Has anyone read this article? Obese 3rd grader removed from home (hormone, working out)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, I have. there's actually very little consideration given to the full facts of the case, regardless of what you consider to the contrary---and I play bridge with "important people", too. Oh, and doctors don't attend custody hearings, its not like on TV.
Then I guess I'll just have to tell my friend she must have been dreaming. She never went to court at all.
The case that made the local newspaper must have been a figment of the reporter's imagination.
And unless you have followed a family court judge twenty four hours per day, you really do not know how much time s/he spent on a case, do you? You know for sure s/he did not take case files home to read? You know for sure he did not talk to the child's physician on the telephone, even if the doctor was not in court? You know for sure s/he did not talk with the attorneys involved before the actual hearing?
I do know the medical profession often undertreats, then blames the patient. Another "broad, sweeping generalization?" Not any more than your assumptions, regardless of who you play bridge with.
I have seen a general contempt for the patient on the part of the medical profession, along with undertreatment. At least for adults, if they feel their doctor isn't working for them,they can go elsewhere. However, for children, there's always CPS to turn to. Doctors do their "thing" if the child doesn't improve, blame the parents and use CPS to take the kid away.
I know the difference between Juvenile--type I---diabetes and type II, or adult onset. Its a definition and diagnosis, not a matter of age. And adult can get insulin-dependent diabetes, at any age, and children can develop type II diabetes. Regardless, the child I referred to at Ann Arbor was grossly undertreated. If whatever treatment program they came up with didn't work, then, perhaps, maybe....change the program? don't just keep doing the same thing over and over and blame the patient when it doesn't work.
Please explain why a child (not an adult) with insulin dependent diabetes would not be treated with insulin? What you are describing does not make sense medically. The only reason I can think of is that there was no one willing or able to monitor the child's blood sugars and give the child insulin. What do you believe should have been done differently?
How do you define "undertreatment"?
Maybe the problem was actually noncompliance and not lack of effort on behalf of the medical team:
If the mother in the case under consideration in this thread was unable to place her morbidly obese son on an appropriate diet, is it not reasonable to suspect that the family of the diabetic child you are describing might also have had difficulty with the dietary measures needed to control type I diabetes?
Sometimes nothing the doctor tries will work, because the patient (or the patient's parents) do not follow directions.
By the way, the docs I know do care about their patients. I have never seen anyone I know treated with contempt by a physician.
The real tragedy is and it's not just this kid, that way too many children are now obese. This is a parental problem. We have obese or overweight parents that are literally killing their kids with food. Whatever the reason may be why they are doing it is irrelevant. Something needs to be done. It is so tragically unfair that parents would handicap their kids by allowing them to become obese.
For whatever reason as a society we have become desensitized to obesity. It is everywhere and there are hundreds of excuses as to why. Personal responsibility never seems to be on that list.
If an adult wants to allow themselves to become obese that is their problem, but when they allow their children to become obese that is child abuse and people need to start getting good and angry about it because it is just no fair to these kids.
Reminds me of smoking. In the 60's no big deal. 70's more hard hitting facts that it is very bad for the smoker. 80's campaign to curtail smoking. 90's 2nd hand smoke is bad. 2000> eliminating smoking in public spaces.
Many parents will stop smoking when they have kids to prevent exposure to 2nd hand smoke and set a good example. The die-hards (or is it die-quickers)will go smoke outside or in the garage.
Unless enough people get angry about the obesity epidemic, actions to lower the obesity rate will not happen or be slow. Most school lunches, lack of recess, lack of P.E., lack of decent meals served at home, prevalence of fast food and junk food, prevalence of "junk"ingredients in too many pre-packaged foods are just some of the hurdles. Oh, and acceptance. Went to France this year and my daughters asked my Mom, "Why don't we see any fat people" Wife, "It's socially unacceptable in the minds of most French" And boy do they have some good food & the people we visited didn't eat like birds or eat "diet" food.
So just like smoking went from socially acceptable to becoming almost socially unacceptable I hope being obese trends the same way.
Reminds me of smoking. In the 60's no big deal. 70's more hard hitting facts that it is very bad for the smoker. 80's campaign to curtail smoking. 90's 2nd hand smoke is bad. 2000> eliminating smoking in public spaces.
Many parents will stop smoking when they have kids to prevent exposure to 2nd hand smoke and set a good example. The die-hards (or is it die-quickers)will go smoke outside or in the garage.
Unless enough people get angry about the obesity epidemic, actions to lower the obesity rate will not happen or be slow. Most school lunches, lack of recess, lack of P.E., lack of decent meals served at home, prevalence of fast food and junk food, prevalence of "junk"ingredients in too many pre-packaged foods are just some of the hurdles. Oh, and acceptance. Went to France this year and my daughters asked my Mom, "Why don't we see any fat people" Wife, "It's socially unacceptable in the minds of most French" And boy do they have some good food & the people we visited didn't eat like birds or eat "diet" food.
So just like smoking went from socially acceptable to becoming almost socially unacceptable I hope being obese trends the same way.
I could not agree more. And its so funny about the French, they eat 'real' food and drink wine and are extremely healthy. Hmmmm, wonder why.
