader syndrome is a genetic disorder that can cause an insatiable hunger in those that have it.
http://www.pwsausa.org/syndrome/index.htm

Wasn't there also a theory or a study, that suggested that intestinal bacteria might be a cause of obesity?

 

[Tmoo]

i think the bigger issue at hand is good parents vs. bad parents. good, mindful parents monitor their child's health, food intake, et al. You have to be ready for this kind of thing when you conceive that kid. If not, then you shouldn't be having kids, not until you know what to expect and have the maturity to follow through with your responsibilities. If it's a genetic problem, then you still have to do your best to combat it, for your child's health. There's a difference between saying little Johnny is overweight because it's genetic when you feed him fast food all the time, and actively working against said genetic problem through a healthy lifestyle. The former is an excuse for bad parenting, and the latter is a proactive approach to improve the health and well-being of the child.

...more on topic, separating kids from their parents due to neglect is fine, but there's a difference between neglect and obesity. correlation does not imply causation, etc.

 

[Ilyena]

Fruits and veggies are not that expensive. Bananas are typically 49-59 cents a pound which typically comes out to less than $2 for a bunch. A head of lettuce is usually between 1-2 dollars. Frozen vegetables are even cheaper than that. You can get a decent sized bag of brown rice for under two dollars and it certainly goes a long way. Whole grain pasta is about the same price as enriched pasta and it's healthier. You could buy enough food for a week's worth of meals for what you would pay to feed a family of five at McDonalds. I just don't see that as a valid excuse.

I don't see an issue with giving children treats every now and again but letting your child eat so much that they become severely or morbidly obese is a problem. I'm not saying let's just take all children who are overweight from their parents but if the parents are aware of the issue and are not doing anything to rectify it, then someone should step in.

 

[Bambi]

Also Willi Prader syndrome is a genetic disorder that can cause an insatiable hunger in those that have it.
http://www.pwsausa.org/syndrome/index.htm

My cousins son has that, and he never got fat. It's something they had to learn to live with and control. Well, not sure if it's that exact same thing, but he has some condition that means he never gets the signal to his brain to say he is full. so he just constantly feels hungry

As a child it is definatley down to the parent to control something like that, however hard it is, it just has to be done, like having children with disabilites that is a 24 hour job, people do it

I would't say I'd be able to cope. Im pretty sure I wouldnt be able to, but aside from conditions like this, there's just no excuse to have a 3 year old that weighs something daft like 5 stone for no other reason that you are allowing it, and thinking its normal to eat like that, it just beggars beleif. Sure if people are brought up like that, and they have the bad habits, its understandable that the familiy will as a whole be over weight, but there's a line.