Should parents lose custody of super obese kids?

[aGameOfThrones]

CHICAGO – Should parents of extremely obese children lose custody for not controlling their kids' weight? A provocative commentary in one of the nation's most distinguished medical journals argues yes, and its authors are joining a quiet chorus of advocates who say the government should be allowed to intervene in extreme cases.

http://yourlife.usatoday.com/parenting-family/story/2011/07/Should-parents-lose-custody-of-super-obese-kids/49320358/1

[dannno]

God dammit, why can't we just go back to the 90s and send them to fat camp instead?

[brushfire]

Chicago, huh... you dont say?

[aGameOfThrones]

God dammit, why can't we just go back to the 90s and send them to fat camp instead?


Camp hope!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KALgXhyqTZI

[fisharmor]

I love the "should" threads. Haven't yet found a case where "should" is in the title and the answer is "yes".

I just love doctors.
"Hi, we fucked up the market so bad you can't get medicine, then we rubber-stamped this asinine food pyramid which made your kids fat to begin with, and now we'll advocate taking them away. Trust us, we're board certified."

[LibertyEagle]

No. That is crazy.

Children belong with their parents. The government has no claim on them. How ridiculous.

[sailingaway]

No. That is crazy.

Children belong with their parents. The government has no claim on them. How ridiculous.

this^^

[YumYum]

Is it child abuse when a parent feeds his/her kid Twinkies and Ho-Hos for dinner, and the kid weighs 400lbs? My aunt feeds my cousin anything he wants; as much as he wants and he weighs close to 500 lbs. He has an enlarged heart and the doctors say he won't live to be 40.

[Echoes]

The scientific dictatorship at work.

[Dustancostine]

Is it child abuse when a parent feeds his/her kid Twinkies and Ho-Hos for dinner, and the kid weighs 400lbs? My aunt feeds my cousin anything he wants; as much as he wants and he weighs close to 500 lbs. He has an enlarged heart and the doctors say he won't live to be 40.

Then why don't you slap your Aunt upside the head and educate her.

[mczerone]

If this doctor truly, honestly, sincerely thinks this, let him try.

Without the socialist funds of the state at his disposal, he'd never even think that he could go in as a man, even a "learned professional", and start taking kids from unwilling parents.

A responsible doctor that truly cared about the health of children would be giving out/personally subsidizing all-natural/organic/healthy meal options, running charity athletic venues, and volunteering at free/reduced cost children's clinics. But no, he looks to the men with guns.

[YumYum]

Then why don't you slap your Aunt upside the head and educate her.

I have, and she has told me that she can't control him; he drives her "nuts" until he gets his way. She gives in to his screaming and crying.

[mczerone]

Is it child abuse when a parent feeds his/her kid Twinkies and Ho-Hos for dinner, and the kid weighs 400lbs? My aunt feeds my cousin anything he wants; as much as he wants and he weighs close to 500 lbs. He has an enlarged heart and the doctors say he won't live to be 40.

I doubt he's too young to not realize what he's doing. Have you had a conversation with your aunt or your cousin? (answered in last post) Do you support busting their door down, kidnapping your cousin, and forcing him to change? Do you support the state doing so?

[Guitarzan]

I have, and she has told me that she can't control him; he drives her "nuts" until he gets his way. She gives in to his screaming and crying.

Call Supernanny rather than super.gov

[youngbuck]

The scientific dictatorship at work.

Yep, that is exactly it. Same with environmental issues, and every other government action they try to justify via science.

[BlackTerrel]

Is it child abuse when a parent feeds his/her kid Twinkies and Ho-Hos for dinner, and the kid weighs 400lbs? My aunt feeds my cousin anything he wants; as much as he wants and he weighs close to 500 lbs. He has an enlarged heart and the doctors say he won't live to be 40.

You just make stuff up right?

[Carehn]

Im all for more fat kids so long as they are male. This cuts the supply like motorcycle deaths and makes healthy males of appropriate breading age just that much more valuable. I am against fat girls because 80% of them are fat to the extent i would rather has sex with a guy. The supply of girls under 350 pounds is getting very rare these days.

Am just getting sick of all the fat girls. Its like thats all thats left. O well, I bet they have wonderful personality's.

[YumYum]

You just make stuff up right?

No, Black Terrel. She lives in Flower Mound. She is the hoarder, she is the aunt who is fat and smells bad. I would give you her phone number, but Danke has already claimed her. But don't give up, out there is a fat woman of your dreams just dying to meet you.

[Revolution9]

You just make stuff up right?

Probably not. His name is Yum Yum. Liking food alot runs in the family maybe:)

Rev9

[YumYum]

I doubt he's too young to not realize what he's doing. Have you had a conversation with your aunt or your cousin? (answered in last post) Do you support busting their door down, kidnapping your cousin, and forcing him to change? Do you support the state doing so?

"No" to all of the above. He is special, and he is now 23 years old. My aunt would call the police on me if I tried kidnapping him, or she would have my other cousin (her other son) shoot me. I can't interfere in her life without repercussions from the state, or the authorities. I wouldn't call the state. He will most likely die of a massive heart attack.

[Reason]

The other day at the beach my g/f & I were commenting on how many extremely overweight children there were running around spilling out of their bathing suits...

Sad.

