Should the Government be able to take your kidsw If they think he or s

[marharth]

No...

 

Instead the government should ban or restrict the usage of chemicals linked with obesity, such as high fructose corn syrup, or other harmful dyes/chemicals like Yellow 5, in foods which are aimed towards children. Have you even bothered to read the amount of crap that is in some processed foods?

 

Don't blame parents, blame companies who are using unhealthy methods to produce their products cheaply. You cannot feed a kid, let alone yourself these days without running afoul of known harmful chemicals. When you have 40-50% obesity rates, it is not the work of a few bad parents but is indicative of a problem with the very system.

 

But, the government won't do a darn thing because they're being paid not to. And although Mrs. Obama's "vegie" movement is good and all, it won't do anything as long as the problem still exists. Or maybe they really don't understand/care since it is mostly cheap food that is bad for you.

If certain things are banned from being used in processed food, it will go down to the civilian level.

 

I don't really want a law that restricts certain people from eating certain things.

 

I simply think that the government needs to make people more knowledgeable of what companies put into food.

Edited July 16, 2011 by marharth

[ita]

What about loving your kid for who he is. I don't think the government has any concept of that.

 

Is it an act of love to let your child get so obese that it is directly threatening his/her health?

 

People who lack the parenting skills to take care of their children properly have forfeited the right of being parents.

 

 

Who is to say what is proper? You are talking about a one size fits all mentality. People are not like that!

 

Neglecting your kids health (to the point of them running a real risk of developing diabetes and other associated illnesses due to their obesity) should be considered a form of physical abuse.

 

Sure we can run information campaigns about the dangers of food additives until the heat death of the universe, that doesn't change the fact that some people will always be too apathetic to care and at the end of the day the government will still need to step in and pick up the pieces.

[RZ1029]

And although Mrs. Obama's "vegie" movement is good and all, it won't do anything as long as the problem still exists. Or maybe they really don't understand/care since it is mostly cheap food that is bad for you.

Precisely. It's quite easy to say "eat healthy" as the personal chef brings out the fresh boiled cabbage, Alaskan salmon, mixed vegetables sauteed lightly in the low-fat, low-calorie, low-whatever-else butter for a hint of flavor. If I made a half-million a year and had a personal chef, I would probably eat a heck of a lot better than I do.

 

But, as for the original topic:

I do not think the government should, given their (absolutely wonderful /sarcasm) track record in regards to taking care of children who were taken from their homes because of their parents. That being said, in an ideal world where these kids are removed and given the absolute best caring and loving parents that ever existed, I wouldn't be too object to it, but ONLY when it became a severe medical danger.

 

I am loathe to say yes because I've seen what breaking up families can do to kids, even for (what seems like) a good reason. One of my best friends in high-school was taken from his parents Freshman year because his dad was a severe alcoholic and his mother wouldn't do anything about it. Wasn't an ideal situation, by far, but they were still his parents, and taking a child should be the absolute last, final, completely last-ditch effort, if nothing else has worked.

 

EDIT: Because I got ninja'd, I feel I must address the post immediately before mine:

 

We should break up a family... just to make sure the kid doesn't get diabetes? I'm sorry, I don't follow that logic at all. I'm talking, severely, morbidly, immediately life-threateningly obese.

Edited July 16, 2011 by RZ1029

[kvnchrist]

No...

 

Instead the government should ban or restrict the usage of chemicals linked with obesity, such as high fructose corn syrup, or other harmful dyes/chemicals like Yellow 5, in foods which are aimed towards children. Have you even bothered to read the amount of crap that is in some processed foods?

 

Don't blame parents, blame companies who are using unhealthy methods to produce their products cheaply. You cannot feed a kid, let alone yourself these days without running afoul of known harmful chemicals. When you have 40-50% obesity rates, it is not the work of a few bad parents but is indicative of a problem with the very system.

 

But, the government won't do a darn thing because they're being paid not to. And although Mrs. Obama's "vegie" movement is good and all, it won't do anything as long as the problem still exists. Or maybe they really don't understand/care since it is mostly cheap food that is bad for you.

 

 

Is it the cheapness of the food, or the abundance of the food. I remember back a few years, when I heard this documentary on the breakfast industry. They were discussing the advertisement gimmicks that these companies were running. I noticed that every commercial I saw said the same thing. A HELPFUL PART OF A NUTRITIOUS BREAKFAST, but what they didn't say was that the nutrition value was abysmal. Just look at all the breakfast cereals out there.

[Vagrant0]

If certain things are banned from being used in processed food, it will go down to the civilian level.

 

I don't really want a law that restricts certain people from eating certain things.

 

I simply think that the government needs to make people more knowledgeable of companies put into food.

The government has this wonderful branch that is responsible for ensuring that the things being added to foods are safe for consumption, and placing controls over how much of certain substances can be in a product. They already do this with some stuff, they just don't do it here because there isn't a public outcry and most attempts to inform the public are silenced with these notions of "oh, you must be bad parents then".

