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.

 

Take fat kids into care, say experts

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Take fat kids into care, say experts


www.news.com.au

CHILD protection authorities should take fat kids into care, experts say, citing a 110cm 40kg four-year-old girl who watched TV for six hours a day.

"Jade", a girl actually comprised of several real cases also had tantrums when she was denied food, a report in the Medical Journal of Australia says.

The example has obesity experts calling on child protection authorities to take extremely obese children from parents who allow them to become too fat.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 03:26 AM
link   
Hmmm, I'm not sure about this.

I've got no problems about adults making themselves fat through their lifestyle choices. Of course, they need some help but they did it to themselves.

However, it's a little trickier when parents neglect children enough to make them fat. Help the whole family but don't split them up in the process. Black and white guidelines would be useless in these instances.

I know that many parents would resent big brother trying to take their children away, rightly so.


www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:07 AM
link   
This falls into the same category as my post on this page. Please study the sites indicated. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Such so called authority is a rational of the legal society / system and the rational is roughly as follows: When a person is born that PERSON (YOUR NAME all caps) is property of the state and a bond is issued under that name ie YOUR NAME, a corporate entity managed by the corporate "Government" and Administered by the "Corporate legal society" via maritime law practices. These practices are not necessarily "constitutional in responsibility" they are usually Administrative. Now that PERSON is absolutely NOT you the living human being. Administrative authority only exists over the fictional YOU but you volunteer to be identified with that person in court. So the rational of such Acts is that YOU being a property of the state are manageable at their discretion.

The truth is that if the family understand what is going on and how to avoid being entrapped into the legal society the legal society will have no authority over them! But, we are deliberately managed to be ignorant of what is really going on.

A fundamental practice (karmic) of the Illuminati (so called) is get people to volunteer or buy into authority and consequences even though they almost never have a clue what they have just done!



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:20 AM
link   
Let me put it this way. The "System" works just like a trap. A mouse trap, lobster trap, etc.. We walk into the trap because we don't realize what it is and most of the time never realize what we've done to ourselves. But the means appears to exist (via eduction) to learn how to recognize and avoid stepping into the trap. A trapper in the woods setting a trap for a fox rationalizes to them self that the fox will have to choose to step into the trap. You can't cheat an honest man so if I try to cheat you I'm only going to catch the dishonest guy so whats the problem? (kind of thinking) -- its not what we tend to think -- We tend to think the authority is absolute, it's not, it's buy in. There really are rationals and choices we can be chained or free. Remaining uninformed and ignorant tends to leave us at the mercy of unscrupulous people. We don't have to remain that way.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Starred and Flagged! Good Work Tezz!

Under this logic: Fat Government employees and Politicians should be fired or removed from their positions.

We can't have people chosen to serve and Represent society doing so whilst Fat - it is just poor form and renders them as de facto 'bad' role models.

*Fat people are no longer allowed to adopt children and they especially should not be in government, even as simple service workers (under this system of illogic). Perhaps that is where all the fat people have been getting the idea from;

Damn you Winston Churchill! You've ruined Generations!

(Then there is John Candy, who taught us that Fat people can still be happy - What a horrible influence on the Body Politik he was...)

Edit: Have you seen Gordon Brown's Double-Chin and Swollen belly?

He should be Removed from his Position and kept out of public view until he looks like a Good, non-fat, role model... We can't risk another fat Prime Minister - look what happened with Teddy Heath... People got fatter after that and have been getting fatter ever since. Churchill merely formed the 'foundation' of a Paradigm that has brought the Earth itself to the Brink of Destruction - God help us all if Gordon Brown Gets Fatter.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Hey Tezza,

I think we need to substantiate (or legally solidify) what constitutes parental abuse and what doesn't. Any laws pertaining to parental abuse (or abuse in general) should then be applied.

In my mind abuse is abuse no matter what the instrument is. Neglect is also neglect no matter what form it comes in. I'm not sure we can say, it's ok to abuse a child thusly but any other way is non acceptable... (not that you said that... but I'm just saying..)

Let's look at it this way... What is worse? Hitting a child and leaving marks & emotional scars or forcing a child to passively smoke (by smoking inside) and causing the child all manner of medical problems in years to come.

Is one any different to the other? If a parent can plea naivety to obvious health risks, were they ever fit for parenting and should this be an acceptable excuse.

If the family is kept together after abusive actions on behalf of the parent, what systems should be put in place to ensure a healthy change? Should there be a zero tolerance placed upon the parent after that point?

If being a part of the family unit proves unhealthy for the child, is the health of the family unit itself more important than that of the child?