[amy31416]

Actually, what should happen is the parent of an obese kid should get custody of about 10 more kids and have to feed them all on the same income--no new benefits or anything.

Let 'em fight over the Twinkies, they'll slim down in a hurry AND get exercise. They'll probably even need to procure some of their own food.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZrgxHvNNUc

God damn, I'm brilliant. Elect me now.

[Slutter McGee]

The state should not intervene unless the life of the child is in danger. Most obese kids are just fat. I don't agree with letting your kid's become fatasses, but so be it. There are so very very few cases where the actual life of the child is in danger that I think this would be a horrible law to pass. You could probably find a way to justify a criminal charge with what we have now if the situation was that severe.

So another horrible fucking law with good intentions. With an absolutely outrageous potential for abuse.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[dejavu22]

All kids should be taken away from their parents when they are born and become property of the state. This way everyone starts from an equal starting point and the government can guarantee that they are properly indoctrinate so that everyone votes for the correct candidates.

I think i just threw up a little in my mouth.

[Freedom 4 all]

Short answer: No
Long answer: NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OO

What the fuck is wrong with these people? They are raising fat kids, so we should STEAL them?! Fat is largely genetic anyways, perhaps not as much as height, but it has at least as much to do with uncontrollable factors as how much we eat. I personally know several severely obese people. These people weigh practically twice as much as I do, but I know for a fact that I pay less attention to my diet and actually eat more.

[affa]

The other day at the beach my g/f & I were commenting on how many extremely overweight children there were running around spilling out of their bathing suits...

Sad.

my wife and i recently had the realization that many 'fat kids' no longer think they're fat... because all their friends are overweight too, as is their family. they're 'normal', thin kids are 'skinny', and only the extremely obese are now 'fat'.

[squarepusher]

ko, how bout this. If kids smoke, should their parents lose custody? Junk food is estimated to be more harmful than tobacco.

[AcousticFoodie]

my wife and i recently had the realization that many 'fat kids' no longer think they're fat... because all their friends are overweight too, as is their family. they're 'normal', thin kids are 'skinny', and only the extremely obese are now 'fat'.

In the 90s I bought medium sized clothes. Now I have to move down to small because the mediums out today are really the large of yesterday.Clothing manufactuers make people think they are skinny when they buy their clothing line so they will come back. Ridiculous.

[Carehn]

my wife and i recently had the realization that many 'fat kids' no longer think they're fat... because all their friends are overweight too, as is their family. they're 'normal', thin kids are 'skinny', and only the extremely obese are now 'fat'.

They have even started using fatty's in the movies and on TV more. But they no longer play the role of the fat boy, just a role like normal.

[aGameOfThrones]

They have even started using fatty's in the movies and on TV more. But they no longer play the role of the fat boy, just a role like normal.


I know what you mean.

http://images.dailydawdle.com/stupid-guys.jpg

http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/image/article/842/842399/hero-showdown-homer-simpson-vs-peter-griffin-20071218060723409-000.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_5hDFu2z_gtY/TH2HBgSzT8I/AAAAAAAAAQ0/pMkTvhPEFk0/s1600/peter_griffin_demotivational_exercise_fat.jpg

[Andrew-Austin]

Im all for more fat kids so long as they are male. This cuts the supply like motorcycle deaths and makes healthy males of appropriate breading age just that much more valuable. I am against fat girls because 80% of them are fat to the extent i would rather has sex with a guy. The supply of girls under 350 pounds is getting very rare these days.

Am just getting sick of all the fat girls. Its like thats all thats left. O well, I bet they have wonderful personality's.

Hah, those mirror my less serious thoughts on this topic.

But as to my more serious thoughts, it would be much better if these people (who sit by watching their kids become morbidly obese) realized they were not qualified to be parents before they went off and fucked without a condemn. But since they did, it would be better for them to get new parents/guardians. Except most parents suck, so really there is no where for these neglected super-obese kids to go to. They certainly wouldn't be in better custody in the hands of the state. At the moment this is just one of those fucked up issues where practically the only thing we can do is shrug our soldiers and say "the world is a fucked up place".



my wife and i recently had the realization that many 'fat kids' no longer think they're fat... because all their friends are overweight too, as is their family. they're 'normal', thin kids are 'skinny', and only the extremely obese are now 'fat'.

Yeah I'm skinny skinny, as in genetically predisposed to be skinny, as in its as hard for me to gain weight than it is for endomorphs to loose weight.

And sometimes I do get the vibe that I'm part of the new "fat crowd", that skinny is the new fat, that its the new abnormality.

[amyre]

Actually, what should happen is the parent of an obese kid should get custody of about 10 more kids and have to feed them all on the same income--no new benefits or anything.

Let 'em fight over the Twinkies, they'll slim down in a hurry AND get exercise. They'll probably even need to procure some of their own food.

God damn, I'm brilliant. Elect me now.

:D

[AlexAmore]

I think some of the heavy hitters of this forum are using flawed arguments concerning this. Too much property rights mindset going on.

Obese children are a major risk to getting diabetes and life threatening illnesses now and in the future. They do have a shortened lifespan, they get bullied and consider and attempt suicide. Sure there is marketing, and peer pressure, but a parent's role is to raise a child, and if they can't then they CAN'T. I'm sure we can agree that she should never have had the child in the first place, so why are we so hesitant to remove a 500lb 15 year old AFTER the damage has been done?