I eat a lot of good food. I do not deprive myself of anything I want. That said I never want fast food, bakery goods, or pre packaged stuff. I drink wine every night and enjoy all my meals.
Its so simple and yet so hard for people to understand that convenience foods are killing them. Lack of exercise is killing them. And our indifference to obesity is killing them.
We are not allowed to criticize fat people because apparently its not their fault they are fat. As a society we must gingerly approach the subject of obesity lest we offend anyone.
I was watching an interview with an actor that recently lost weight, I do not remember who it was. When asked why he decided to finally lose the weight he said that he realized that there are no old fat people.
I could not agree more. And its so funny about the French, they eat 'real' food and drink wine and are extremely healthy. Hmmmm, wonder why.
I eat a lot of good food. I do not deprive myself of anything I want. That said I never want fast food, bakery goods, or pre packaged stuff. I drink wine every night and enjoy all my meals.
Its so simple and yet so hard for people to understand that convenience foods are killing them. Lack of exercise is killing them. And our indifference to obesity is killing them.
We are not allowed to criticize fat people because apparently its not their fault they are fat. As a society we must gingerly approach the subject of obesity lest we offend anyone.
I was watching an interview with an actor that recently lost weight, I do not remember who it was. When asked why he decided to finally lose the weight he said that he realized that there are no old fat people.
Then, there's Australia with more than twice the number of obese people than France, and a longer average life span.
In fact, of the 22 nations with a higher rate of obesity, 5 have longer average life spans than the French.
ps: 27% of French people are daily smokers, in comparison with 17% of Americans. Who did you say has the longer life span?
The point is that we shouldn't be so quick to give up what is arguably our most important liberty...the right to chose for ourselves how we live. "We hold these truths to be self-evident...that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," however we define that pursuit. When we support the taking of someone else's freedom of choice, we inevitably risk our own as the cause of "health" goes forward. What is acceptable behavior today won't be tomorrow and whatever you want done to smokers and the obese will be done to you eventually.
You're willing to trade your essential liberty in exchange for what? For healthier neighbors? For lower health care costs? Since the number of smokers has dropped by at least half since the campaign against tobacco began, how is that working out for you? How much have health care costs gone down? (Hint: They haven't. Health care cost is about the only sector of the economy growing faster than the inflation rate, much faster.) How much have your own insurance rates gone down? With that kind of "success" at curtailing others freedoms, by now we should be seeing a noticeable effect on costs, but we're not, are we? By what right would you expect something different from a similar campaign against obesity?
Before you support using the power of government and persuasion to force others, and ultimately yourself, to change how they live, take a moment to consider just what it is you'll get for that and whether or not it's a good trade-off.
Then, there's Australia with more than twice the number of obese people than France, and a longer average life span.
In fact, of the 22 nations with a higher rate of obesity, 5 have longer average life spans than the French.
ps: 27% of French people are daily smokers, in comparison with 17% of Americans. Who did you say has the longer life span?
The point is that we shouldn't be so quick to give up what is arguably our most important liberty...the right to chose for ourselves how we live. "We hold these truths to be self-evident...that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," however we define that pursuit. When we support the taking of someone else's freedom of choice, we inevitably risk our own as the cause of "health" goes forward. What is acceptable behavior today won't be tomorrow and whatever you want done to smokers and the obese will be done to you eventually.
You're willing to trade your essential liberty in exchange for what? For healthier neighbors? For lower health care costs? Since the number of smokers has dropped by at least half since the campaign against tobacco began, how is that working out for you? How much have health care costs gone down? (Hint: They haven't. Health care cost is about the only sector of the economy growing faster than the inflation rate, much faster.) How much have your own insurance rates gone down? With that kind of "success" at curtailing others freedoms, by now we should be seeing a noticeable effect on costs, but we're not, are we? By what right would you expect something different from a similar campaign against obesity?
Before you support using the power of government and persuasion to force others, and ultimately yourself, to change how they live, take a moment to consider just what it is you'll get for that and whether or not it's a good trade-off.
Where in my post did I say I wanted the government involved?
I am saying that Americans are out of control with their eating habits and should not pass their crappy eating and sedentary lifestyles on to their children. And quality of life is an important factor. I cannot imagine an obese person has a great of quality of life. For one they probably wake up feeling crappy everyday, but that is their baseline so they have no idea what it feels like to feel healthy. That is not quality of life.
We as a country have accepted obesity as normal. Its NOT NORMAL to be 100 lbs overweight.
But you have every right to be obese, I just cannot imagine why you would want to.
I am saying that Americans are out of control with their eating habits and should not pass their crappy eating and sedentary lifestyles on to their children. .
Location: Back in Melbourne.....home of road rage and aggression
402 posts, read 1,160,180 times
Reputation: 526
[quote=tickyul;21911526]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim in FL
Thanks for the link...I was sickened when I read that article..more so than when I read about the obese kid. Starving is not a fun way to die.
Yeah..both extremes are pathetic, but what is the answer??[/quote]
3 meals a day.....no snacking, junk food very rarely and limit carbs because above a certain amount they are JUNK.
