If some “experts” have their way…
Childhood obesity could destroy your family
Every day it becomes more and more clear that this free nation is slipping further into socialism than I ever thought I’d see in my time. Case in point: an opinion piece in a recent issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association suggesting that the best solution for solving the problem of childhood obesity is foster care.
That’s right: Put on a few extra pounds, and it’s bye-bye mom and dad; hello Daddy Warbucks.
This isn’t just some far-fetched proposal. It’s already happened to at least three children. One girl——a 400-pound 12-year-old——was taken away from her parents and put into foster care, where her caretakers dutifully give her three square meals a day and make sure she gets moderate physical activity. (Is this foster care or prison?)
She’s lost 130 pounds in a year, and I’m sure the “experts” would consider this example a success. But in a situation like this, success can’t be measured by the number on a scale. That assumes too many things (and you know what they say about people who assume things).
For starters, it assumes that being skinny means being healthy. You and I both know that’s a bunch of hot air. It also assumes that physical health is more important than mental health. (Try dragging a child away from her parents to have her live with strangers, and I guarantee it’ll continue to do a number on her mental and emotional health long after her weight falls into Uncle Sam’s desired range.)
But possibly the biggest assumption of all is this:
Obese children are victims of child abuse
The argument is that the excess weight is literally putting the child in physical danger. After all, overweight kids tend to remain overweight as adults, and at that point, they’re almost guaranteed a one-way ticket to diabetes, heart disease, breathing difficulties, you name it. So in a way, these kids are in mortal danger.
And with that argument, these people technically have the law on their side, as Dr. David Ludwig, obesity specialist at Children’s Hospital Boston, pointed out. That’s because the current law requires health care providers to report children they feel to be in danger——from abuse, neglect, or any other circumstance that would cause a “failure to thrive.”
Talk about leaving things open to interpretation! This law has been so misconstrued that there have been cases of kids being taken away from parents because they were “victims” of spankings! Call me old-fashioned, but I consider parents who spank their kids to be the BEST parents out there. They’re responsible for raising well-behaved, well-mannered, authority-respecting children that go on to become contributing members of society.
It’s the kids who are allowed to run free that become the juvenile delinquents. So you tell me——what’s abuse and what’s not? And whose job is it to determine that?
I don’t mean to get too off topic here, but it all ties in together. The bottom line is that…
State intervention is always a slippery slope
Reasons can always be drummed up to take kids away from their parents. Disagree with a so-called expert, and your kid gets snatched and put with a more responsible (read: brainwashed) adult that is willing to toe Uncle Sam’s line.
Dr. Ludwig is obviously one such adult. How else could you explain this line of reasoning: “State intervention may serve the best interests of many children with life-threatening obesity, comprising the only realistic way to control harmful behaviors.”
Where does it end? Who decides where the overweight bar is set? And what is it based on? And most importantly——who decides the best way to correct the problem? The same organizations that insist on loads of exercise, staying out of the sun, and “going vegetarian”?
Can you see the problem here?
The epidemic of childhood obesity
Is childhood obesity a big fat epidemic? Of course it is! Some estimates say that there are as many as two million extremely obese kids. But to use it as a justification to take kids away from their parents is over the line.
The last I checked, obesity wasn’t a crime (not yet, anyway——but once ObamaCare kicks in, all bets are off). Instead of punishing people for their poor food choices, we should try educating them instead. This is what we should be doing, but I’ll tell you why we aren’t.
Actually, I’ll let Dr. David Orentlicher, co-director of the Hall Center for Law and Health at Indiana University School of Law tell you why: “Sometimes, it is easier to take a child out of the home than take the time and resources to provide the right solution to the problem.”
FINALLY we’ve gotten to the bottom of the matter. It’s all about money. (Isn’t it always?)
Uncle Sam seems all too willing to take on any and every responsibility——whether it’s his to handle or not. And the problem is that too many people are too lazy, uneducated, or uninterested to recognize it for what it is.
This play for more power always comes in the name of protecting the public——and most people fall for this bait hook, line, and sinker. But remember, every time the government gets bigger, your personal freedoms get smaller. You can’t have it both ways.