We remove children all the time for things like torture, rape...etc. Can we agree that it's correct to do so? So then doesn't that mean we don't own children as our property? So then doesn't that mean children have right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Of course. The problem is they don't necessarily have all the faculties needed to live, but that doesn't mean you own them as property by default. That argument cannot be made logically. So they need to live, and learn to live and that's where parents come in. Parents have responsibility to care for their children without jeopardizing the child's health. It was the parent's choice to bring them in, not the child's. Now they must deal with the responsibility, find someone else, or get them taken away if they are abusive. This is like how we would expect the government to react if I was abusing a grown adult except I would be taken away because the grown adult can presumably take care of themselves whereas a child may not. That's the only difference.

Children resemble property but that's impossible because they have freedoms. Parents are legally responsible for taking care of children. So this is infact a legal matter.

My solution is for a child who is super obese to have the parents go to trial for child abuse and neglect. If found guilty then some solutions could involve:
1. Talking to the child and finding a solution with them
2. Warning the parent and giving private charitable education in some form.
3. Put into a private charity foundation that helps obese children
4. Placing the child into another family member or family friend's house willing to take them in.

Obviously I'm not in favor of government coming into homes. I'm in favor of basic law abiding investigations.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

I think some of the heavy hitters of this forum are using flawed arguments concerning this. Too much property rights mindset going on.

Obese children are a major risk to getting diabetes and life threatening illnesses now and in the future. They do have a shortened lifespan, they get bullied and consider and attempt suicide. Sure there is marketing, and peer pressure, but a parent's role is to raise a child, and if they can't then they CAN'T. I'm sure we can agree that she should never have had the child in the first place, so why are we so hesitant to remove a 500lb 15 year old AFTER the damage has been done?

We remove children all the time for things like torture, rape...etc. Can we agree that it's correct to do so? So then doesn't that mean we don't own children as our property? So then doesn't that mean children have right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Of course. The problem is they don't necessarily have all the faculties needed to live, but that doesn't mean you own them as property by default. That argument cannot be made logically. So they need to live, and learn to live and that's where parents come in. Parents have responsibility to care for their children without jeopardizing the child's health. It was the parent's choice to bring them in, not the child's. Now they must deal with the responsibility, find someone else, or get them taken away if they are abusive. This is like how we would expect the government to react if I was abusing a grown adult except I would be taken away because the grown adult can presumably take care of themselves whereas a child may not. That's the only difference.

Children resemble property but that's impossible because they have freedoms. Parents are legally responsible for taking care of children. So this is infact a legal matter.

My solution is for a child who is super obese to have the parents go to trial for child abuse and neglect. If found guilty then some solutions could involve:
1. Talking to the child and finding a solution with them
2. Warning the parent and giving private charitable education in some form.
3. Put into a private charity foundation that helps obese children
4. Placing the child into another family member or family friend's house willing to take them in.

Obviously I'm not in favor of government coming into homes. I'm in favor of basic law abiding investigations.

This is one of the most insane things I have ever read on this forum. You seriously want to put parents on trial for having a kid that is fat???? If we start putting people on trial for being idiots you better run for the hills!!!!

[AlexAmore]

This is one of the most insane things I have ever read on this forum. You seriously want to put parents on trial for having a kid that is fat???? If we start putting people on trial for being idiots you better run for the hills!!!!

This whole thread is about "super obese children". That's what I was talking about. Sorry if I didn't make it clear. Parents are exposing them to type 2 diabetes, heart disease, kidney failure, cancer, early death, bullying... etc. What's so hard to understand about that? With freedom comes responsibility.

Children are in gangs at 11 and grow up fighting, stealing, damaging property. By the time they are 18 they literally don't know any better. They are "idiots" too and it doesn't make what they do any better and are put on trial. Heck a lot of that stuff is often less violent than destroying an entire childhood and scarring them for the rest of their life.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

This whole thread is about "super obese children". That's what I was talking about. Sorry if I didn't make it clear. Parents are exposing them to type 2 diabetes, heart disease, kidney failure, cancer, early death, bullying... etc. What's so hard to understand about that? With freedom comes responsibility.

Children are in gangs at 11 and grow up fighting, stealing, damaging property. By the time they are 18 they literally don't know any better. They are "idiots" too and it doesn't make what they do any better and are put on trial. Heck a lot of that stuff is often less violent than destroying an entire childhood and scarring them for the rest of their life.

Cute bolded line there.. I also liked the Spider-Man movie. So parents who have household dietary options that could produce diabetes should be put on trial and risk losing their child because of a poor choice?

So I am guessing you would be just fine with the courts hauling in parents who smoke cigarettes because second hand smoke is believed to elevate cancer risks?

Would it also be ok to haul parents into court who want to home school their kids because some studies (paid for the the Department of Indoctrination) show a link between home schooling and social anxiety in kids?

I suppose it would also be ok to drag parents into court who allow their kids to ride bikes, use skateboards, play on scooters, jump on trampolines or use pogo sticks because of the elevated risks of broken bones or spinal injuries.

I am guessing parents who let their kids enjoy professional wrestling, professional football, martial arts competitons, UFC, etc should also be dragged into court to defend their rights as parents because some studies have shown exposure to violent sports leads to violent behavior in kids.