Just some thoughts....

IRM



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
Hey Tezza,

Hey, IRM.

I'm struggling with this news article, as I can kind of see both sides to it. Warning bells always sound in me when the government wants to step in and remove children from families, however, I know that abused children should also be taken care of.

It's a grey area that needs common sense monitoring on a case-by-case basis. Typical government departments will write black and white laws though and stuff it up along the way.

It's not often that I'm totally undecided on something, so I have to admit that this one has me stumped. I'm happy to be undecided, for once!



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


It'll just produce a bunch of children who dont like their parents because they never showed them how to restrain themselves.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


I don`t know IRM, the in thing is to not have people smoke right? But what of those who drink? I find it amazing that we judge those who smoke, yet we allow places such as bars to stay open to serve booze. Sure, it`s up to the person who drinks, how much they drink. But yet, there are those who maybe only have one or two drinks and get behind the wheel and run the risk of killing someone. And they may show as being below the limit, yet they may kill someone, but that`s ok, right? Sure, they may be able to stop smoking in the near future, but I can say one thing, they never will do away with booze. Why is that? How many in government and how many lawyers drink? Do you think they will want laws to stop their fun? I shouldn`t say they drink for fun, it`s more that they drink to calm their nerves, but that`s ok, right? It`ll never happen in this lifetime. But yet, we can dictate to those who smoke, yea, that`s being fair all the way around isn`t it?

You see, I grew up around parents who smoked, both parents. I am 53, and I remember them smoking when I was very little. neither one drank, but they both smoked. Should they have had their kids taken away? If so, why? Smoking was ok at that time, was it not? Now, all of a sudden, it`s wrong. Sure, studies show it`s bad for you, but, isn`t drinking booze just as bad? So, if we`re going to be fair in this, shouldn`t those who drink have their kids taken away?





[edit on 2-2-2009 by FiatLux]



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by FiatLux
 


I was only using smoking as an example. However, we do know better these days. My mum smoked around us too but they didn't have the information at their finger tips that we do today. Remember, there's no such thing as second hand alcohol.

I believe we should have mandatory educational classes for soon to be parents that teach them what children can and cannot be exposed to amongst other common sense things like nutrition etc. That way parents have no other reason/excuse other than conscious choice...

Like the car I saw yesterday with the child in the front seat with no seatbelt on with both feet hanging out of the passenger side window. What on earth was her father thinking? Bad choice and he can't say he didn't know the dangers right! Negligence of the highest order!

IRM



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
reply to post by FiatLux
 


I was only using smoking as an example. However, we do know better these days. My mum smoked around us too but they didn't have the information at their finger tips that we do today. Remember, there's no such thing as second hand alcohol.

I believe we should have mandatory educational classes for soon to be parents that teach them what children can and cannot be exposed to amongst other common sense things like nutrition etc. That way parents have no other reason/excuse other than conscious choice...

Like the car I saw yesterday with the child in the front seat with no seatbelt on with both feet hanging out of the passenger side window. What on earth was her father thinking? Bad choice and he can't say he didn't know the dangers right! Negligence of the highest order!

IRM


Yes, but, should we hold our parents responsible from all those years ago? With the sue happy world we live in, should we sue them for what they put us through? Should I sue my parents? Should I hold them resposible for my smoking today? No, I wouldn`t sue them, and no, I will not hold them resposible. I went to school with many kids who`s parents never smoked, but yet, they went out and bought cigarettes and smoked them, and many of them still do.

As far as being schooled before having kids, as to what we can and can not expose them to? We would end up locking them in a window free room because almost everything in this world anymore is not good for us. Bad jobs, smoking, drinking, food additives, CO2 ridden air, guns, knives, clubs, any transportation. All the above could kill you in one way or the other. So we may as well just lock them in a room and not let them see the real world.

There may not be such a thing as second hand alcohol, but, tell that to the families of those who are killed by drunk drivers. How do you stop someone from drinking and driving? You never will as long as drinking is allowed. You can make hundreds of laws to stop these things, but, there are those who will always think they are not under the influance, and can still drive.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
The families should get help yes....but the child taken away? No.

Many people eat for comfort, so how would taking the child away help at all?


If the child refuses to eat less or excercise, or make any effort to lose weight, you can't force them to do so. Never mind the fact that there are studies (No proof, was in a documentary on tv...sorry) that some people are more likely to gain weight, and will have more trouble losing it than others.

Think of all those poeple you know who eat barely anything but are overweight, compared to the dowright greedy who look almost anorexic...



