Is Childhood Obesity Child Abuse/neglect?

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
[url="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/22/video-is-childhood-obesity-child-abuseneglect/"]From HotAir[/url]
if you knowingly let your kid consume whatever they desire to eat (and thereby putting your child's health in danger), is that child abuse or child neglect?

here's another news article: [url="http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/weightloss/2009-07-20-obesityboy_N.htm"]http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/weight...besityboy_N.htm[/url]
[quote]State courts in Texas, Pennsylvania, New York, New Mexico, Indiana and California have grappled with the question in recent years, according to a 2008 report published by the Child Welfare League of America.

In all of those cases, except the one in California, courts expanded their state's legal definition of medical neglect to include morbid obesity and ruled that the children were victims of neglect, the report says. Criminal charges were filed only in the California and Indiana cases, but the parents weren't sentenced to jail time in either.[/quote]

[homeschoolmom]

Well, if there wasn't so much HFCS in everything, I think childhood obesity would go down considerably.

On the other hand, I can't see any rational reason for a child to be morbidly obese without a medical condition unless his diet is not being overseen by someone.

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1929598' date='Jul 23 2009, 03:29 PM']Well, if there wasn't so much HFCS in everything, I think childhood obesity would go down considerably.

On the other hand, I can't see any rational reason for a child to be morbidly obese without a medical condition unless his diet is not being overseen by someone.[/quote]


I think it has much more to do with activity level. I'm only 23 so HFCS was already in everything we ate when I was a kid. Perhaps I am just one of the out of touch grown ups now, but I feel like kids today are much less active than my peers were when we were their age.

[CatherineM]

Interesting question. In extreme cases, I think it can rise to the level of abuse. In lesser, but still serious cases, probably neglect. They say this is the first generation where life expectancy is less than their parent's. The school lunch program was started during WWII because kids showing up for the draft or enlistment weren't fit for service due to malnutrition. Now we still have malnutrition meaning the lack of proper nutrition. When my son signed up for the Navy, the recruiter told him that 25% of graduating seniors were unfit for service because of hearing damage, and 50% were unfit due to weight issues. Even if some overlap, if we were to really get into a World War where every able bodied person needed to serve, we'd be in trouble.

[StColette]

I agree with Catherine, I believe in certain cases it can be raised to a level of abuse or neglect. If a parent is giving into their child's every food whim and letting them eat and drink as much as they want whenever they want, that's definitely not healthy and bordering on neglect or abuse. I've witness parents feed their children almost everyone 30 minutes it seemed. The kids got to eat whatever they wanted and after time they started suffering from childhood obesity.

I agree with Voteckam as well, that kids today are less active then what kids were back when I was younger, etc. I think the internet, computer, and video games have a lot to do with that. I remember being little (I'm only 24) and being gone from the house the moment I got home from school until dark, practically. I was always outside playing and being active. If it was raining then we played activities inside. We had a huge extra room that was never used except for laundry folding and arts & crafts. So we were able to run and play in there. My parents didn't allow us to be couch potatoes or be consumed by tv or video games. I don't have anything against video games, but I think they can cause lots of problems. My sister got rid of all other video games and game systems that the kids had other than the Wii. The kids time limit on the Wii is even limited, but at least it is a game system that gets them off their rears.


I think it all comes down to moderation. Three meals a day and a afternoon snack should be sufficient for the majority of kids, unless there's a medical condition like diabetes.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='StColette' post='1929737' date='Jul 23 2009, 05:09 PM']I agree with Catherine, I believe in certain cases it can be raised to a level of abuse or neglect. If a parent is giving into their child's every food whim and letting them eat and drink as much as they want whenever they want, that's definitely not healthy and bordering on neglect or abuse. I've witness [b]parents feed their children almost everyone [/b]30 minutes it seemed. The kids got to eat whatever they wanted and after time they started suffering from childhood obesity.

I agree with Voteckam as well, that kids today are less active then what kids were back when I was younger, etc. I think the internet, computer, and video games have a lot to do with that. I remember being little (I'm only 24) and being gone from the house the moment I got home from school until dark, practically. I was always outside playing and being active. If it was raining then we played activities inside. We had a huge extra room that was never used except for laundry folding and arts & crafts. So we were able to run and play in there. My parents didn't allow us to be couch potatoes or be consumed by tv or video games. I don't have anything against video games, but I think they can cause lots of problems. My sister got rid of all other video games and game systems that the kids had other than the Wii. The kids time limit on the Wii is even limited, but at least it is a game system that gets them off their rears.


