British husband told he's too fat to adopt.

Does anyone know if they wouldn't let you adopt if you were a smoker?

I agree with this decision
I also think gays shouldn't adopt

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Are you being serious...?
---

Does this also mean if someone's morbidly obese by law they can't have children?

I can't believe so many people on ATS think he shouldn't be able to adopt based on weight...

Perhaps next, blond people can't adopt, because they MAY be too stupid to raise children.

-Will

Originally posted by Basilis
I can't believe so many people on ATS think he shouldn't be able to adopt based on weight...

Perhaps next, blond people can't adopt, because they MAY be too stupid to raise children.

-Will

not DIRECTLY based on weight no
but based on life expectancy due to obesity

many blondes are intelligent, even psychologists and scholars will agree
but what will doctors say about the obese?

See what you don't understand is that it's not about this obese man
it's about the orphan

you are focusing on the wrong potential victim

Doesn't China or didn't they at least, deny individuals who were handicapped, fat or even "ugly" from adopting Chinese children?

Either way, this is Sick, Sad and pathetic.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


I believe someone posted a few pages back about some overweight people eating healthily and BEING healthy, despite weight.

I can to an extent understand where you're coming from, but there's also the chance the orphan would live a horrible life with abusive foster parents.

But like I implied, where will it stop? Will they tell me that I can't adopt a child because I may be joining the military later in life, or because I enjoy to sky dive, or anything that may lower my life expectancy?

-Will

reply to post by Basilis


I know,its amazing isn't it.

The simple answer is to make every cpl who wants to adopt to take a medical.
If they have a clean bill of health,and everything else checks out,then there is no reason for them not to be able to adopt a child.

I think the problem is that the associations in charge of this sort of things are expecting the orphans to go to beautiful, happy families of blondes with blue eyes and gorgeous sexual organs. Which is understandable, they know the kid already had a bad life so they want the best for him now. Problem is that they are so obsessed with looking for a perfect family that they are keeping good people to adopt a needed child.

In this particular case, I can understand their reasoning: the guy is obese so he might die in the near future, hence the wife will get stucked with the kid and everything might fall apart.

I don't feel capable of discerning if their way of thinking is right or wrong, but I do know this: most of the people in the world didn't chose their parents or the family they grew into, and there are A LOT of people which can't raise a child even if they had a manual. I also think a single parent is as capable of raising a child as anyone else. I also believe many people, despite of their parents, had been able to become "normal" adults. So in that aspect, I do believe they are trying too hard trying to make everything perfect. The kid might go to a beautiful family which is killed in a car accident. And as you know, more people gets killed because of cars that because of weight.

Maybe they should start preventing people with cars to adopt...

[edit on 13-1-2009 by Radiobuzz]

If this guy only has to lose a couple of pounds (4 I think) to be able to adopt, apparently this would then magically make him healthy by their warped BMI figures.
And yet, he would still be obese.

So obviously it's not the mans health/obesity that is the issue.
It's the adoption agency standing by its' magical figure that apparently they don't sway from.

So, he's highlighting the absurdity of the situation and their BMI statics by going public.

This is heavy-handed if it is just based on weight. However if he has some kind of health issue that might impede his ability to be a parent or drastically shorten his life, because of his weight, then I can agree with this decision.

reply to post by Avenginggecko


Being fat isn't a disease - except in very rare cases involving metabolic imbalance. Usually it's just people who eat too much.

That said, the state MUST take into account individuals when considering adoptions. If the guy is healthy, he should be able to adopt. If he's a sickly, fat, lump of near-death, then no, obviously.

I hate it when people claim being fat is a disease. Just put down the damn twinkie and take responsibility for your own lot in life for chris'sakes...

Same with alcohol, for what it's worth.

"I have a disease, I can't stop drinking." AIDS is a disease, Cancer is a disease, if you're an alcoholic you just need to drink less. It's very simple.