I guess it is ok for the authorities to drag a parent into court if they have a firearm in the house. It would be so nice to see parents cry and beg at the feet of their masters because they dared keep a weapon. I mean afterall, if a parent owns a gun it is possible that a kid could shoot themselves or someone else.

Let's not forget those parents who keep pets of any kind. Would it be ok with you to drag a parent into court and force them to defend their family because they have a dog, car, snake, rabbit, hamster, horse or some other pet that could bite their kid? I mean think of the injuries that could happen. Those evil parents should have known better.

This list could go on and on and on and on. When you justify dragging someone into court because of their choices as parents you might as well think up excuses for the rest of it because you will have opened Pandora's box. How about instead of lecturing other people on how to live their lives and raise their families you just back the hell off, leave them alone and mind your own business. Nobody is going to force you to feed your kid ding dongs and twinkies and if you care that much about obesity you should lead by example and not rely on the nanny state to enforce your moral values.

[AlexAmore]

You're really not reading my posts, because I've been talking about super obesity as a form of abuse and/or neglect and you can't deny it isn't. I'm not talking about dietary options in a household. Anything in moderation can allow the body to heal itself. Look, if super obesity didn't have horrible side effects emotionally and physically I wouldn't give a shit, but it does.

Almost all of your examples are missing important factors that make them off topic. Obviously if the child is involuntarily inhaling smoke then that is an infringement on his right to life. Obviously this is hard to prove it's happening in any given household but it's true nonetheless. As libertarians we understand there are going to be people breaking the Constitution and we simply can't find or prove it's going on because there is also the privacy factor we can't ignore.

For the rest of your examples your basing them on "studies" and we know they can be bullshit. I know what you're trying to say but it doesn't hold up. Here's an example:

Super Obese children are extremely easy to find. They go to the doctor. The doctor exams his patient who at age 12, weighs 400 pounds and developed diabetes, cholesterol problems, high blood pressure and sleep apnea which if isn't cured will lead to further complications. There we go, we have evidence perfect for an investigation into abuse and neglect. This is a real case in the article, this is not a "study". This is what I'm talking about. It starts of with an examination by a doctor or nurse or whatever. Then it goes to the police about potential neglect, they do an investigation. They go to court and then have to prove it. You're defending parents to the death and completely forgetting about the child's human rights. This isn't big totalitarian overlord shit. We're all created equal...children included. They need protection under the Constitution even from their parents.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

You're really not reading my posts, because I've been talking about super obesity as a form of abuse and/or neglect and you can't deny it isn't. I'm not talking about dietary options in a household. Anything in moderation can allow the body to heal itself. Look, if super obesity didn't have horrible side effects emotionally and physically I wouldn't give a shit, but it does.

Almost all of your examples are missing important factors that make them off topic. Obviously if the child is involuntarily inhaling smoke then that is an infringement on his right to life. Obviously this is hard to prove it's happening in any given household but it's true nonetheless. As libertarians we understand there are going to be people breaking the Constitution and we simply can't find or prove it's going on because there is also the privacy factor we can't ignore.

For the rest of your examples your basing them on "studies" and we know they can be bullshit. I know what you're trying to say but it doesn't hold up. Here's an example:

Super Obese children are extremely easy to find. They go to the doctor. The doctor exams his patient who at age 12, weighs 400 pounds and developed diabetes, cholesterol problems, high blood pressure and sleep apnea which if isn't cured will lead to further complications. There we go, we have evidence perfect for an investigation into abuse and neglect. This is a real case in the article, this is not a "study". This is what I'm talking about. It starts of with an examination by a doctor or nurse. Doctor goes to the police about potential neglect, they do an investigation. They go to court and then have to prove it. You're defending parents to the death and completely forgetting about the child's human rights. This isn't big totalitarian overlord shit. We're all created equal...children included. They need protection under the Constitution even from their parents.

No it is big government totalitarian overlord shit. To sit on a high horse and say that a parent is neglecting a kid that is obese? Who gets to decide this? You? Popular opinion? No thanks! I am reading your posts just fine. I know full well what you are talking about and I still think it is BS. There is ZERO excuse for any government to step in and dictate who is abusing their child through diet. What on God's green earth makes you think that you (or a government in your name) has a right to march into my house or anyone else's house and tell me or someone else what is wrong with my child, what is wrong with me as a parent and that I do not deserve to have my kid?

If you or your government want to start this bullshit than at least buy some swastika armbands so you can be in proper uniform!!!!!

[Carehn]

I don't care if they are beating the kids. I DON"T WANT TO PAY FOR IT.

[fisharmor]

Super Obese children are extremely easy to find.

I think JDV did a sufficient job destroying your premise, but I'll add that you need to update your database when it comes to CPS.
They have a multi-decade history at this point, and I've heard exactly one story - one - where the child was righteously taken away.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_%28feral_child%29

However, if you type "cps wrongdoing" or "cps kidnapping" or "cps nightmare" or "cps" and anything negative, you're going to get stories like this one:
http://legallykidnapped.blogspot.com/2009/06/christopher-slitor-daughter-kidnapped.html

This case involved CPS responding to someone reporting that a baby lost 10 ounces in the first week of her life, and based strictly on that, they took his daughter.
The problem with that is the fact that medical professionals tell you when you leave the hospital that weight loss in the first week is normal.

