Should parents eat junk?

Tara - posted on 07/21/2011 ( 24 moms have responded )

2,567

14

114

It's not illegal but it is unhealthy and potentially deadly.

Should parents who eat a steady diet of junk food around and with their children be charged with negligence causing death if their child dies from a heart attack due to over eating?

Should parents have their children removed if it is proven that they are not providing a balanced diet and instead are only providing unhealthy choices that are proven to lead to childhood obesity, juvenile diabetes and early onset heart disease?

Just wondering what people think of this. I know a FAT family. I mean HUGE family, Mom and Dad are both well over 300 lbs and the two kids are about 12 and 10 and are both past 150 lbs. I know the brother of the mom, he is thin, his family is thin.
And from what I know they eat a lot. A lot of shitty food that is leading to chronic health problems, the grandma wants the kids to live with her so they don't die young.
Thoughts?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Kellie - posted on 07/24/2011

1,994

8

175

Let me get this straight. If you starve your child you are abusing them, but if you overfeed and feed your child nothing but crap and they're 200 pounds when they're 5 you get a pat on the head and an awww you must be uneducated, here's a Nutritional class to go to?

No matter how uneducated someone is about food, you KNOW eating Maccas, Hungry Jacks, and deep frying everything is unhealthy simply by the way you look and feel (and no I don't think every overweight person is an unhealthy lazy person, I realise there are medical conditions out there affecting weight).

How about you put the chip packet down and get out there and educate YOURSELF instead of sitting on the couch and waiting for someone to knock on the door and give you a healthy eating guide/class?

Personally I think it's about time people started taking responsibility for themselves and their choices instead of blaming everything/everyone but the kitchen sink for their choices.

I know poor, I've been so poor I couldn't afford food and have had to wait a couple of days for the dole check to come in until I could eat. Even at 16 and being on my own I knew it was the wrong choice to go get a burger rather than cooking something healthy that I could portion out and freeze so I had food for however many nights I could get out of a dish. And I knew this without having to have someone come knock on my door and 'educate' me.

Sherri - posted on 07/22/2011

9,593

15

391

No no parent should have their children removed. However, monitoring and help teach them to eat healthier is a far better option.

Ella - posted on 07/25/2011

88

0

3

argh can't stand people like that. I get so friggn frustrated friend has a not even 2 yr old kid who gets fed just crap since he was a baby all they ever gave him was chips and junk food his snacks are biscuits asnd they wonder why the kid is over twice the weight of mine who is a year older. Mine get fruit and lots of it for thier snacks and bulk veges with thier dinner plus all the otehr food groups so it really shits me when I see people who are too lazy to give thier kids a balanced diet. If you dont want to look after them properly , dont have them

[deleted account]

I understand where you all are coming from I really do, but im curious as to why everyone has become so focused and intent on taking children from their homes for every thing that can be thought up? I get that children shouldnt be over weight or obese I get that parents should monitor diet's but when in the hell did that become everybody else's business? They arent your kids right, it has no direct affect on you or your kids so why even worry about? What happened to the days of people raising kids with out unwanted interference from everybody else?

[deleted account]

I think removing children as a first step is not the best step to take. First if child welfare gets involved, the parents should have a mandatory nutrition course, and all members of the family should go to a psychologist to figure out WHY they are over eating. People just don't decide to be obese. Its a disease, same as anorexia or bulimia. It takes a lot of pain to get there.

24 Comments

View replies by

Kellie - posted on 07/25/2011

1,994

8

175

"There is a difference between being starved and being overfed."

Sara, I disagree. They BOTH have similar end results. They both result in malnutrition, illness and possible eventual death due to complications from malnutrition. They just present their symptoms in different ways.

Personally I think the difference is that society sees being overweight/obese as the "norm". Obese/Overweight people/families are everywhere (Shit according to my BMI I'M obese) and it's accepted to a certain degree.

So while we can look at a child whose Parents have clearly starved the child as an Abused child, we look at the Obese 5 year old as almost normal in todays world of Obesity. However, we are NOT in that home and overfeeding a child can definitely be used as a form of Child Abuse and can in SOME cases, absolutely be classed as Child Abuse.

[deleted account]

@Sara I have read that and it sickened me, it took me a couple months to read through all of it because it made me so upset. But like you said I also dont think that taking them should be the first option, most parents really dont understand the risk and most parents and families just cant afford the more healthy stuff. Have you watched the documentary called America and food or something along those lines? Healthy food should be readily available to everyone and it just isnt in most cases, they talk about how the junk food is less expensive than the healthy and I agree, I shop all discount stores and budgtet the hell out of my money so I can buy healthy food for my kids, they dont snack on candy and sweets, they get fruits veggies juice water ect. But I also understand that its not like that for many families. So should those families be punished because of financial problems? NO. They should be helped and why not just go to the source and start demanding that healthy food be made available to everybody. Taking them from the home shouldnt even be an option. I understand wanting to help, but taking any child from the home should be the absolute last resort after litterally everything else has been tried in these cases.

Sara - posted on 07/25/2011

202

23

17

@Brandi, you should read A Child Called It. Then you'll understand why we should all be more involved. It used to be you could starve your kids and beat them and it was no ones' business. So even though it has no direct affect on me I'm going to get involved. I am a foster parent. I've seen it all. And if we didn't get involved these poor kids who have come into my home needed to be out of their homes.

