It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
A BRITISH man has been told he and his wife cannot adopt children because he is so fat that the authorities fear he will die.
Damien Hall stands 1.85 metres tall, weighs 155 kilograms and has a body mass index (BMI) of more than 42 - and is thus considered morbidly obese.
The call centre worker, 37, and his nanny wife Charlotte, 31, cannot have children of their own and approached Leeds City Council in northern England, about adopting.
In a statement, Leeds City Council said: "The council's adoption service has a legal responsibility to ensure that children are placed with adopters who are able to provide the best possible lifelong care.
"Part of this responsibility is advice for applicants on a range of suitability criteria, including any health and lifestyle issues which may impact on an applicant's long-term ability to adopt."
Originally posted by HunkaHunka
It makes no sense to place a child with a morbidly obese adoptive parent. You are simply setting the child up for failure.
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
A man that is that overweight is obviously not only physically unable to bring up a child, but also mentally unable to do so too. This has nothing to do with discrimination but plain old simple common-sense.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
A man that is that overweight is obviously not only physically unable to bring up a child, but also mentally unable to do so too. This has nothing to do with discrimination but plain old simple common-sense.
Wow. Really?
Mentally unstable, huh? I wonder how many obese parents are sitting at their screens right now wondering if you were serious when you typed that???
How can you presume to know the mental stability of a person based on their BMI?
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
Ok, I'll just say that I'd like you to go back and RE-READ what I typed. Did I say UNSTABLE?
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
Ok, I'll just say that I'd like you to go back and RE-READ what I typed. Did I say UNSTABLE?
Unable, unstable, what's the difference? (It's midnight here and I've spent far too long on ATS today. I apologise for misreading one word.)
You're questioning his mental capacity to love and care for a child based on his BMI. What about his wife, is she also mentally unable or unstable to care for the child because she's married to someone obese?
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
Again, a parent who has created their own misery to such an extent that they are physically unable to function as a normal human being
Also, do you actually know how heavy 150kgs is? A feel sorry for any child who is put through losing a parent, which will inevitably happen to the child in question.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by HunkaHunka
It makes no sense to place a child with a morbidly obese adoptive parent. You are simply setting the child up for failure.
What about ensuring that the child does fail by being shuffled around different foster homes for years or kept in state 'care'?
Remember, in this case that there are two parents applying. The wife was not mentioned as being obese.
Will CPS start knocking on doors and remove children from homes, if they have a natural parent who is obese?
Originally posted by HunkaHunka
You are going to extremes.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
Again, a parent who has created their own misery to such an extent that they are physically unable to function as a normal human being
He works! He's employed! How does he not function as a normal human being?
Also, do you actually know how heavy 150kgs is? A feel sorry for any child who is put through losing a parent, which will inevitably happen to the child in question.
Adopted children have already lost parents (not necessarily deceased), so I imagine that they would be thrilled to have a FAMILY offer to care for them.
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
I can't understand why you don't see the wrong-doing in putting a child in the care of a parent who will die well before their normal life-expectancy.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by dodgygeeza
I can't understand why you don't see the wrong-doing in putting a child in the care of a parent who will die well before their normal life-expectancy.
What's your point?
You edited your post to retract your 'mentally unable' claim?
You edited your post to retract your claim that he can't function as a human?
Now you think that he's a bit taller, so not nearly as obese?
Is all that you've got left to argue based around life expectancy? Is that it? A child could be placed with the best adoptive parents on the planet. The following day, those adoptive parents could both be killed for any number of reasons.
Are you arguing that based on a life-lottery, he won't live as long, so he'll make a crap parent?