See if you can follow the logic here, because it makes perfect sense:
An agency is set up with the express purpose of taking children from their parents.
It is a state agency.
State agencies get a fixed budget every year.
This budget is calculated based on past expenditures.
If they don't use the budget one year, they become a target for cuts. This is because the state is incapable of generating revenue. It is all taken forcibly. Various agencies compete for slices of a fixed pie, and if one agency doesn't use their entire slice, the system figures that they don't need it, and sends it to another agency next year.
The signal that they send to the system when they don't spend all their money is this: "The problem is not as big as you think and you can downsize us."

On the other hand, if they snatch as many children as they possibly can, and run over budget, the signal they send to the system is "The problem is much bigger than you think and we need more money."

More money equals more jobs, more awards, and the perception that the system works.

Only it never does work, because the goal you have in mind is that some superhuman judgment is going to be applied in each situation in order to do the right thing. The goal from the onset is anything but doing the right thing, because the right thing requires a fraction of the budget.

The goal is snatching children.
It's not just wrong headed to think that with this as their goal they would be taking only the children that objectively need to be taken - it's a monstrous idea which has no place in a free society. It doesn't even have a place in a society that values humanity to any extent at all.

[DrRP08]

Is it child abuse when a parent feeds his/her kid Twinkies and Ho-Hos for dinner, and the kid weighs 400lbs?

YumYum

[pcosmar]

Obviously I'm not in favor of government coming into homes. I'm in favor of basic law abiding investigations.
http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm


The Constitution contains no explicit provisions for criminal law enforcement. Nor did the constitutions of any of the several states contain such provisions at the time of the Founding. Early constitutions enunciated the intention that law enforcement was a universal duty that each person owed to the community, rather than a power of the government. Founding-era constitutions addressed law enforcement from the standpoint of individual liberties and placed explicit barriers upon the state.

[Dorfsmith]

Who gets to say what "extremely obese" is? School takes your kid out to the mobile health van and puts them on a scale. Kid is a few pounds overweight. State steals your kid. This is the slippery slope government controlled health care leads to.

[ctnjason]

I don't care if they are beating the kids. I DON"T WANT TO PAY FOR IT.

This is my thoughts exactly. Sorry but obesity is NOT hereditary. If the parents want to feed he kid a bunch of crap, have them get diabetes and other health problems, require seatbelt extenders at airports, etc thats fine..... just do not FORCE me to pay for it when they become lazy "disabled" adults.

The very bottom line is always money. Ask yourself why do people act the way they do and often the answer is because they can do said actions as long as someone else pays for it.

[tropicangela]

What's next? They remove big babies right away and blame the moms for eating too much while pregnant?

[Echoes]

What's next? They remove big babies right away and blame the moms for eating too much while pregnant?

I shouldve been taken away, i was 10.2 lbs.

[oyarde]

Hell no , it is your fat kid , you keep it , I do not want it , nor do I want to pay for any service that steals children. If times get tougher . I may offer to trade one of my skinny kids for your fat kid :) , you will know it is that time when my other pets have disappeared:)

[fisharmor]

Hell no , it is your fat kid , you keep it , I do not want it , nor do I want to pay for any service that steals children. If times get tougher . I may offer to trade one of my skinny kids for your fat kid :) , you will know it is that time when my other pets have disappeared:)

Looks like you and Carehn had the same idea...


...makes healthy males of appropriate breading age just that much more valuable..

So, like Salisbury steaks, or just the digits & stuff that can go in the basket fryer?

[AlexAmore]

No it is big government totalitarian overlord shit. To sit on a high horse and say that a parent is neglecting a kid that is obese? Who gets to decide this? You? Popular opinion? No thanks!


Awesome I get to repeat myself for the trillionth time. I don't decide.

#1 A doctor is very capable of determining if a child is super obese and unhealthy.
#2 An investigation followed by a trial is capable of determining if it's the parent's fault if there is enough evidence.


I am reading your posts just fine. I know full well what you are talking about and I still think it is BS. There is ZERO excuse for any government to step in and dictate who is abusing their child through diet. What on God's green earth makes you think that you (or a government in your name) has a right to march into my house or anyone else's house and tell me or someone else what is wrong with my child, what is wrong with me as a parent and that I do not deserve to have my kid?

If you or your government want to start this bullshit than at least buy some swastika armbands so you can be in proper uniform!!!!!

#1 It is NOT YOUR child. The child owns himself! You are a steward. He/She is 100% protected by the Constitution and deserves equal treatment. This means causing no harm....something about true individual liberty or something.

#2 It wouldn't be the government dictating. It would first have to be proved. This would involve doctors and a jury. Basic trials that we all agree with.
This is because...reread #1.


BTW this is somewhat off topic.

Your mindset is very much like authoritarian government with regards to raising children. Your thought process only encourages dependency, authoritarianism and human on human ownership in the children you raise. Treat children like independent adults and they will grow up to be Libertarians. Treat them like the former and they will think paternal and maternal authority figures own them which will translate into politicians and police when they grow up. We already see this happening.

If we treat children like independent adults and teach them that they DO have rights and can protect themselves against unjust behaviour from others then they will grow up with a F'ing backbone! Instead of seeing all these F'ing apathetic losers who got abused by their parents now take it in the F'ing A$$ by the police and politicians and who exert even the smallest of force...and then they ask for more. Let's teach by example. Let's teach kids that they can use the courts if something is wrong, to stand up, to say I've had enough of this treatment.