I think it all comes down to moderation. Three meals a day and a afternoon snack should be sufficient for the majority of kids, unless there's a medical condition like diabetes.[/quote]

I agree with pretty much everything you said here with the exception of where you said something about you witnessed parents feeding their children everyone... that's a little... weird.

I think this is an oversimplification, but I think with all the hype about child abductions (your neighbor COULD be a child molester!) and not going out into the sun without SPF 40 on at all times, kids are much more likely to be inside. Video games at least keeps kids quiet. (I'm not condoning these comments, just saying how some people think...) Sadly, childhood obesity is a much bigger threat to children's health than child molestors or skin cancer. By "protecting" them, we've created another problem.

My kids are skinny and three meals and a snack would probably not be sufficient.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1929598' date='Jul 23 2009, 01:29 PM']Well, if there wasn't so much HFCS in everything, I think childhood obesity would go down considerably.[/quote]

[url="http://www.switchbev.com/"]Organic pop[/url] FTW!

[philothea]

One of the books I reviewed for Amazon was [url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1605297852?ie=UTF8&tag=amberdine-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1605297852"]The End of Over Eating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite[/url]. (Highly recommend it for anyone dieting, any parent, or really anyone... it was fascinating.)

The author was head of the FDA for two administrations, and is a pediatrician. The gist of the book is that modern science has created foods which stimulate our reward system in ways which natural foods were never able to. These hyper-palatable foods trigger addiction-like changes in our brains. For certain people, once they're exposed to those foods, their appetite begins to far out pace their actual need, so they gain weight.

But, most important (and relevant to this discussion) [b]the earlier a person is introduced to hyper-palatable food, the more profound the biological change is[/b]. Developing brains are much, much more susceptible to conditioning. The author is seeing an explosion of obese children, and the physical effects of early obesity are very bad and possibly irreversible.

I don't think there should be anything available for sale that has a good chance of permanently screwing up a child's appetite [i]for the rest of their lives[/i]. And, as much as I want to call down the wrath of some authority on people when I see them taking their toddlers to McDonald's... it's unreasonable to punish parents for failing to outsmart billion-dollar corporations staffed by some of the most talented people in the world.

Don't know how to fix the issue. There needs to be more research done. Ultimately, I suspect there will have to be stricter limits on what's allowed to be sold as food.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='philothea' post='1929954' date='Jul 23 2009, 08:21 PM']One of the books I reviewed for Amazon was [url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1605297852?ie=UTF8&tag=amberdine-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1605297852"]The End of Over Eating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite[/url]. (Highly recommend it for anyone dieting, any parent, or really anyone... it was fascinating.)

The author was head of the FDA for two administrations, and is a pediatrician. The gist of the book is that modern science has created foods which stimulate our reward system in ways which natural foods were never able to. These hyper-palatable foods trigger addiction-like changes in our brains. For certain people, once they're exposed to those foods, their appetite begins to far out pace their actual need, so they gain weight.

But, most important (and relevant to this discussion) [b]the earlier a person is introduced to hyper-palatable food, the more profound the biological change is[/b]. Developing brains are much, much more susceptible to conditioning. The author is seeing an explosion of obese children, and the physical effects of early obesity are very bad and possibly irreversible.

I don't think there should be anything available for sale that has a good chance of permanently screwing up a child's appetite [i]for the rest of their lives[/i]. And, as much as I want to call down the wrath of some authority on people when I see them taking their toddlers to McDonald's... it's unreasonable to punish parents for failing to outsmart billion-dollar corporations staffed by some of the most talented people in the world.