That being said, I don't think it should be the first option. There is a difference between being starved and being overfed. I think the first option should be nutrionist and dietician. IF that doesn't work, then you could look at further actions.

[deleted account]

When I first read this I thought "oh too harsh" but Kellie you have made your point well. I can't see that any government would ever take kids away from their families solely on the grounds of a bad diet leading to obesity... but maybe if there was a wider context of neglect and/or abuse, the dept could use the bad diet as one of the examples of bad parenting... then take the kids away.... But as we've seen over the last couple of generations, kids taken away from their families starts a whole new set of problems which are rarely a happy outcome.

[deleted account]

When I first read this I thought "oh too harsh" but Kellie you have made your point well. I can't see that any government would ever take kids away from their families solely on the grounds of a bad diet leading to obesity... but maybe if there was a wider context of neglect and/or abuse, the dept could use the bad diet as one of the examples of bad parenting... then take the kids away.... But as we've seen over the last couple of generations, kids taken away from their families starts a whole new set of problems which are rarely a happy outcome.

[deleted account]

First families do not need to be broken.Man you would have some amount of kids taken and then put were.Would you even have places for them all.As there are many children who are obese, whos parents are obese etc.



You can help them and offer your advise and help.If it were my loved ones.I would offer recipes and cook with them. I would offer to bring the kids swimming or to walk together, for us all to go out as a family or an activity day etc.They should not be broken up as a family for heaven sake.Help them help themselves.

If that did not work then there doctor etc needs to assign a nutritionist etc.Intervene in a positive way.

~♥Little Miss - posted on 07/24/2011

21,273

9

3058

I think America as a whole needs a new perspective of nutrition, and portion control.

Stifler's - posted on 07/23/2011

15,141

154

604

We eat crap food... but mostly healthy. If their children are suffering there should definitely be an intervention!

Rosie - posted on 07/22/2011

8,657

30

321

if the kids are obese and having health problems then something should be done about the situation. i'd like education first but if that isn't working then remove the kids.
however normal kids with no health problems? and their parents eating crap? nah. even if the kids are eating crap, if there's nothing wrong with the kids why take them, and how would they know anyway?
if the children are eating crap and don't have any health problems, maybe start the whole education process, but how would a lot of these families be monitored? some people don't take their kids to doctors unless they're sick, so who is going to turn these families on to the DHS or whatever?

Corinne - posted on 07/22/2011

1,288

14

121

If a family continues to ignore the advice of a doctor and puts their childrens health in danger then yes, remove them. You can be banned from keeping animals in this condition, why should children be left to suffer because of their parents shitty choices? Yes, educate the parents by all means, but if they then choose to ignore that? Sorry if I come across harshly but this is something that really gets me angry.

Bonnie - posted on 07/22/2011

4,813

22

262

They could seem to fine now, but that doesn't mean nothing could happen. Not only that, but their eating habits now could play a part in poor health in the very near future. As Tara mentioned, they already have diabetes which should have them eating a certain way. Not good at all IMO.

Tara - posted on 07/22/2011

2,567

14

114

But what if there is no "immediate danger" as in they aren't going to keel over tomorrow from a heart attack, but they are already ill with juvenile diabetes and their parents are not altering the food they bring into the home? What if they children are already at risk for serious health problems because of how they are eating at home?
What if, despite the advice of a nutritionist and the recommendations of their family doctor, this family continues to put their children's health at risk?
What if one of those children suffers a heart attack due to being obese? Who is to blame at that point in time?
What if a child is hospitalized due to diabetes and the on call doctor discovers that his parents have not been following his specialized diet, thus leading him to being admitted to the hospital?
Should there be any repercussions for these parents at all?

Sal - posted on 07/22/2011

1,816

16

34

i think that people who only eat junk need to wake up and teach their children proper eating habbits, however i think there is also a place for fun food or junk in a normal healthy diet and i feel that parents who out law junk food are only making it seem more appealing, teach them how to enjoy it sometimes also i think it is important to teach them how to cook, if you can cook you know more about nutrition and what is in food and that can only be a good thing

[deleted account]

Children being removed from their homes for something like this is absolute ludacris... if they are in no real imediate danger its no ones business. Every now and then I eat stuff I should'nt stuff I know is not good for me and every once in a while,very rarely, I will share it with my kids. A nutritionist is a good idea, maybe these families dont fully understand the risk they are putting them selves in, that is where help is needed, taking the kids out of the home is not help, its problematic. I think people in general these days are way too wrapped up in trying to control what evey body else does with themselves and other's children. Its no body's business but theirs.

Johnny - posted on 07/21/2011

8,686

26

322

I do agree with Jayce. Although I do think intervention with nutritional and emotional counseling for such families may be necessary. I would personally be very worried about the fitness of any parent who would not want help to ensure their child's well-being.

Jayce - posted on 07/21/2011

1,480

1

85

I agree with Feen - if the kids aren't in immediate danger leave them be. I hate the idea that kids can be removed from the home if they are obese. Placing them in a foster home will mostly likely cause all kinds of emotional issues which could lead to more eating issues. Education on healthy eating habits and access to a nutritionist is a much better idea.

Charlie - posted on 07/21/2011

11,203

111

409

In short , unless the childs in immediate danger then no I dont think they should be removed but the parents should speak to a nutritionist .

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms