There is no doubt that social workers are unheralded and deserve much credit for the work that they do. But having said that, I can’t hide my displeasure at their willingness to break up families in the name of raising thinner kids.
It bothers me that people think they know what is best for someone elses children. It disturbs me that people can justify taking children from their flawed but loving parents and subject them to foster homes and estrangement from their flesh and blood all in the name of helping them to lose weight.
What about what the children want? Has it ever occurred to them that some children are prepared to deal with the consequences of being severely overweight if it means they can remain with their parents? Since when did physically healthy foster kids have it much better than obese kids enjoying the closeness of their parents and siblings?
And don’t tell me that parents that raise obese kids are ‘cruel’. Yes, they have made poor parental decisions and yes their poor decisions may have all kinds of serious consequences for their kids. But parenting, like weight loss, is not an easy job. It is unfair to taint parents as ‘cruel’ and ‘unfit to parent’ just because they are not succeeding in breaking bad habits. No parents wants to see their child suffer. Some just need a lot more support than others to break bad habits.
Four obese children are on the brink of being permanently removed from their family by social workers after their parents failed to bring their weight under control.
In the first case of its kind, their mother and father now face what they call the ‘unbearable’ likelihood of never seeing them again.
Their three daughters, aged 11, seven and one, and five-year-old son, will either be ‘fostered without contact’ or adopted.
Either way, the family’s only hope of being reunited will be if the children attempt to track down their parents when they become adults.
In an emotional interview, the 42-year-old mother said: ‘We might not be the perfect parents, but we love our children with all our hearts. To face a future where we will never see them again is unbearable.
‘They picked on us because of our size to start with and they just haven’t let go, despite the fact we’ve done everything to lose weight and meet their demands. We’re going to fight this to the bitter end. It feels like even prisoners have more human rights than we do.’
The bullying and stand over tactics by the social workers and courts were deplorable. Making them send their kids to dance and sport lessons is not sensible at all. Why wouldn’t the courts give the children a say about whether or not they wanted to go to dance and football? Ask a young girl suffering from obesity whether or not she would take up dancing, she would invariably say, “Over my dead body.” Clocking in and out to satisfy court imposed curfews and having social workers stand in corners taking notes at dinnertime just added to the lunacy.
Society is too harsh on parents. Parenting is a difficult job. Instead of judging or punishing parents for bad choices, would it be too much trouble to offer real support and encouragement? Has this couple ever once been offered free appointments with dieticians or councillors?
Soon we are going to get to the stage where it is socially acceptable to classify any parent with even a slightly overweight child as a reckless and sub-standard parent.
I think I’ve heard it all. It seems you can take any position nowadays, no matter how crazy or usual it sounds and sell it to a world of impressionable and desperate people. Advocating a more lazy, hands-off approach to parenting is certainly unconventional. The claim that families are suffering from “family fatigue” just seems odd:
Children need time and space just to play and to be – if not they’ll end up psychologically damaged and useless, says a British parenting writer and philosopher.
Tom Hodgkinson is author of The Idle Parent, a book that encourages parents to adopt a hands-off approach so that their children become more self-reliant and capable.
… the less free time parents allocate to their children, the more anxious parents seem to become.
Rather than ferrying kids to music lessons, sports games and playgroups, it seems we should be saving our energy and staying at home, dragging out the dress-up or craft box, or sending the kids out into the backyard.
I resist criticising parents, because as one myself, I know that it’s not an easy job. Parents make mistakes, it’s just a fact of life. But some mistakes, parents just can’t afford to make. Shaming a ten year-old in the way that this mother does, takes a small problem and turns it into much larger one:
A Townsville mother has punished her son by making him sit in public wearing a sign that read, “Do not trust me. I will steal from you as I am a thief”.
The boy, who was also wearing a pair of Shrek ears and writing lines, spent almost an hour near a waterpark on Sunday while his family ate lunch nearby, the Townsville Bulletin reported.
Diane Mayers told the Bulletin that she was so “horrified” when she saw the boy, thought to be about 10, that she alerted Child Safety Services.
The former Child Safety Services worker said the long-term effects of the public humiliation would be greater than any form of physical abuse.
“A lot of people walked past and were laughing at him, including boys who would have been his age,” she said.
She said the parents had clearly put a lot of work into the punishment, with the boy wearing laminated signs on both his back and his front.
Ms Mayers told the Bulletin the boy took the Shrek ears off at one point when her daughter overheard the boy’s mother say, ‘Put them back on or I’ll smack your head in’.
That boy may never steal again, but does the punishment really fit the crime? Not even close.
Remember when quality time with another involved talking? Remember when a family dinner was a daily not twice yearly occasion? Well, times have changed and some think that the lack of real conversation between family and friends is quite acceptable and just a new feature in the era we live in.
Four in five parents described playing video games with their children as “quality time”, while 32 per cent of parents play computer games with their kids every day.
Many grandparents revealed that they play video games with their tech-savvy grandchildren, in a bid to get closer to them.
Dr Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Reader in Psychology at Goldsmiths said: “These findings are important because they highlight the social benefits of playing videogames.
“Previous research has tended to look only at the individual effects of video games, but in the era of social networking games appear to play a vital role in enhancing social relationships. The fact that both parents and grandparents are using games to connect with their children and grandchildren, and quite successfully, suggests that video games can improve social skills and make a key contribution to both effective parenting and child development.
The social benefits of playing video games? Are you a doctor of psychology or a rep for Nintendo? Just because parents are resorting to these lengths in a bid to connect with their kids doesn’t mean that it’s the best way to communicate with them. You can spend hours every night playing Mario Bros. with your child and never begin to understand how they are feeling, what their troubles are and what excites them etc.
Imagine if dates consisted of smartphone operations and video game playing instead of dinner and romantic walks? How would that work? The answer is it wouldn’t, because people need to actually converse in order to connect.
A recent survey seems to show that many parents prefer rest and a quiet drink than spending time with their kids:
A new survey has revealed that stressed adults prefer to kick back with a bottle of wine, rather than spending time with their partners or children.
Six in ten adults said drinking was their top choice after a stressful day, reports the Daily Mail.
While 28 per cent said spending time with their children helped them relax only 26 per cent opted for talking to their partner, according to the poll of 825 adults conducted by industry-funded charity Drinkaware.
It found people battle stress with up to four drinks on a typical evening at home.
Family dynamics have changed over the years. Something like the family dinner is quite different now to what it was in the 60’s and 70’s. Whilst a few drinks is clearly more relaxing than getting the kids ready for bed, it is still important that they receive the love and attention they need.
Ultimately, they need to feel as though they are more important than a drink at the end of a taxing and stressful day.
Last week Harvard obesity specialist David Ludwig advocated putting children in temporary foster care when the child is found to be obese. The obvious conclusion being, that in his opinion, allowing your child to get to the stage of obesity equates to a form of child abuse.
I don’t agree with this statement or the measures advocated by Mr. Ludwig. And more importantly I think the debate will distract rather than positively influence what is a very important issue. I appreciate the words of Dr. Arthur Caplan, the director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvaniawho wrote:
“I am not letting parents off the hook,” he wrote in response to the article, “but putting the blame for childhood obesity on the home and then arguing that moving kids out of homes where obesity reigns is the answer is short-sighted and doomed to fail. We need the nation to go on a diet together and the most important places to start are the grocery store, schools and media.”
My only query on the above quote is why he omitted “home”. Surely “home” is the most important place to start a change of habits. Not just in what is eaten, but how food is eaten. It is sad to hear of the demise of family dinners. Surely the television and computers can be switched off for half-an-hour every evening.
Whether it was a legitimate attempt or just a joke, it is a very sad and sorry look at the inherent selfishness in some parts of our society.
A VICTORIAN woman is being investigated after offering her two young children for sale to the highest bidder on internet auction site eBay.
