Monday, March 7, 2011

Obesity is Abuse!


Let's talk real quick about the "Childhood Nutrition Bill" which present a pretty complicated problem.  With big government comes many intertwined issues, and it gets complicated! With the government's compulsory public education they have their hands full with various responsibilities for Americas problems.   One of the best things public education has done for our country is provide the government with an venue to make sure that America's children are being kept safe (vaccinated, not abused or neglected, etc.).  And while I am very against the Nanny State that Obama (and Bush, yes) preach, as I do think adults should be allowed to make their own decisions, including the decision to fail (or decisions The Government deems "bad").  When it comes to children and how parents raise them, I (and the general population), don't believe that parents have free reign.  The question is when to intervene, and how much to intervene?  A secondary and important question, which I won't touch today-- does intervening even help for the majority of cases?

Of course it is expensive to take a child away from their parents and have the government act as guardian ad litem (you think having 1 child is expensive... now imagine your tax dollars going to take care of ALL the kids in America with severely neglectful, abusive, or absent parents! and THEN paying their lawsuits! AH!), and whenever $$$ comes into play in government decisions you can bet that the government won't consistently enforce rules, regulations, or consequences, and will have that good ol' strict versus loose interpretation of laws, including the definition of "harm to a child."  This is why I am normally against large government involvement and I think leaving most things to Free Market is best for this country.  And while I don't trust or agree with many of the decisions the government makes on a case-by-case level for the safety of our children, I haven't heard of a better system to protect the unprotected youth and until I do, I will support and fight to better the one we have.

Now we can all agree that abusing a child physically, mentally, and sexually is bad, and most often warrants the child's removal from the home.  We all also can admit that not providing proper nutrition, care, or shelter for a child (neglect) is also wrong and most often warrants removal.  If a child comes to school severely underfed, after a little research by Social Services, that child will probably be taken into protective custody.  But what about children that are severely overfed?!?! in America, 21-24% of children are overweight and an additional 16-18% of children are obese (that's in the upwards of 42% of the nations children being over the normal, healthy weight!! Source: Pediatric Obesisty) When studies show that childhood obsesity can lead to not only to emotional and social stigmas, but serious and dangerous physical consequences, including, but not limited to: type 2 diabetes, metabolic disorder, sleep apnea and other breathing conditions, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, asthma and other breathing disorders, early puberty, (source:mayo clinic ), liver disease, bone and joint problems, and skin infections (source: childhood obesity foundation).  All of these dangers combined with obesity itself has been linked to cancer, heart disease, liver disease, dementia, and much more.  Childhood obesity (via American parenting) is killing the future of America, and with the high percentage of children overweight we can't exactly take them all from their homes.  But that's a funny thought because let's say the government did... they probably would feed these newly orphaned children what they feed children in our public school systems: Sh*t!  So what are we to do?

Michelle Obama has been up and about making speeches preaching that children need to have healthier school lunches.  I agree, they do.  If they are mandated to go to school and the government is already willingly paying their welfare, then the government should be making sure they are fed with proper nutrition.  That is, NOT cardboard pizza or paper towel sub sandwiches (which we appropriately titled these meals in my public schools growing up) but rather food that won't actually inhibit their learning, and perhaps, (novel idea) promote learning and acute minds!  Though, ass Michelle Obama stated in a speech to school children: "The solution to this challenge has to come from the bottom up. The gov't can't be in a position to tell people what to do in their own homes. That generally doesn't work." (surprising to come from an Obama!!) But actually on this issue, I disagree with you Ms. Obama. While it pains me to say it with my Libertarian ideals, if parents are killing their children by overfeeding them (and vis-a-vis under/over-nourishing them) the government needs to tell them what to do, in fact the government needs to demand of them better nourishment of their children (particularly young children)!  No, of course I don't believe in a "fat tax."  Unhealthy food should remain on the shelves.  If you want a Little Debbie snack you shouldn't be penalized, you're just dumb or indulging.  That's allowed.  But if you bring your child to school on the first day and he's a 4 foot tall 115 pound 3rd grader, then you are endangering that child's present and future life!! He is NOT an adult who can care for himself, he is NOT educated or mature enough to know better about his nutrition. I think a child (and again, a young child) that is obese (and not just the fattest girl on records video of the fattest little girl) deserves suspicion from child protective services.  The government must first conform and feed children healthy meals, and for once lead by example, as it is doing by passing the Childhood Nutrition Reauthorization in December and with Michelle Obama's continued advocacy for childhood healthy eating.