I'd say more like:
3 smaller meals a day, consistently
2 small quality snacks, consistently
"junk" food exposure decreased but not enirely rubbed out to remove the "forbidden fruit" ideology, which can make it seem tastier than it actually is
regular and consistent exposure to a vast array of food choices
stop using rules like "clean your plate!", or "no dessert until you eat that broccoli!"; this interferes with natural hunger and satiety cues thatbwere all born with but is quickly destroyed
Encourage and facilitate play that doesn't involve computers, video games or TV - fresh air, sunshine, safe and ample space, and imagination all key ingredients
Practice what you preach and set an example for your children
I don't see why it's so hard.
That said, I don't think removing the child from their home is necessarily the answer. I mean, the kid (regardless of how it's explained) will always feel they are being punished, which is stressful, and in the case of disordered eating (which I think most overweight and obese kids suffer from to various extents) the stress, confusion, anxiety ect, would likely exacerbate the issue. I was a fat kid, and I can tell you that if I'd been removed from my family for being fat, it certainly wouldn't have motivated me to lose weight. That might work on an adult who has the capability to rationalize, but it won't work on a child. They just don't have that capacity to see that they supposedly aren't being punished.
I'd like for the results of this "intervention" to be published down the track. I think that this child will have lost little if any weight. And what if the child doesn't in fact lose at all and instead gains? Then the problem has been made worse, not in the fact that kid would be even heavier, but that he now probably has some PTSD, an anxiety disorder, an eating disorder or worsened ED. His self esteem will be even more shot than it probably was when he was removed, his relationship with his family permanently altered--I'm certain he would feel like they'd just sent him away, or had not come to save him. But I suppose a damaged self esteem/confidence, anxiety and a general distrust of adults is an acceptable casualty in the war on obesity.
Location: Back in Melbourne.....home of road rage and aggression
402 posts, read 1,160,180 times
Reputation: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
The key is supervision. This child has to be watched while he is taught to make better food choices. That includes being watched at school as well as during activities and at home. He is not a teenager with access to money and a car. He's in the third grade. He should be eating lunch with his teacher in the room with him. His classmates have to understand they cannot share their snacks with him, just as they would not give peanuts to a child who is allergic to them.
The rest of the family has to sacrifice access to soda and junk food. They cannot be kept at home. The entire family has to adopt a more healthy lifestyle for the sake of the morbidly obese child. That includes the mom, who must herself eat better, exercise, and lose weight. We still do not know where the dad fits in the picture. His role has not been described. But if he has access to his son, the dad must adopt a healthy diet and exercise and lose weight, too.
When his mother has demonstrated that she can implement these changes, he should be allowed to come home.
I agree the child's dietary intake needs to be monitored, but I don't think that having someone literally watch him every minute of ever hour of every day is going to help. Well, it will help in that they can interfere with what he eats. But it also causes harm emotionally and psychologically. Watching like a hawk will likely only teach him to eat what he's "supposed" to eat while being watched, and go totally off the rails when nobody is around. Trust me, being watched like a hawk is embarrassing, it's annoying, its mortifying and it brings on a sense of shame in the person being watched. It doesn't teach self control in any way other than momentarily-- the minute the overseer is looking the other way, that kid will be eating like he's a condemned prisoner being executed at dawn. I know, I've been there--not that me and this kid have the same situation, but I bet we have more n common than not. To this day have an enormous problem eating in public or around people I don't know well and trust implicitly.
I think the best course is a whole family intervention. They ALL need to make the same changes, together, as a unit. As someone else said, it's very unlikely The kid removed is the sole overweight/obese person in the house. If so, that would most likely indicate a possible genetic issue rather than a dietary intake issue.
The problem, ultimately, is the western lifestyle. Its just that simple. All convenience all the time. Technological advancement is great, but IMO we're advancing ourselves right back to square one. In our quest for advancement and ease of work, we've created sedentary lifestyles, which have only really given us the avenue to work longer hours cramming in more work than one person is reasonably capable of completing.
Then there is all the fake, processed, artificially preserved, colored, flavored food stuffs (that are not even really food if you want to argue semantics) that we ingest daily. Some people never eat ANY whole foods! Add to that pollution,pesticides, toxins, hormones and genetic modification........were not helping our own cause, are we?
How ironic is it that a fat person can be under nourished? By the above of course.
How is it that skinny people die due to complications of clogged arteries? The above, of course.
I hope that whoever is making these decisions to remove fat kids from their otherwise (hopefully) loving homes, can see that it's not the child that needs to be removed as much as it's the whole family that needs to be educated/re-educated and essentially trained about healthy foods, drinks, eating and activity. after all, he's merely a child; he's not responsible for what he's given to eat and how he's been taught to eat. Why should he be removed from his home over something he has no control over? Of course, the same can be said of children who are abused and neglected, and I can't see any way to get rid of that WITHOUT removing the child. Perhaps remove the abuser and bring in a carer? I don't know what the perfect solution is. But one thing I do know for either situation is that by the time something is "being done about the issue", the damage is already done........damage that takes ages to fix (IF it can ever be fixed) was done when they removed him: psychological damage. My heart goes out to him.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