[MelissaWV]

If we treat children like independent adults and teach them that they DO have rights and can protect themselves against unjust behaviour from others then they will grow up with a F'ing backbone!

Not from what I have seen. There is a time and place for those lessons, but teaching a two-year-old they can do whatever they want and defend themselves from someone trying to stop them is a bit counterproductive.

As for super-obesity, it does become a slippery slope, and no one here has demonstrated that the child would be better off in foster care. That is what's at stake. This child you are trying oh so hard to defend has not brought up the complaint. Someone else has on their behalf. Doesn't this blow your whole "#1" argument out of the water? If we are to think of them as individuals, they should be able to complain and bring charges on their own. I doubt most of these kids would want to be taken away from mommy and daddy and put into the foster care system.

There are also already examples where super-obese children have gotten WORSE after the stress of a change in environment, or have gotten so much fatter that a few more tests showed there was actually something medically wrong. Good job, Government; you took a sick child away and stressed them out and then returned them with nary an "oops."

[fisharmor]

#1 A doctor is very capable of determining if a child is super obese and unhealthy.
By doctor I assume you mean physician, and by physician I assume you mean someone who has been licensed and perhaps even bootstrapped by the state.
So I notice you don't address my assertion that CPS is in the business of snatching children already, and that this will only give them ammo to snatch more.
How hard is it, really, for a child-snatching operation funded by the state to grab a couple of the state's medical cronies to help them do it?
Not gonna happen, you say? How about the fact that pediatricians are already including in their questioning whether or not the parents have guns in the house?
There's something that they're doing and the state isn't even asking them to do it. The guild is simply reading the tea leaves.

Physicians are some of the most corrupt fuckers in this country and I trust them to make decisions on this about as far as I could kick them.
So there goes your silver bullet. If we got rid of licensing and therefore the state isn't defining them, it sure as hell isn't going to let them rule on this: and if it is defining them, they're in bed with the state.


#2 An investigation followed by a trial is capable of determining if it's the parent's fault if there is enough evidence.
Courts, trials, hell why don't you throw in support for NASA while we're finding stuff we're supposed to like the state to do?
I like the way Tom Woods put it in a recent interview with Lew Rockwell - They can't even get a stupid dairy subsidy right, why would I trust them with this?

I love the rest of your post, but just take that last step, man - There's no difference between the state manifested in the courts and the state manifested in anything else. It's all the same beast.

[Philmanoman]

Not from what I have seen. There is a time and place for those lessons, but teaching a two-year-old they can do whatever they want and defend themselves from someone trying to stop them is a bit counterproductive.

As for super-obesity, it does become a slippery slope, and no one here has demonstrated that the child would be better off in foster care. That is what's at stake. This child you are trying oh so hard to defend has not brought up the complaint. Someone else has on their behalf. Doesn't this blow your whole "#1" argument out of the water? If we are to think of them as individuals, they should be able to complain and bring charges on their own. I doubt most of these kids would want to be taken away from mommy and daddy and put into the foster care system.
There are also already examples where super-obese children have gotten WORSE after the stress of a change in environment, or have gotten so much fatter that a few more tests showed there was actually something medically wrong. Good job, Government; you took a sick child away and stressed them out and then returned them with nary an "oops."





This


also...Whats to stop this from leading to other
"protective measures"

[Anti Federalist]

+rep


By doctor I assume you mean physician, and by physician I assume you mean someone who has been licensed and perhaps even bootstrapped by the state.
So I notice you don't address my assertion that CPS is in the business of snatching children already, and that this will only give them ammo to snatch more.
How hard is it, really, for a child-snatching operation funded by the state to grab a couple of the state's medical cronies to help them do it?
Not gonna happen, you say? How about the fact that pediatricians are already including in their questioning whether or not the parents have guns in the house?
There's something that they're doing and the state isn't even asking them to do it. The guild is simply reading the tea leaves.

Physicians are some of the most corrupt fuckers in this country and I trust them to make decisions on this about as far as I could kick them.
So there goes your silver bullet. If we got rid of licensing and therefore the state isn't defining them, it sure as hell isn't going to let them rule on this: and if it is defining them, they're in bed with the state.


Courts, trials, hell why don't you throw in support for NASA while we're finding stuff we're supposed to like the state to do?
I like the way Tom Woods put it in a recent interview with Lew Rockwell - They can't even get a stupid dairy subsidy right, why would I trust them with this?

I love the rest of your post, but just take that last step, man - There's no difference between the state manifested in the courts and the state manifested in anything else. It's all the same beast.

[AlexAmore]

There IS a time and a place for those lessons. Thank you for agreeing with me. I'm saying if our mindset in America was actually libertarian then it would be inherent within children that they can call 911 and go to court for wrongs done to them. Right now we live in a society of passivity and apathy. We both know that it's bringing our entire world down because of a handful of people who aren't apathetic.

Children should be able to complain and bring charges on their own. Nobody is stopping them except ignorance. Who's fault is that? I would say society and the parents. WE can affect society. So I would say as a libertarian movement we should reach out to children. Right now we have government social engineering centers...or schools doing this. They also teach it to take in the A$$ by authority figures and that standing up for yourself and voicing your opinion gets you deeper in shit. Terrible teachings.

