Harvard Researchers Want Fat Kids Taken From Their Parents

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]Would allowing your child to smoke be abuse? Like I've said, being morbidly obese has been shown to be as bad as smoking a pack a day.

and yes, doing something to your child that is going to cause long term health and psychological probems is abuse. Theses children will have dramatically shortened lives and have lower qualities of life on top of that.

Also, Walmart, Kroger? Those things are everywhere.

DJ-Lafleur

No. Because that'd be the fault of his peers, not his parents. Parents can't control what Johnny's peers do, or atleast it's much harder to handle.

What dinner the kids eat everyday is something the parents are on control of however.

Rofl...Harvard...what a bunch of crackhead ****tard idiots. These sorts of ludicrous ideas are what you get when you put together a bunch of state-funded "professors" who couldn't hack it in the private sector, and let them endlessly "think" and "research" without any sort of reality check. They will inevitably "think" and "research" their way to the conclusions they want to come to.

Communistik

Also underminding there ability to make it in the private sector is rediculus, a Ph.D. from harvard would easily get you a100k a year or better job.

On top of that you don't seem to understand how studies work, "think" there way to a conclusion? Give a break, you need to read about how studies are produced.

Half of validictorians at their high schools are turned away from Harvard every year, that should tell you how selective they are.

Also underminding there ability to make it in the private sector is rediculus, a Ph.D. from harvard would easily get you a100k a year or better job.

On top of that you don't seem to understand how studies work, "think" there way to a conclusion? Give a break, you need to read about how studies are produced.

CaveJohnson1

A PhD doesn't guarantee you a job. Not anymore.

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

That's not abuse. That's called spoiling your child. Just because you say it's abuse, doesn't make it so. If that was the case, none of us would ever lose an argument.

Nothing is that cheap around here, especially in the inner-city areas.

LJS9502_basic

and yes, doing something to your child that is going to cause long term health and psychological probems is abuse. Theses children will have dramatically shortened lives and have lower qualities of life on top of that.

Also, Walmart, Kroger? Those things are everywhere.

[QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] So if Johnny picks up smoking from his peers....he should be removed from the home?LJS9502_basic

No. Because that'd be the fault of his peers, not his parents. Parents can't control what Johnny's peers do, or atleast it's much harder to handle.

What dinner the kids eat everyday is something the parents are on control of however.

Well if the parents realize that Johnny has a problem and try to do something to stop and help him then no he shouldn't be removed.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]

No. Because that'd be the fault of his peers, not his parents. Parents can't control what Johnny's peers do, or atleast it's much harder to handle.

What dinner the kids eat everyday is something the parents are on control of however.

DJ-Lafleur

Well if the parents realize that Johnny has a problem and try to do something to stop and help him then no he shouldn't be removed.

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

Would allowing your child to smoke be abuse? Like I've said, being morbidly obese has been shown to be as bad as smoking a pack a day.

and yes, doing something to your child that is going to cause long term health and psychological probems is abuse. Theses children will have dramatically shortened lives and have lower qualities of life on top of that.

Also, Walmart, Kroger? Those things are everywhere.

airshocker

And if he smokes without his parents knowing? This doesn't correlate at all, a kid can't be fat without his parents noticing, it's sort of obvious. Should he be removed from his home then? What about the mental trauma of removing a child from their home? Compared to what they're going through physically, I really doubt it would be worse, just look at some of those 2 year olds that weight 70 lbs, that's terrible.

Can you prove that someone being borderline obese won't live longer than someone that is healthy? Have you ever read a study on obesity ever? This seems so common sense I can't believe I have to site a source childhood obesity has been linked to 2 times the average mortality rate before the age of average lif expectancy. We see that every day. A perfectly fit person dying of a heart attack, and someone who is morbidly obese living into their 90s. Perfectly fit person dying of a heart attack and a morbidly obese person dying in their 90's, I'm not gonna claim to be a cardiologist/oncologist here, but the correlation between obesisty and disease and shortened life is very very obvious.If somebody has a heart attack, something was wrong, and nobody who is morbidly obeses lives that long outside of case examples.

Not all Walmarts sell food. The only one in my county is right next to a supermarket, the supermarket has higher prices, but it has everything. I have heard of this problem in inner cities, but even beyond food, exercise can solve most of the problem of weight, something that can be enforced by competent parents. and there are healthier options out there, like the one I mentioned of Wheat being cheaper than white bread.

