Another step towards a state run nation

The child is not in current danger YET of obesity-related medical complications. The state just decided that the mother was guilty of "neglect" for failing to manage his weight and took him away.

Welcome to Nanny America.

 

We're on the downhill side of that slope.

 

And everybody knows, going downhill is faster.

So where does it end? If a kid is 50 pounds overweight? 20 pounds? What if the kid isn't fat but his BMI doesn't look good? Who determines it, and where will they draw the line?

By the way, who gives the state the "AUTHORITY" to do this? Was it voted on by the people?

 

What a load of rhetoric!

A normal 8 year old should be around 60lbs. The list of the detriments to this child’s health through poor parenting is exhaustive, long lasting and is unconscionable for a parent to allow. To neglect a child’s diet to the point of allowing off the charts morbid obesity should be considered criminal neglect just as purposely starving a child would be.

Everybody always jumps on the supposed taboo about the mere mentioning of the unhealthiness if it dare concerns obesity, and this phenomenon is at the roots of the problems as to why our society has gotten into the condition it is in! It’s about time this society recognizes that this is a serious problem that needs to be addressed and stops sticking their heads in hole!

 

CPS is behind this one. Somehow, CPS has no real authority over them to watch for over zealousness. Bush jr vowed to correct this but it got buried in congress somewhere. It's only starting.

 

Benjamin, I agree there may be parts of this story we are missing about this mother and her child.

I get nervous when people talk about what should be "normal" for someone. My youngest dd weighed over 10 pounds at birth and has always been at the top of, or "off" the charts for height and weight. She also struggles with ADHD, food allergies, and an addiction/craving to sugar. I've had to eliminate certain sweets and still catch her in the pantry eating plain sugar with a spoon on occasion. That doesn't make me a bad mother, and so help anyone who dared try to take her from me! Her doctor knows all about this and we're in the process of testing my child to see what's going on.

From what the article says, this little boy was removed from his home simply because of his SIZE. That's very disturbing to me, because that's a very drastic step for something that could have been handled in a much better way. Perhaps the mom needs education or help with meal planning, or maybe the boy has a thyroid problem. It's possible his mom is unmarried and struggling to make ends meet and is buying too much fast food. There's lots of variables there that should have been taken into consideration before the boy was taken from his mom.

 

You are right. Obesity is the most popular sin in America at this time in our history. I have heard some obese people use the same argument that some women use for abortions, "It is my body and I have the right to do with it as I wish." Does that right extend to their children? "It is my child and I can treat them as I wish and that includes gorssly overfeeding them.

This story reminds me of an incident when I was a kid. There was a women I knew who had a son who needed an operation to correct a problem with his aorta. She refused giving her consent saying, "I am afraid he will die." So, no operation and her son died of the faulty aorta at about age 7. That, to me, was negligence. The same is true, IMHO, of the mother in the OP. It brings up the question, when does the child's right to a healthy life become more important the the right of a parent to keep the child? Tough question in my mind.

 

"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body," (1 Cor. 6:19-20).

Destroying your body through obesity is a sin as shown above. You are destroying a holy temple. The Holy Spirit lives in that temple and it is a sin to harm where the HS lives.

Are you saying a parent has the right to treat or mistreat their child in any way they want and no one should be able to do anything about it?

 

Obesity is not a sin. It is the RESULT of sin. HUGE difference. Getting a ticket isn't a sin, it's just the RESULT of speeding.

So, if you think children should automatically be removed from their homes simply because of their size, do you also think children should be removed if their parents smoke? After all, smoking is defiling the parents' bodies and the child's air supply. Should kids be removed if they are allergic to dogs and the parents refuse to give up the family pet? What if the parents are Christians and object to their daughters getting the gardasil shot?

Don't you understand where this is going?

 

Here we see the inconststency of liberals. One poster here thinks it's bad parenting, and supports fat kids being taken away from parents. yet the parent who lets a tooth infection kill their kid gets a pass, and the state gets the blame.

 

Yes! And we should allow the state honchos to come in and weigh our kids at random. They should control everything we do. What we eat, what we watch, and we can add these to the fact they want to control what we think.

 

But of course. This is how they operate.

 

"The Holy Spirit lives in that temple and it is a sin to harm where the HS lives."

I knew it God DOES sin -- every time He takes a believer home!!!!

 

Oh man! Did I ever cross the line on this one. How dare I be so irrational to submit that this can become a serious enough problem for the “state” to intervene in the parenting of a perfectly responsible and ethical provider.

I’ve been shown here through the many rational comparisons that it certainly wouldn’t be on the same level to compare the health deficits of inadequate diet to the health deficits due to gross morbid obesity as being equally neglectful and harmful to a child. To take action against a “parent” who knowingly neglects a child’s diet so that they are skin and bones and slowly deteriorating due to nutritional deficits is perfectly acceptable, but I should have known better than to dare make my taboo comparisons to the other side of that coin! Guess my point was clearly made invalid and you told me!

And further, I forgot all about the rationale that the child is not imminent danger “YET”! …Nanny America supporting liberal that I am. :tear:

I probably even missed the fact that this “parent” had took her 200lb 8 year old child to the doctor for medication to treat for the life threatening sleep apnea has unquestionably PROVED that she was being a concerned and responsible parent all along and the state is just being overzealous.

Sheesh, I shoulda known that gross morbid obesity is rarely ever due to a lack of responsibility of the parent, could be a thyroid problem, or they were born that way, or it is due to sugar addiction, or maybe just being forced into buying too much fast because of social status.

Darn! I’ve even exposed my party alignments because it’s a common inconsistency in one’s political view, which automatically places one in the liberal camp to consider…err “think” that the long term raising of one’s child onto gross morbid obesity before the age of 8 years old as neglectful…err, I mean “bad” parenting and at the same time would not be an advocate of criminalizing the parent whose child dies from a tooth infection.

Finally, my Biblical interpretation skills are sorely lacking because gluttony doesn’t ever pertain to over-indulgence of “food” and therefore it is certainly not a “sin” (missing the mark) to lack self-control when it comes to eating.

I’ve been pinned down because there’s no other logical outcome to this than to just start accepting that all overweight children should be removed from their home. It has started.

I get it now. :tonofbricks:

 

Good try at mis-information. The parent tried by going to a number of dentists. None would work on the child's tooth. All refused as they did not believe the state would pay them enough.

Read it again, the parent tried to get help for the child. The dentists refused! Why? Because they believed they would receive too small a payment to bother performing a relatively simply procedure on the child.

In case you forgot:

http://mouthdoctor.net/braininfection.cfm