If We Take Obese Kids Out of Homes, Who is Next?

It is all over the news today. A couple of doctors at Harvard want the government to remove obese children from their homes, place them on foster care, and treat the obesity. Let me think, didn't I hear something else about Harvard researchers recently? Oh, yes, they think that only Republicans enjoy celebrating the founding of our country. But I digress.

So what do I think? Obviously childhood obesity is a serious issue. Seventeen percent of kids are obese; three times the rate of obesity thirty years ago. More kids are being diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol than ever before. So yes, something must be done about this pending healthcare crisis.

Do I think it is a form of child abuse? Yes, but these parents don't realize that. In the majority of cases, you will find that they are raising their kids the same way they were raised. Are we not all guilty of that to some extent?

Is removing them from their homes a good idea? Absolutely not--and for many reasons:

• First of all, none of the articles I read this morning discussed the psychological effects this would have on the child. Now I am not a psychologist, but I am sure that many of these overwieght kids have some issues already--depression, low self esteem, and more. How does taking them away from the family unit, who they depend on and love, benefit them in that manner? What a traumatic event for that child.
• Putting them in foster homes is suggested as a solution. I know there are many wonderful foster parents out there, but I have heard so many horror stories of physical, mental, and sexual abuse that I have to question the wisdom of that move. So you move a depressed overweight, but loved child into a home in which they are put on a forced diet and possibly sexually abused--for their welfare? Hmmm.
• Do we have that many foster homes out there? The last I heard, the demand for foster homes was much greater than the supply already.
• What about the expense of adding that many more people that the government has to pay to care for?
• Another important reason to not resort to this forced removal from homes is: What is next? With Obamacare leading us down the path to socialized medicine, we better take a long look at the future. If we let the government start deciding who is a fit parent and who is not, where does that slippery slope lead? Trust me, don't trust the government. At some point they will be coming for your kids and putting them in re-training camps--for their weight, their level of exercise, their grades, the fact that they got caught smoking a cigarette, the fact that they drink sodas and eat chips and so forth. Am I paranoid? Perhaps, but remember, with socialized medicine you must control the actions of the public in order to afford the cost. So if kids can be, for want of a better term brainwashed, into good health practices, isn't that for the greater good? In my mind it is better not to peek into that Pandora's box.

So what can be done? There are many different ways to attack the problem:

• Remove all vending machines from schools. We didn't have them when I went to school and we survived just fine.
• Remove so many choices from school lunches and give them one entree, two vegetables, a desert (that could be fruit), and milk or water to drink. Give them healthy foods instead of so many choices and wasted food at the end of the day.
• Reinstate physical education in schools so that kids have it every day K through 12.
• Government money could be spent helping dieticians and physicians provide low or no cost dietary classes for families with identified obesity issues. If the whole family attends and learns, then they may be able to make the changes necessary for their health.
• Health educational classes for families of obesity to help them understand the consequences their child will face due to the obesity.
• Encourage more towns to have community gardens for families so they could grow their own healthy foods. The garden plots could be leased on a pro-rated sliding scale based on income.
• Free classes on gardening for those who would be interested in growing their own foods. Many poor people cannot afford organic foods, but might grow their own.

I could keep going; there are so many potential solutions. Bottomline is that you can only help people who want help. But there should be services that can help those that truly want it.

Dr. David Orentlicher, co-director of Hall Center for Law and Health at Indiana University of School Law said in an interview with ABC news, "Sometimes it is easier to take a child out of the home than take the time and resources to provide the right solution to the problem." I am saying that we need to get this right--for the kids, the families, our economy, and our future as a free nation.