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   
I agree with this, parents are killing their children. They need to teach them good eating habits, not doing so is pure neglect and avoiding the issue. I wish this was done in America.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Although the Gov't taking away children is a horrible way to do things, it's just as horrifying to see what goes on with most everyone i know.


Most people i know are far too stupid to care for themselves properly, let alone raise a healthy child. It should be considered child abuse to intentionally poison and sicken a child, but "everyone" does it. Do you seriously think that feeding your child HFCS, MSG, Trans-fat, and chemical laden imitation food is NOT abuse on the highest order?

Every time i see you idiots hand your poor helpless kids soda and crap food, i see red. I have to restrain myself from beating the crap out of you morons. I see another life led down a wasted path by stubborn ignorance.

And it's not just the food, it's the whole situation.

Ther only thing that the average family can afford is what's pushed onto them by the toxic waste factories that call themselves the food industry. You can't afford to eat food so you settle for feeding your kids crap. What we should be doing is demanding a safe food supply FIRST! Fix what's really wrong and there won't be a problem.

I mean, what the hell is wrong with people?

Makes me ashamed to even be from the same species as all you blind idiots.

Scary thing is, every generation gets dumber. I've now got to live side by side with millions of complete idiots with no common sense. I don't see a future that i want to be any part of, you idiots scare me.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Hmmm.... Tezz I can see both sides too. Of course the system as it is needs massive reform, but yes I can see both sides.

My gut reaction is to say, let them take the kids away? Hells no!

But then I think of some of the kids I see out in public... not kids that have gained a little pudge at puberty but morbidly obese 6 and 7 year olds.

This I beleive constitutes genuine abuse, and should relegate the parent to counceling at least--taking them away is an extreme of course.

It's the difference between spanking a child and beating him. It disgusts me to see fat kids in public because the parents have done this, either by placating them with food or by neglect. That parent is setting up the kid with bad habits FOR LIFE that could very well take decades off of his life span.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I think that parents should just be educated more.
I exercise for an hour every other day in the gym with weight lifting, plus yoga every day, I eat healthy, and I weigh 102.

I also sit in front of the TV for a huge amount of time, but usually I'm doing homework or reading at the same time, or cooking and listening to the TV in the other room.

Some people have worse metabolisms, though.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
I think that parents should just be educated more.
I exercise for an hour every other day in the gym with weight lifting, plus yoga every day, I eat healthy, and I weigh 102.

I also sit in front of the TV for a huge amount of time, but usually I'm doing homework or reading at the same time, or cooking and listening to the TV in the other room.

Some people have worse metabolisms, though.


My kids are 2 and they have already learned to imitate my movements when I exercise.

I feed them healthfully. They are not at all fat and neither am I.

Some people never loose the baby weight. SOme kids are chubby naturally. That can all be taken into the account but there is NO EXCUSE for the kids that look like this:




posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by asmeone2
 


That's disgusting, Asme.
That should come with a graphic image disclaimer.

Really that's when habits get learned, at a young age, and that's how you get people who request a free airline seat for the other half of their body...

In the state of CT we have to take a certain number of hours of physical education. I fought with my school about it because I don't do the whole "competition" thing at all (No sports, no AP classes, only took the ACTs, etc) so they put me in weight lifting.

I can weight lift more than lots of boys my age. It's kind of awesome.

I thought that the masses were being enrolled in sports and things... I remember I was always made fun of because I danced middle eastern outside of school when everyone was cheerleading or playing lacrosse.

I guess video games are the new PE...



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


And that's exactly why I agree this can be abuse. You say you want a disclaimer because you don't want to look at her. That is a living, breathing girl there, and her parents have essentially turned her into something less than human.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 





However, it's a little trickier when parents neglect children enough to make them fat. Help the whole family but don't split them up in the process. Black and white guidelines would be useless in these instances.


I agree. In my mind this should be looked upon much worse than a parent that spanks their child. Parents who neglect their kids to the point that they are obese should face some sort of consequence. The lifetime of damage that they are inflicting upon their child is very cruel.

I am not really sure what most parent think when they do this. I would have to guess that in most cases the parents are in denial about their role in the weight of their child, blaming it on genetics or some other ailment. Other cases the parents simply don't want to deal with the fight, so they give the child whatever they want. Either way, I wish they would simply realize the lifetime of pain and disease that they are giving them.

Why would any parent wish that upon their kids?

Also, the draw on society that a lifetime of obesity is something else to keep in mind. The medical needs of someone who is obese their entire life far exceeds the medical needs of someone who was raised with proper eating habits.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join