You don't get to make the determination of how a parent raises their child. No matter how much you want to. The state should in cases of extreme neglect or abuse, as much as you don't seem to care about neglected or abused children.

debating this another study

disturbs me. seriously, these things aren't hard to find at all.

Childhood obesity has been linked to a loss of as many as 20 or more years of life, and that's just the norm, the cases I showed has children so obese that it makes your average case of morbid obesity look like an anorexic. How bad will it be for those kids. Will they live to be 40? Studies say, probably not.

This seems so clear cut that I feel like anti-government rhetoric may be getting in the way of common sense.

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

Half of validictorians at their high schools are turned away from Harvard every year, that should tell you how selective they are.

Also underminding there ability to make it in the private sector is rediculus, a Ph.D. from harvard would easily get you a100k a year or better job.

On top of that you don't seem to understand how studies work, "think" there way to a conclusion? Give a break, you need to read about how studies are produced.

airshocker

A PhD doesn't guarantee you a job. Not anymore.

Sooo you're saying my PhD. in Basket Weaving is useless? HA...riiiight.

[QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] But Johnny is still a minor child to his parents. And as such has picked up a bad habit while in the care of his parents. Using the Harvard logic...Johnny should be removed from his home.

LJS9502_basic

Well if the parents realize that Johnny has a problem and try to do something to stop and help him then no he shouldn't be removed.

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

Half of validictorians at their high schools are turned away from Harvard every year, that should tell you how selective they are.

Also underminding there ability to make it in the private sector is rediculus, a Ph.D. from harvard would easily get you a100k a year or better job.

On top of that you don't seem to understand how studies work, "think" there way to a conclusion? Give a break, you need to read about how studies are produced.

SpartanMSU

A PhD doesn't guarantee you a job. Not anymore.

Sooo you're saying my PhD. in Basket Weaving is useless? HA...riiiight.

especially from a school like harvard.

[QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] But Johnny is still a minor child to his parents. And as such has picked up a bad habit while in the care of his parents. Using the Harvard logic...Johnny should be removed from his home.

LJS9502_basic

Well if the parents realize that Johnny has a problem and try to do something to stop and help him then no he shouldn't be removed.

It's quite rare for genetics to be the factor for obesity though. in most cases it bad eating habits.

When on the issue of taking away fat kids from parents, the amount of "Fat" would have to be extremely unhealthy/life-threatening, and also the kids would have to be young and not teens with jobs or whatever and their own income who can eat as much as they want and feed themselves no matter what their parents do.

At a young age the major source for food is their parents, that plus kids aren't as aware or as concerned with the consequences of bad eating habits as older people, so whatever their eating habits are are dependant on the parent. If a kid start getting fatter and fatter, and the parents do alter the way they feed their kid and attempt to help them lose weight, theen yes, the parents are fine. but if they don't help it, andd the kids only get fatter and fatter, it won't be long until that fat turns into obesity, and then for that obesity to put the kid's life at risk. If a child is at that point, then cleearly the parents were being neglectful or incompetant, after all you don't just go from a skinny/healthy shape to an obese/life-threatening weight in a short amount of time. There is a progression; a progression a parent should be able to recognize.

It would be unfortunate if a child were to be seperated from it's parents and home, but at the same time if the "parenting" that goes on in said home is putting the kid's life in danger and nothing is improving after a long while, then the parents are failing as parents to keep them safe and something clearly needs to be done.

i agree we should put all fat kids in detention camps,

Its disgusting what they do to their bodies

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]

Well if the parents realize that Johnny has a problem and try to do something to stop and help him then no he shouldn't be removed.

CaveJohnson1

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]

Well if the parents realize that Johnny has a problem and try to do something to stop and help him then no he shouldn't be removed.

DJ-Lafleur

It's quite rare for genetics to be the factor for obesity though. in most cases it bad eating habits.

When on the issue of taking away fat kids from parents, the amount of "Fat" would have to be extremely unhealthy/life-threatening, and also the kids would have to be young and not teens with jobs or whatever and their own income who can eat as much as they want and feed themselves no matter what their parents do.