Don't know how to fix the issue. There needs to be more research done. Ultimately, I suspect there will have to be stricter limits on what's allowed to be sold as food.[/quote]
Get the word out. Then we can punish
Seriously though, it's what makes the machine go 'round

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='philothea' post='1929954' date='Jul 23 2009, 08:21 PM']I don't think there should be anything available for sale that has a good chance of permanently screwing up a child's appetite [i]for the rest of their lives[/i]. And, as much as I want to call down the wrath of some authority on people when I see them taking their toddlers to McDonald's... it's unreasonable to punish parents for failing to outsmart billion-dollar corporations staffed by some of the most talented people in the world.[/quote]


Well, I don't think there's anything wrong with taking a child to McDonalds once in a while.... I do think it's wrong to take him there often. Children shouldn't be eating more meals out than they do at home. (And if you count school hot lunch and breakfasts, many probably are.)

I take issue with HS vending machines. I don't know what they've got in them these days, but back when I was visiting our local HS as a host parent for our exchange student (99-00), there was a whole row of them and they were full of garbage.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1929840' date='Jul 24 2009, 12:01 AM']My kids are skinny and three meals and a snack would probably not be sufficient.[/quote]
That's not sufficient for me most days, and I'm considered underweight by BMI (not that I go by that, but they sometimes threaten to refer me to a nutritionist because of it). I eat like a hobbit: breakfast, sometimes a second breakfast and/or elevenses, lunch, afternoon tea, dinner, snack. Most of them are smaller meals, though, with the exception of breakfast.

[StColette]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1929840' date='Jul 23 2009, 07:01 PM']I agree with pretty much everything you said here with the exception of where you said something about you witnessed parents feeding their children everyone... that's a little... weird. [/quote]

lol bad typo lol

[quote]My kids are skinny and three meals and a snack would probably not be sufficient.[/quote]

There are exceptions My niece and I have very similar eating habits. We're definitely grazers. Several small meals a day because I can't eat regular sized meals.

[CatherineM]

They had a story on the news last night about a new report out from the Canadian health something or other. Anyway, they looked at the sodium content of fast food and packaged food. The amount of salt in things like Burger King onion rings, or Kellogg's cereal were dramatically higher in Canada than in the US or UK. None of the companies wanted to speak on camera, but one put out a letter saying that nutritional contents are adjusted to regional tastes.

It reminded me of the report leaked from the tobacco companies that they used to adjust nicotine levels up and down to get people hooked on more cigarettes. They would lower it to have people have to smoke more to get the same "buzz" and once they were used to smoking a whole pack a day instead of half a pack, they'd up the nicotine level to get them hooked on a higher amount.

[kenrockthefirst]

The larger issue is the way of life we lead in the 21st century. How many families eat at least one meal a day together? How many of those meals are prepared using whole foods, i.e. things with a recognizable plant or animal origin?

Several excellent books on the topic, in addition to the one mentioned above:

[url="http://www.amazon.com/Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History-Meals/dp/0143038583/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248452441&sr=1-1"]The Omnivore's Dilemma[/url]
[url="http://www.amazon.com/Defense-Food-Eaters-Manifesto/dp/0143114964/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248452470&sr=1-2"]In Defense of Food[/url]
[url="http://www.amazon.com/Animal-Vegetable-Miracle-Year-Food/dp/0060852569/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248452499&sr=1-1"]Animal, Vegetable, Miracle[/url]
[url="http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Food-Nation-Eric-Schlosser/dp/0060838582/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248452529&sr=1-1"]Fast Food Nation[/url]

Indirectly related to the topic:

[url="http://www.amazon.com/Spark-Revolutionary-Science-Exercise-Brain/dp/0316113506"]Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain[/url]

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='StColette' post='1930529' date='Jul 24 2009, 10:10 AM']There are exceptions My niece and I have very similar eating habits. We're definitely grazers. Several small meals a day because I can't eat regular sized meals.[/quote]
i know you understand exceptions. I'm sorry if I sounded accusatory. I have had to defend my children's eating habits on more than one occasion (one situation was especially ugly). My children have a high metabolism... they eat many mini-meals often. So, when the neighbor hears that my dd had "a tomato" for lunch, she shouldn't consider calling CPS on me because my poor skinny little dd had to scrounge around and could only find a tomato to eat... she should take into consideration that two hours prior, my dd had peanut butter and crackers and in another hour or two she'll have a big glass of milk and a peach. I used to hear often that I should not give my children snacks-- just let them get good and hungry and then they will eat good "proper" meals. It just does not work like that for us. The only seriously "proper" meal we eat is supper. (And don't worry about breakfasts, we usually get two around here...)