Whatever - if he's healthy let him adopt. He's not a freakin' leper, he's just fat.

reply to post by WyrdeOne


Well, medically, morbid obesity is a disease. I don't know the specifics of it (it would have been nice if the article was a little more particular about his health), but I know people who are genetically built larger vs. people who are larger because of poor diet and you can see a difference when you look at them. He looks to me like he's a twinkie kind of guy.

I can't say i don't agree with that statement, because i do. Would be interesting to know if the fellow works or if he is too fat to work? If i was his wife i'd get him straight on a diet. Simple as that!
However being fat smacks of idleness, so maybe the adoption people in this case see little Jonny growing up like his adoptive Father and sorry that can't be good, for obvious reasons. Sorry adoptive Dad, best you go to the gym mate! One other thing, which is just my observations. Usually when you have an obese family member, the whole family are the same, not just one of them. There are a fat family in my road and they are truely shameless. But they don't care, probrobly because it's normal to them. They admitted once that their boy nicks the other kids lunchboxes from school and found it hilarious! I didn't know where to look it was so embarassing.

Don't see what the problem here is...?

It's simple physics : burn more calories than you consume and you will lose weight. It ain't rocket science. He's too fat. Means he doesn't take care of himself or know how to. He doesn't exercise enough or eats too much or both.

Suggests he doesn't have the will power or drive to look after himself. And if he can't take care of himself, how can he be expected to take care of a child?

Originally posted by noonebutme
Don't see what the problem here is...?

It's simple physics : burn more calories than you consume and you will lose weight. It ain't rocket science. He's too fat. Means he doesn't take care of himself or know how to. He doesn't exercise enough or eats too much or both.

Suggests he doesn't have the will power or drive to look after himself. And if he can't take care of himself, how can he be expected to take care of a child?

yep, totally agree with you Sir.

oops did i do that wrong? sorry.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I also think gays shouldn't adopt

Ok, that's a joke, right? I *hope* that's a joke...?

Call it a disease if you want, it doesn't make it so. The medical establishment is eager to label anything and everything a disease - I can't imagine why, maybe because it makes them money. Don't ask a tailor whether or not you need a new suit.

Anyway, why stop here? Why not prohibit fat people from having children of their own? Why not prohibit people with piercings and tattoos from adopting or giving birth, they might stigmatize their child? Smokers and drinkers and people who like to stay up late - they can't possibly raise healthy children, right?

The skinny guy who's a womanizer lacks self-control too, but you don't see the state digging into his little black book.

It's not that I support people being 400 lbs, it's just that I don't see it as being a deal-breaker.

It's not as though the rest of society is so self-empowered and full of willpower and good judgment, it's just that the fat guy can't hide his weaknesses like the rest of society. It's not fair to single him out, just because his weakness leaves evidence...

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Anyway, why stop here? Why not prohibit fat people from having children of their own? Why not prohibit people with piercings and tattoos from adopting or giving birth, they might stigmatize their child? Smokers and drinkers and people who like to stay up late - they can't possibly raise healthy children, right?

The skinny guy who's a womanizer lacks self-control too, but you don't see the state digging into his little black book.

Adoption agencies are looking for the best possible parents, having your own children is an entirely different matter. The adoption agency has a choice between a good parent and a bad example. Although i think we should license child birth because the world can only support so many people. That's a mathematical fact.

People with tatoos and piercings don't risk their health or the health of the child they're adopting now do they. Smokers are looked at with less favoritism by the adoption services and if you're a heavy drinker you won't be able to adopt. At least that's how the system is supposed to work.

Also the adoption services tend to pick stable couples, not a womanizer. So basically all of your examples are null and void.

you know if fat people cant adopt i dont think gay people should be allowed to either
i think growing up in a gay household would be way worse for the precious child
getting beat up in school because you have 2 mommies or 2 daddies
never heard of someone getting beat up because there daddies a fatty