At a young age the major source for food is their parents, that plus kids aren't as aware or as concerned with the consequences of bad eating habits as older people, so whatever their eating habits are are dependant on the parent. If a kid start getting fatter and fatter, and the parents do alter the way they feed their kid and attempt to help them lose weight, theen yes, the parents are fine. but if they don't help it, andd the kids only get fatter and fatter, it won't be long until that fat turns into obesity, and then for that obesity to put the kid's life at risk. If a child is at that point, then cleearly the parents were being neglectful or incompetant, after all you don't just go from a skinny/healthy shape to an obese/life-threatening weight in a short amount of time. There is a progression; a progression a parent should be able to recognize.

It would be unfortunate if a child were to be seperated from it's parents and home, but at the same time if the "parenting" that goes on in said home is putting the kid's life in danger and nothing is improving after a long while, then the parents are failing as parents to keep them safe and something clearly needs to be done.

The percentage of obesity that can be attributed to genetics varies widely, depending on the population examined, from 6% to 85%. --Yang W, Kelly T, He J (2007). "Genetic epidemiology of obesity".

85% seems rather high to me....

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] And perhaps the parents are trying to help their obese child.....genetics does play a part in obesity. Not just diet and exercise.LJS9502_basic

Other than that, I really don't know if much should be done.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]That's only true about 3% of the time, and a doctor could veryify this to the gov't.

CaveJohnson1

Other than that, I really don't know if much should be done.

And this opens the door to government raising children. Eat too much...lose your home. Play too many games...lose your home. Watch too much TV...lose your home. Etc. It's not governments job to take over the care of children because they don't like what mom and dad are doing....absent abuse or neglect of course.

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Very altruistic of you to want to step in and provide the money for the care of children....but that would do more harm than good. One thing children need is their parents...not strangers.LJS9502_basic

Other than that, I really don't know if much should be done.

I understand that weight is a continual spectrum and classification would be hard, but I don't see it being impossible. I'm not a doctor, but I'm sure some scale could be created, maybe something along the lines of weight being 2x the norm or something.

you edited your post; I agree, it's not the gov'ts job to completely rule on childs being raised, but in cases of neglect/abuse, like some of the children I've shown, something has to be done.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]I'd only support it in extreme cases.

Other than that, I really don't know if much should be done.

CaveJohnson1

I understand that weight is a continual spectrum and classification would be hard, but I don't see it being impossible. I'm not a doctor, but I'm sure some scale could be created, maybe something along the lines of weight being 2x the norm or something.

you edited your post; I agree, it's not the gov'ts job to completely rule on childs being raised, but in cases of neglect/abuse, like some of the children I've shown, something has to be done.

Edit: I credited the numbers earlier in one of my posts.

[QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] And perhaps the parents are trying to help their obese child.....genetics does play a part in obesity. Not just diet and exercise.LJS9502_basic

It's quite rare for genetics to be the factor for obesity though. in most cases it bad eating habits.

When on the issue of taking away fat kids from parents, the amount of "Fat" would have to be extremely unhealthy/life-threatening, and also the kids would have to be young and not teens with jobs or whatever and their own income who can eat as much as they want and feed themselves no matter what their parents do.

At a young age the major source for food is their parents, that plus kids aren't as aware or as concerned with the consequences of bad eating habits as older people, so whatever their eating habits are are dependant on the parent. If a kid start getting fatter and fatter, and the parents do alter the way they feed their kid and attempt to help them lose weight, theen yes, the parents are fine. but if they don't help it, andd the kids only get fatter and fatter, it won't be long until that fat turns into obesity, and then for that obesity to put the kid's life at risk. If a child is at that point, then cleearly the parents were being neglectful or incompetant, after all you don't just go from a skinny/healthy shape to an obese/life-threatening weight in a short amount of time. There is a progression; a progression a parent should be able to recognize.

It would be unfortunate if a child were to be seperated from it's parents and home, but at the same time if the "parenting" that goes on in said home is putting the kid's life in danger and nothing is improving after a long while, then the parents are failing as parents to keep them safe and something clearly needs to be done.

The percentage of obesity that can be attributed to genetics varies widely, depending on the population examined, from 6% to 85%. --Yang W, Kelly T, He J (2007). "Genetic epidemiology of obesity".