Taking the child away should be a last resort. Educating the parent to not poison their child with overfeeding them would be nice. Education rarely gets a child or adult off of a food addiction though. This is why we have rehabs. Private rehabs for food addicted children could work as well, but the important part is changing your environment when you're an addict for the long term.

I really hate government solutions so I'm not advocating for them. All I'm advocating is that government uphold their duty to protect the individual. After that it's up to the free market to come up with solutions. I'm sure given the brilliance of the free market they could come up with solutions to this that we can't even comprehend right now. Also a straight up free market would create a lot of wealth and smart people so after all is said and done even moderate obesity would probably not be much of a problem for most since the average IQ would shoot up thanks to everyone going to private schools and learning nutrition...etc. People would then have more time at home thanks to better jobs and wealth and could make food instead of buying fast food. A lot of these problems would work themselves out with a free market.

I'm just talking about neglect. One form of it is super obesity.


By doctor I assume you mean physician, and by physician I assume you mean someone who has been licensed and perhaps even bootstrapped by the state.
So I notice you don't address my assertion that CPS is in the business of snatching children already, and that this will only give them ammo to snatch more.
How hard is it, really, for a child-snatching operation funded by the state to grab a couple of the state's medical cronies to help them do it?
Not gonna happen, you say? How about the fact that pediatricians are already including in their questioning whether or not the parents have guns in the house?
There's something that they're doing and the state isn't even asking them to do it. The guild is simply reading the tea leaves.

Physicians are some of the most corrupt fuckers in this country and I trust them to make decisions on this about as far as I could kick them.
So there goes your silver bullet. If we got rid of licensing and therefore the state isn't defining them, it sure as hell isn't going to let them rule on this: and if it is defining them, they're in bed with the state.


Courts, trials, hell why don't you throw in support for NASA while we're finding stuff we're supposed to like the state to do?
I like the way Tom Woods put it in a recent interview with Lew Rockwell - They can't even get a stupid dairy subsidy right, why would I trust them with this?

I love the rest of your post, but just take that last step, man - There's no difference between the state manifested in the courts and the state manifested in anything else. It's all the same beast.

I'm all about deregulating the medical profession. I absolutely agree with you that they are extremely corrupt. So implement deregulation and you can still use a doctor in a jury to bring up science to prove something. Then the defence uses their doctor and their science to prove the other side. We then have a jury to deliberate. This is a health relate thing and therefore we are allowed to use scientists and experts to help juries make better decisions. The scientists in this case are doctors and the blade is two sided. Nobody is at a disadvantage here.

I also hate state manifested organizations like CPS. We don't need it. Just because there is no state funded Anti-Murder Organization called AMO doesn't mean you're allowed to murder somebody. We don't need individual organizations to protect every freedom in the bill of rights. We just need a court. That's it.


This
also...Whats to stop this from leading to other
"protective measures"

I know right. First we can't rob people, then we can't abuse people, now we can't murder people. What next? This isn't about creating more laws and power. This is about making it clear that children are free people protected by the Constitution. That's IT! If you disagree with it then show me in the Constitution where it excludes children and I will bow down.

I wonder if discussions like this were similar back in day of blacks and women trying to gain recognition of equal protection by the Constitution. Us libertarians are trying to do the same except in regards to everybody because we're all getting screwed now. I think we just forget about children....who are OUR future. The government knows how important this is because they are educating them, but apparently we're completely clueless. Sad.

[Philmanoman]

Yea cause I advocated murder and robbing in my post.Not sure where you got that at.I used quoptations because I dont feel protecting kids from being fat falls under the costitution.Is it that hard to understand that there might be well meaning people out there that have good reason to disagree with you.



I dont have a problem with education or anything like that...but government force to take someones children because theyre fat isnt what the govt should be involved in.

[aGameOfThrones]

Should kids be taken from their parents if they are too skinny, too? Some kids may need to gain weight to be healthy.

[awake]

This isn't just a slippery slope - no sir- this is a slip'n slide the size of Texas on Mount Everest - Crisco oil soaked trunks provided.

[tropicangela]

Should kids be taken from their parents if they are too skinny, too? Some kids may need to gain weight to be healthy.

My nickname through school was "flaca" which is skinny girl in Spanish. That's scary to think they would have taken me from my family!!!

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

Awesome I get to repeat myself for the trillionth time. I don't decide.

#1 A doctor is very capable of determining if a child is super obese and unhealthy.
#2 An investigation followed by a trial is capable of determining if it's the parent's fault if there is enough evidence.



#1 It is NOT YOUR child. The child owns himself! You are a steward. He/She is 100% protected by the Constitution and deserves equal treatment. This means causing no harm....something about true individual liberty or something.

#2 It wouldn't be the government dictating. It would first have to be proved. This would involve doctors and a jury. Basic trials that we all agree with.
This is because...reread #1.


BTW this is somewhat off topic.

Your mindset is very much like authoritarian government with regards to raising children. Your thought process only encourages dependency, authoritarianism and human on human ownership in the children you raise. Treat children like independent adults and they will grow up to be Libertarians. Treat them like the former and they will think paternal and maternal authority figures own them which will translate into politicians and police when they grow up. We already see this happening.

