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.

 

Baby taken parents refused to feed him junk food

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   
"You have legal rights but be warned if you oppose this we will go straight to court and have all your parental rights taken away."
what a joke of a system not sure what doctor could get away with telling the parents of the kid to eat junk no wonder obesity is such a big problem
www.naturalnews.com...




posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Thats Britian for you these days...fricking riduculous BUT not in the slightest surprised?

Still, no-one really does anything about it -pity that this is so prelavent over here now.

Valorian



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 07:14 AM
link   
i dunno ...

on the face of it this looks to be a total over reaction.

but lets think about this one slightly deeper, that child will not eat the food prepared by the mother as it simply doesnt like it, now, that is very bad for anyone, calorific intake is ESSENCIAL TO BEING ALIVE!

the doctors have told her basicly " Look, your child will not eat your food, give it something else"

the story used the phrase "junk food" with little thought... what are they classing as "junk food" ? As that is not stated here. What is stated is that the doctors told the woman to give her child some food which contains HIGH calories for the simple reason that we need colories to give our body energy, without that we die, and this child is not eating and thus has no calorific intake and is in danger of becoming malnurished!

one thing to remember, esspecialy if you have been on ats a while... their are ALOT of people out their who think their holyier than though thinking and way of life is the absolute best way to live, never mind doctors or science... fact is if the child did not eat something ... ANYTHING ... It will die, yet the parents seem to think "screw that, i dont want him eating what we think is crap... its healthfood or nothing"

this is YET ANOTHER story which is blown out of proportion!



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
"I have four other children and they are perfectly healthy, it was just that Zak was refusing food for some reason," his mother said. "They said I should just feed Zak chocolate, cakes and junk food just to get calories into him. But I objected, saying that was only a short-term answer and not a proper solution."

did you even read it?



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by boaby_phet
i dunno ...

on the face of it this looks to be a total over reaction.

but lets think about this one slightly deeper, that child will not eat the food prepared by the mother as it simply doesnt like it, now, that is very bad for anyone, calorific intake is ESSENCIAL TO BEING ALIVE!

the doctors have told her basicly " Look, your child will not eat your food, give it something else"

the story used the phrase "junk food" with little thought... what are they classing as "junk food" ? As that is not stated here. What is stated is that the doctors told the woman to give her child some food which contains HIGH calories for the simple reason that we need colories to give our body energy, without that we die, and this child is not eating and thus has no calorific intake and is in danger of becoming malnurished!

one thing to remember, esspecialy if you have been on ats a while... their are ALOT of people out their who think their holyier than though thinking and way of life is the absolute best way to live, never mind doctors or science... fact is if the child did not eat something ... ANYTHING ... It will die, yet the parents seem to think "screw that, i dont want him eating what we think is crap... its healthfood or nothing"

this is YET ANOTHER story which is blown out of proportion!


Blown out of proportion? Really?

What part of the STATE taking their child because some Ahole doctor got his panties in a wad for being questioned? Sounds like a lazy doctor with a half ass solution. State quality medicine folks!

Obstinate child. Remember, at that age, they are little more than cute animals. They go feral if you give an inch. I have one and have helped raise half a dozen.

What part of "only gained one pound" on junk food did you not get?

This is STATE CONTROLED MEDICINE folks! Be ready to defend yourself.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Whilst it does appear to be over reaction by social services, the whole 'junk food' think is over reaction by the tabloid press keen to blow a mundane story into something more dramatic.

The original UK story

Trouble, as always, in these cases is what information has been deliberately left out of the tabloid story? We'll probably never know. But I doubt we're getting the full story (if so, it'll be a world first!).



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 08:09 AM
link   
@CYRAX clearly i did, if you read my reply you will see it refers to more than a few things from that actual page that was linked in the OP.

i understand you posted this page, but it doesnt meant you DONt have to look at things objectivly!

@felonius 1 lb more, compared to what he woudl lose by not eating... all the 1lb thing means is that he was actualy eating and being sustained !

unfortunetly, the story doesnt mention loss of weight before the kid was taken to the dr's, we only have the weight put on side of the argument, which makes this whole discussionette pointless!


to both of you!

Im suprised you could even type your replys with your knee's jerking the way they are!

[edit on 12-4-2010 by boaby_phet]



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 08:20 AM
link   
2 years old and only 17 pounds????????????????????????????????

Sorry but that is cutting it alittle close IMO. The baby is only two and the idea that getting his weight up makes perfect sence, ESPECIALLY, if he is refusing to eat what yout trying to feed him. Get his weight up and THEN try to ease him onto your food regiment......

EDIT TO ADD: I am not one to make fun of peoples outward appearence, but when a mother is obviously NOT eating perfectly healthy and has some chub on her, how can you FORCE your 2 year old to be only 17lbs because you refuse to get calories into him and act like your some expert dietition!!!!!!

[edit on 4/12/2010 by rcwj1975]



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 08:29 AM
link   
"the story used the phrase "junk food" with little thought... what are they classing as "junk food" ? As that is not stated here."

"They said I should just feed Zak chocolate, cakes and junk food just to get calories into him. But I objected, saying that was only a short-term answer and not a proper solution."






posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by CYRAX
 


This is an old story and was discussed to death here last year.

www.dailymail.co.uk...



[edit on 12/4/10 by Kailassa]



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by felonius
 


wow, i just realised why this story was posted .... took me a wee bit of time to see it!



This is STATE CONTROLED MEDICINE folks! Be ready to defend yourself.


message to americans - dont critisize something you have absolutely no experience in!

instead of trying to find flaws in the british healthcare system, how about you make a little post on ATS to find out how many people have actualy been helped in the uk by the NHS! ... if it wasnt for the NHS alot of people in the uk simply wouldnt be alive ...



[edit on 12-4-2010 by boaby_phet]



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join