85% seems rather high to me....

For one it seems that the results vary widely from population to population, meaning that the 85% doesn't exactly apply to everywhere. We shouldn't ignore the 6% in this statistic. For all we know there may be more cases where it's closer 6% than 85%.

The frequency of genetics in obesity beside, not all cases are of genetics, clearly. in cases where the obesity is from bad eating habits enforced from the parents, that's what this whole issue is focusing on, I believe. Sure, in cases where the obesity is about genetics, then that changes things, but even then that doesn't mean that bad parenting might not be at play, after all there's nothing saying that ALL the weight could be genetic; extra weight could be added on top of the genetic weight from bad eating habits, making a child fatter than thye genetically should be.

And in the many cases of childhood obesity where genetics AREN'T in play, bad parenting totally takes a part in it. If a parent truly loves their child and cares for their future, they would try to make sure there children are healthy, and if this happens a child shouldn't be able to reach such dangerous levels of fat. if eating habits are proving to be unhealthy, a good parent will alter it. If they don't do this and just neglect the issue, the kid will become unhealthily fat in time, and that will put the child's future in jeopardy.

Why should a child stay in ahousehold where their needs and future are neglected?

For one it seems that the results vary widely from population to population, meaning that the 85% doesn't exactly apply to everywhere. We shouldn't ignore the 6% in this statistic. For all we know there may be more cases where it's closer 6% than 85%.

The frequency of genetics in obesity beside, not all cases are of genetics, clearly. in cases where the obesity is from bad eating habits enforced from the parents, that's what this whole issue is focusing on, I believe. Sure, in cases where the obesity is about genetics, then that changes things, but even then that doesn't mean that bad parenting might not be at play, after all there's nothing saying that ALL the weight could be genetic; extra weight could be added on top of the genetic weight from bad eating habits, making a child fatter than thye genetically should be.

And in the many cases of childhood obesity where genetics AREN'T in play, bad parenting totally takes a part in it. If a parent truly loves their child and cares for their future, they would try to make sure there children are healthy, and if this happens a child shouldn't be able to reach such dangerous levels of fat. if eating habits are proving to be unhealthy, a good parent will alter it. If they don't do this and just neglect the issue, the kid will become unhealthily fat in time, and that will put the child's future in jeopardy.

Why should a child stay in ahousehold where their needs and future are neglected?

DJ-Lafleur

Genetics DOES change things. Look at parents who are doing all they can to give their child a proper diet and exercise. Because the government/medical field now deem obesity to result in parents losing their children (if this scenario played out hypothetically) and vice versa....then the reason isn't important. Big brother has deemed obesity means loss of parental rights. Perioid. Do you think this is fair to the child or the parents? After all because alcoholism is now considered a disease individuals can collect disability pay while they feed their habit. So on one hand the government is rewarding bad health choices and now you want them to punish bad health choices....which may be genetic in nature?

Then too, poor familiies tend to eat less healthy food because it keeps the family from being hungry. So now we are punishing the poor.

Second....government has mandated exercise programs in school. These are not working apparently. So you want to give government more power?

If we want to take children for obesity from parents then the government has the right to restrict videogames, TV, and computers....after all these do not burn calories. Unless you have motion control in the games. But that would restrict what games you can play. Do we really want the government to tell us what we can do?

This doesn't correlate at all, a kid can't be fat without his parents noticing, it's sort of obvious.Compared to what they're going through physically, I really doubt it would be worse, just look at some of those 2 year olds that weight 70 lbs, that's terrible.

Have you ever read a study on obesity ever? This seems so common sense I can't believe I have to site a source childhood obesity has been linked to 2 times the average mortality rate before the age of average lif expectancy. I'm not gonna claim to be a cardiologist/oncologist here, but the correlation between obesisty and disease and shortened life is very very obvious.If somebody has a heart attack, something was wrong, and nobody who is morbidly obeses lives that long outside of case examples.

I have heard of this problem in inner cities, but even beyond food, exercise can solve most of the problem of weight, something that can be enforced by competent parents. and there are healthier options out there, like the one I mentioned of Wheat being cheaper than white bread.

The state should in cases of extreme neglect or abuse, as much as you don't seem to care about neglected or abused children.

You actually study

debating this another study

disturbs me. seriously, these things aren't hard to find at all.