If we treat children like independent adults and teach them that they DO have rights and can protect themselves against unjust behaviour from others then they will grow up with a F'ing backbone! Instead of seeing all these F'ing apathetic losers who got abused by their parents now take it in the F'ing A$$ by the police and politicians and who exert even the smallest of force...and then they ask for more. Let's teach by example. Let's teach kids that they can use the courts if something is wrong, to stand up, to say I've had enough of this treatment.

You know I once had a doctor tell me that I would probably not live to be 16 and I am 31 now and oh yeah I don't have what he said I did either. So excuse me if I believe that a doctor who has to be approved by the government is incapable of making a mistake. Excuse me if I don't want to assume that someone is smarter than me and more qualified to make decisions about my child than I am.

If you honestly believe that parents needs to be dragged into court over obesity than I don't know what else to say to you. I don't know if you have kids or not but I sure do hope that you have some neighbors who will call CPS every week for some trumped up charge so you can get a feel for how the big government you are endorsing tends to operate.

YES IT IS MY GOD DAMN CHILD! It was my sperm that penetrated the egg of their Mother. I am the one who walked them to school on the first day. I was there to catch them when they fell after their first step. I have paid for everything from food to clothes to toys. I have taken them fishing, cleaned boo-boos, changed diapers, taught them about the world they live in and set down firm but fair rules so they can grow into respectable human beings. So yes. They are my children and until they are 18 they will follow my rules and the traditions of this family. I am sure you think you know what is better for my kids and family than I do but most Nazi sympathizers do so that does not shock me!!!

So these government licensed doctors are going to be trying to convince a government paid judge in a government paid courtroom that you should lose your kids to a government agency that is financed by the government for the sole purpose of stealing children and breaking up families and this has nothing to do with the government???? WTF?

and BTW.. this is also off topic.. How about you take your obnoxious, holier than thou attitudes and crumble them up real nice and stick them straight up your ass. You have ZERO right to tell someone how to raise their kids and decide by yourself or through a court in your name that somebody does not deserve to have their child and raise it how they see fit. If I want a child that grows up to be an obnoxious little prick who preaches to people about how the mighty government can take their kids some day than I will raise them how you think I should. If I want a kid who values his family on par with his rights and who will defend his rights to the death against little progressive shits who think they know better than anyone else than I will raise them how I like and I am doing so!

[moostraks]

You know I once had a doctor tell me that I would probably not live to be 16 and I am 31 now and oh yeah I don't have what he said I did either. So excuse me if I believe that a doctor who has to be approved by the government is incapable of making a mistake. Excuse me if I don't want to assume that someone is smarter than me and more qualified to make decisions about my child than I am.

If you honestly believe that parents needs to be dragged into court over obesity than I don't know what else to say to you. I don't know if you have kids or not but I sure do hope that you have some neighbors who will call CPS every week for some trumped up charge so you can get a feel for how the big government you are endorsing tends to operate.

YES IT IS MY GOD DAMN CHILD! It was my sperm that penetrated the egg of their Mother. I am the one who walked them to school on the first day. I was there to catch them when they fell after their first step. I have paid for everything from food to clothes to toys. I have taken them fishing, cleaned boo-boos, changed diapers, taught them about the world they live in and set down firm but fair rules so they can grow into respectable human beings. So yes. They are my children and until they are 18 they will follow my rules and the traditions of this family. I am sure you think you know what is better for my kids and family than I do but most Nazi sympathizers do so that does not shock me!!!

So these government licensed doctors are going to be trying to convince a government paid judge in a government paid courtroom that you should lose your kids to a government agency that is financed by the government for the sole purpose of stealing children and breaking up families and this has nothing to do with the government???? WTF?

and BTW.. this is also off topic.. How about you take your obnoxious, holier than thou attitudes and crumble them up real nice and stick them straight up your ass. You have ZERO right to tell someone how to raise their kids and decide by yourself or through a court in your name that somebody does not deserve to have their child and raise it how they see fit. If I want a child that grows up to be an obnoxious little prick who preaches to people about how the mighty government can take their kids some day than I will raise them how you think I should. If I want a kid who values his family on par with his rights and who will defend his rights to the death against little progressive shits who think they know better than anyone else than I will raise them how I like and I am doing so!

Thank you!!!! I couldn't have typed it better myself...

As for previous poster AlexAmore, I hope you may be blessed with a narcissistic sociopath as the state most certainly does take children already based upon false allegations put forth by children indoctrinated in a system to file against their parents when they don't like the rules of their parents. You should have to live that hell and you will whistle a different tune...

[oyarde]

This isn't just a slippery slope - no sir- this is a slip'n slide the size of Texas on Mount Everest - Crisco oil soaked trunks provided.

Dang straight , what asshole invented tax funded child stealing agencies anyway ?

[Pericles]

Proof that we are confronted with more and more silliness every day.

[amy31416]

Dang straight , what asshole invented tax funded child stealing agencies anyway ?

Well, it's probably a combination of some parents who abused their children dramatically, combined with a liberal contingent who thinks that government is the answer to society's ills.

There's almost always more than one cause to any problem.

[oyarde]

Some children are or will be abused , giving a govt agency license to take them will only result in these agencies taking children they should not . A private charity to work towards some funding and education for these types of kids would make more sense to me ...