I don't agree with everything Michelle Obama advocates about nutrition, I still think children should be allowed to have birthday parties at school. I do NOT believe in a big government...BUT I do believe children should not get abused, and I DO BELIEVE childhood obesity is a sign that child is being neglected!  I have the mightiest wish that something like this did not come down to the government responsibility.  American culture and American parenting needs to change when it comes to food intake, but the government shouldn't stand by and let children be abused, either.

5 comments:

  1. What an interesting post! I think that these issues are so big it's hard to just point to one place as the culprit. Yeah, parents control what their kids eat, but what if the parents were never properly educated about nutrition as well? And what if the parent is a single mother working 2 jobs just maintain her family at poverty level and she doesn't have time to take a look at her nutrition and the nutrition of her kids and change all of their eating habits?
    I think that schools NEED to fix their lunches. Make the vegetables NOT all come from cans and spend some time to prepare meals that are ACTUALLY nutritionally sound. (Not just protein, starch, vegetable, fruit, juice, milk--> give nutrition requirements)
    And I think that our country in general needs to do more to really help families. (i.e., affordable day care, REAL help in times of need, better pay, ending tax cuts for super wealthy companies/people (trickle down is bullshit)) etc.
    But that's my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. @Megan, thanks for the comment. Your ending sentence delving into other political topics I must say, I do not align myself with. "Better pay" for example is a complicated issue, particularly when we take the extremists who push for "living wage." That's just economically unsound.

    But as far as the childhood obesity problem, I get your point. But I would say I'm less sympathetic to these parents than you are. Of course it's a complicated problem and I do NOT have the answer. It gets more complicated when you decide where to draw the line AND when the government is feeding our children (in some cases 3 times a day in all day school programs). But think, neglectful parents or parents who expose their children to age-inappropriate materials are probably as misinformed about proper child rearing as the parents who overfeed their children (many parents don't KNOW they are doing wrong by their children, all the parents who are deemed unfit are certainly not purposely malicious). But on average children watch about 23 hours of TV per week (now throw in video games and computer usage and the number grows). If you don't know enough to be a parent you can't abuse your god-given ability to procreate and abuse and put at risk Americans children. It is certainly your right to have children, and I wouldn't propose to take that away from anyone (i.e., eugenics) but if make the decision to procreate you darn well better not abuse that child, and causing early death and a lifetime plagued with health complications, in my mind, is abuse.

    ReplyDelete
  3. After discussing this post with Ashley I realized I didn't make my view of The State's role quite clear enough. I do not think that every obese child should be snatched from their mothers arms. I just think, like all cases of suspected child abuse, their should be an investigation, and when appropriate the parents should be provided with the proper education and support to help their child reach a healthy weight. If, after being shown the dangers of obesity for their child they do not comply with such a program and their child continues to suffer from obesity than the child should be removed from the home or a more appropriate solution should be applied.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't know if I buy that removing a child from the home is a good solution. Parents aren't just a source of food and shelter, they're also a source of love. Can you imagine being separated from your parents as a child? Also, how could anyone actually measure the of effect the parents have on the child's weight?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Megan I totally got you there with removal isn't the best solution. In many cases it isn't. Like I said above, the state should just provide support so that 42% of Americans children don't die in their 40s. And I'm not sure how one would measure it, but I didn't say this but I'm mainly thinking of elementary school children...and who else would be to blame?

    ReplyDelete