Childhood obesity has been linked to a loss of as many as 20 or more years of life, and that's just the norm, the cases I showed has children so obese that it makes your average case of morbid obesity look like an anorexic. How bad will it be for those kids. Will they live to be 40? Studies say, probably not.

This seems so clear cut that I feel like anti-government rhetoric may be getting in the way of common sense.

CaveJohnson1

We were talking about smoking in that first point. Either answer the actual question or don't talk to me. You aren't a doctor, or even a psychologist. How do you know what's better or worse for a child? Obviously removing a child from their home if they don't want to leave will be traumatic.

Nobody who is morbidly obese lives that long? So you know every single obese person?

Parents who are busy trying to provide for their families, parents who are working more than one job, can't make sure their child exercises.

I care about actual neglected or abused children. Feeding your child junk food is neither. Unless it became a law while I wasn't watching, you can't arrest parents for feeding their children junk food.

This isn't clear cut. You don't get to decide how people live their life or how parents raise their children. It's that simple. And, thankfully, you never will.

Since school is mandatory,how about just making PE/PT/Wellness (or whatever you call it) actually physically challenging? Or make school lunches a little healthier? I don't see why such drastic measures have to be taken when there are simple solutions.

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

This doesn't correlate at all, a kid can't be fat without his parents noticing, it's sort of obvious.Compared to what they're going through physically, I really doubt it would be worse, just look at some of those 2 year olds that weight 70 lbs, that's terrible.

Have you ever read a study on obesity ever? This seems so common sense I can't believe I have to site a source childhood obesity has been linked to 2 times the average mortality rate before the age of average lif expectancy. I'm not gonna claim to be a cardiologist/oncologist here, but the correlation between obesisty and disease and shortened life is very very obvious.If somebody has a heart attack, something was wrong, and nobody who is morbidly obeses lives that long outside of case examples.

I have heard of this problem in inner cities, but even beyond food, exercise can solve most of the problem of weight, something that can be enforced by competent parents. and there are healthier options out there, like the one I mentioned of Wheat being cheaper than white bread.

The state should in cases of extreme neglect or abuse, as much as you don't seem to care about neglected or abused children.

You actually study

debating this another study

disturbs me. seriously, these things aren't hard to find at all.

Childhood obesity has been linked to a loss of as many as 20 or more years of life, and that's just the norm, the cases I showed has children so obese that it makes your average case of morbid obesity look like an anorexic. How bad will it be for those kids. Will they live to be 40? Studies say, probably not.

This seems so clear cut that I feel like anti-government rhetoric may be getting in the way of common sense.

airshocker

We were talking about smoking in that first point. Either answer the actual question or don't talk to me. You aren't a doctor, or even a psychologist. How do you know what's better or worse for a child? Obviously removing a child from their home if they don't want to leave will be traumatic.

Nobody who is morbidly obese lives that long? So you know every single obese person? Can you cite one person that has? Like I said, I'm not a doctor, but I have at least the basic understanding that excess body mass is rough on the body. This is so simple that I can't believe that you're tying to argue this point, this is something anybody who has ever read or heard anything on being overweight, knows.What's the logic in this argument that because a disproportionately low number of obeses people grow to be old that childhood neglect is OK? There's no connection here at all.

Parents who are busy trying to provide for their families, parents who are working more than one job, can't make sure their child exercises.

I care about actual neglected or abused children. Feeding your child junk food is neither. Unless it became a law while I wasn't watching, you can't arrest parents for feeding their children junk food.

This isn't clear cut. You don't get to decide how people live their life or how parents raise their children. It's that simple. And, thankfully, you never will.

Think that in extreme cases of obesity where the parents are obviously incompetent or encourage bad health patterns are destroying their kids. Morbid obesity throughout childhood shortens lifespan by about 20 years, some of the extreme cases I've cited probably take off 30 or more. If you don't think causing a person to literally live 20 to 30 years less with health problems, social and mental problems all associated with a parents neglect then I don't think you have the slightest idea of what neglect or abuse are.

Saving a child from that is going to help alot more than anything they could get from being taken away, if you disagree show me one study that says removing kids from their parents causes their lifeapsn to decress by 20 years, that they'll endure more social torture than if they had gone through life morbidly obeses. One.