 

With consumption and obesity rates as they are, leaving it entirely up to the consumer is wholely impractical. I hear you, you want choices... But I'm not saying to do away with things like fast food or soda, but rather make sure that these nominally unhealthy things aren't being made worse just for the sake of profit. Raw sugar for instance is not only much sweeter, and needs to be used in lower quantities than HFCS, but even in the same quantities, the effect on the body is nowhere near as damaging, but corn syrup is much cheaper than cane sugar.

[Vagrant0]

Just look at all the breakfast cereals out there.

Actually, I do.

 

Most cereals out there these days are fortified with vitamins and minerals and often have more nutritional value than what people serve for dinner. Even the typical "sugary candy sweet" ones. Oddly enough, the ones which seemed to be most nutritionally lacking were ones aimed at adults claiming things like "high fiber". Now while this alone doesn't necessarily say that the cereal is healthy (have to look at ingredients), or that the vitamins or minerals are in a form that is digestible, but the Mythbusters already covered this one. The notion that sugary cereals are bad date back to early days when they actually were compared to say... home cooked meals with fresh ingredients. Since then, within the industry there was a push to make cereals better for kids, and a conversely more and more manufactured foods which are almost void of nutrition short of calories and protien for other meals. Do it yourself, compare the nutritional information on most cereals with those of a vitamin supplement, there are many things which are similar. Do the same with say, a package of prepared pasta, meat, and sauce.

[ita]

We should break up a family... just to make sure the kid doesn't get diabetes? I'm sorry, I don't follow that logic at all. I'm talking, severely, morbidly, immediately life-threateningly obese.

 

As I stated earlier in the thread

 

so obese that it is directly threatening his/her health

 

other associated illnesses

[kvnchrist]

My concern is that such things will become mechanical for the government. That they will try to use a scale,. by some so-called expert that they will use for any child that doesn't fit their guidelines. The government is great at intervening, but seems to have a problem overseeing what goes on after they've intervened. What type of life will the kid go through. Yanked out of the home they are familiar with and stuck in a home or with a foster family.

[marharth]

If certain things are banned from being used in processed food, it will go down to the civilian level.

 

I don't really want a law that restricts certain people from eating certain things.

 

I simply think that the government needs to make people more knowledgeable of companies put into food.

The government has this wonderful branch that is responsible for ensuring that the things being added to foods are safe for consumption, and placing controls over how much of certain substances can be in a product. They already do this with some stuff, they just don't do it here because there isn't a public outcry and most attempts to inform the public are silenced with these notions of "oh, you must be bad parents then".

 

With consumption and obesity rates as they are, leaving it entirely up to the consumer is wholely impractical. I hear you, you want choices... But I'm not saying to do away with things like fast food or soda, but rather make sure that these nominally unhealthy things aren't being made worse just for the sake of profit. Raw sugar for instance is not only much sweeter, and needs to be used in lower quantities than HFCS, but even in the same quantities, the effect on the body is nowhere near as damaging, but corn syrup is much cheaper than cane sugar.

Well a lot of things in food can be considered dangerous, my issue is where people will stop with banning things.

 

I think information campaigns can go a long way to help adults, it is different for children though since they don't make their own choices. Banning certain things won't always help. You would need to ban a lot of things to completely stop health issues.

[grannywils]

Just typed this whole post and deleted it, so will try again....

 

I'm not sure if the OP is serious or not with original question. But the government cannot get out of it's own way, and the question is whether or not it should be able to take away people's children if they are obese? For what purpose? What would they do with said children?

 

I am a dyed in the wool Liberal, and I cannot believe what I am reading. What has happened to all the hue and cry against the government tampering with our personal lives? Vagrant has made some valid points regarding food additives and their restrictions, etc. But even there, we are talking about the government being involved in determining what is or is not good for us.

 

We are perfectly capable of feeding our children properly and teaching them healthy eating and exercise habits. We just need to get off our butts, stop going for the processed junk and spend the necessary time learning what is appropriate and healthy. There are vegetables, fruits, many meats and natural foods that are just as inexpensive as the "processed" foods that keep us addicted and fat.

 

I am a perfect example. I spent my entire life thin, almost bordering on too thin. Then I sort of stopped paying attention, and lo and behold I am now overweight. No one is at fault for this except me. The government didn't do it. I did it. Now I need to get my 65 year old butt up and moving again, and get back into the habit of eating properly. I do not expect the government to help me do that. Think I can figure it out for myself, thank you very much....

 

We hear so much complaining about the governement didn't get this done or that done or is not spending enough time or money on the next thing; and now we are wondering if they should take on the responsibility of seeing to it that our kids are not too fat??? Come on folks... Are we responsible for anything anymore?