I think this sums up their research plan quite well.

Starting in the right place (assign blame to the parents) but I don't think anyone's gonna win if you do this.

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"]

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]I actually agree with this. gameguy6700

Yes because the foster system has time and time again proven how child friendly it is.

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"][QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"]Ok, so you swoop in and take these kids away from their parents (undoubtedly traumatizing the heck out of 'em)..... and then do what with the kids?

October_Tide

Yes because the foster system has time and time again proven how child friendly it is.

[QUOTE="October_Tide"]

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"] Give them to foster parents that will actually take care of them properly? Like I said, if your kid is obese you've proven yourself to be an incompetent, neglectful parent and considering the long term health effects I'd say it is child abuse to let your kid be obese.Nibroc420

Yes because the foster system has time and time again proven how child friendly it is.

True, they may not be fed at all.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="October_Tide"]

Yes because the foster system has time and time again proven how child friendly it is.

October_Tide

True, they may not be fed at all.

Blubber is the primary storage location of fat on some mammals. It is particularly important for species that feed and breed in different parts of the ocean. During these periods, the animals metabolize a fat.

[QUOTE="October_Tide"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] At least they wont be fed 2 Buckets of KFC per meal, and might learn how to live a healthier life.Nibroc420

True, they may not be fed at all.

Blubber is the primary storage location of fat on some mammals. It is particularly important for species that feed and breed in different parts of the ocean. During these periods, the animals metabolize a fat.

Ah I see, all good then. As long as they have their own fat stores to live off, they should be fine :P

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="October_Tide"]

True, they may not be fed at all.

October_Tide

Blubber is the primary storage location of fat on some mammals. It is particularly important for species that feed and breed in different parts of the ocean. During these periods, the animals metabolize a fat.

Ah I see, all good then. As long as they have their own fat stores to live off, they should be fine :P

I was worried someone might find it offensive :lol:

Its up to the parent to decide whats best for their child, to an extent of course. Making your kid fat is just bad for both parent and child in the long (and short) run, but its not like abuse or anything. There are a lot of fat people, but its not like they can't get healthy with a little effort. This is definitely an extreme measure, and its not going to stop bad parents from being bad parents.

Plus I don't think having a fat kid means you are a bad parent, there are a very wide swath of reasons for a kid being fat. Genetics, sneaking food, etc. Not always the parent's fault.

Being taken away from parents is a bit harsh. However there should be repercussions, like court-ordered exercise and diet programs if your child goes on to be obese. You are harming your children if you let your kids get that big, it's a form of child abuse IMO.

Its up to the parent to decide whats best for their child, to an extent of course. Making your kid fat is just bad for both parent and child in the long (and short) run, but its not like abuse or anything. There are a lot of fat people, but its not like they can't get healthy with a little effort. This is definitely an extreme measure, and its not going to stop bad parents from being bad parents.

Plus I don't think having a fat kid means you are a bad parent, there are a very wide swath of reasons for a kid being fat. Genetics, sneaking food, etc. Not always the parent's fault.

SPYDER0416

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

Its up to the parent to decide whats best for their child, to an extent of course. Making your kid fat is just bad for both parent and child in the long (and short) run, but its not like abuse or anything. There are a lot of fat people, but its not like they can't get healthy with a little effort. This is definitely an extreme measure, and its not going to stop bad parents from being bad parents.

Plus I don't think having a fat kid means you are a bad parent, there are a very wide swath of reasons for a kid being fat. Genetics, sneaking food, etc. Not always the parent's fault.

Nibroc420

Obesity is proven to have genetic factors.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

Its up to the parent to decide whats best for their child, to an extent of course. Making your kid fat is just bad for both parent and child in the long (and short) run, but its not like abuse or anything. There are a lot of fat people, but its not like they can't get healthy with a little effort. This is definitely an extreme measure, and its not going to stop bad parents from being bad parents.

Plus I don't think having a fat kid means you are a bad parent, there are a very wide swath of reasons for a kid being fat. Genetics, sneaking food, etc. Not always the parent's fault.

tenaka2

Obesity is proven to have genetic factors.

Take over internet, TV, and video game access. Reward physical labor from jobs like farming with those activities.

It'll whip those kids into shape easily. Damn I should be a Harvard Reseacher.