The woman, in her early 30s, lives near Geelong. She wrote a “lengthy sales pitch” that included photographs of her son and daughter, both aged under 10.
Several people placed bids on the sickening auction, which has alarmed authorities.
Detectives from the Sexual Offences and Child Abuse unit were alerted to the internet page by a horrified member of the public.
The page has been taken down and the woman’s children could be taken into permanent care.
Victoria Police has decided not to press charges against the mum, who claims the act was a joke.
However, police sources told the Sunday Herald Sun they were disturbed by the incident and in particular the genuine bidders who tried to obtain the children.
Officers continue to probe the people who bid on the children and the Department of Human Services is continuing its investigation into the family.
Father and computer expert, Bill Ramsey sets a good example for other parents concerned about what their children get up to online:
“The internet has really changed the way that children interact with the world and not always for good,” said Bill Ramsey. He’s owns The Bill Guy Technology Solutions and is a dad. He says you have to know who your kids are chatting with on places like Facebook. “There are so many parents that say I don’t care that they put that stuff up there and I tell them they should. You should care,” he said.
He cares so much, he requires his 15-year-old step daughter provide her passwords so he can access everything, including text messages. He says she doesn’t like it but knows if she breaks the rules she’ll lose her computer privileges. By checking her email recently, he found emails from a guy who asked she send pictures of herself. She didn’t do it, but he says she also didn’t understand why it was a big deal. “So what this is a person I’ll never see. But you don’t know this. You don’t know who this is,” he said.
Ramsey was able to find the boy who lived in Arkansas and called his parents. He says that also shows how easy it is to track people down with information posted on-line. The National Center for Exploited and Missing Children say one in seven youth between the ages of 10 and 17 have received a sexual solicitation on the internet. Ramsey says that’s enough to know what your kids are up to. “It’s not an invasion of their privacy,” he said.
Obviously Ramsey is good with computers and has an easier time keeping track on his child’s on-line activity. But he says it’s not difficult if you put in some effort. He says having passwords is the most helpful but it’s also good just to visit their Facebook page. If getting a password won’t work, he says there are several software programs that offer various amounts of protection and some at a cost.
A survey has revealed that fully 30 per cent of British parents’ Facebook “friend” requests to their children get rejected, and that many then resort to using other people’s login details in order to keep track of their offspring’s Web-2.0 activities.
This sad commentary on the number of parents who feel able to speak to their kids as opposed to interacting with them primarily online – it would seem normal to know in advance whether a friend request to one’s nipper would be rejected, for instance – came among the results of a survey of 2,000 online Brits.
The survey revealed that among today’s digital British some 5 per cent of parents would like to monitor their kids on Facebook but don’t know how, and 55 per cent do stalk their kids online. No less than 11 per cent reported that the only reason they had a Facebook account was to keep an eye on their nippers, suggesting that in some age groups, up to a fifth of Facebook users have no real interest in the service’s putative benefits and are only there because they worry about its effects on their kids.
Indeed in many cases a Facebook user who signed up for positive reasons is not actually that person – it is a friend of theirs borrowing their login to keep tabs on their kids. Some 13 per cent of digital parents reported having done this, presumably because they couldn’t be bothered creating an account just for this purpose.
Altogether then, it would appear that 24 per cent of online Brit parents consider that the only reason to use Facebook is worry about their children. Perhaps it’s just as well that the company’s founder Mark Zuckerberg says he no longer cares about new signups.
“These figures are initially quite surprising, but since certain malicious third parties have been known to prey on unsuspecting or over trusting individuals online, it does seem as though many could have legitimate concerns,” commented Claus Villumsen of security firm Bullguard, which commissioned the survey.
I wonder if Mark Zukerberg and his Facebook team can do more to help concerned parents.
Shame on you David Ludwig for making a conclusion that belies all common sense and sensitivity. How can you justify the idea of taking children away from their parents because of their obesity? How is such a move in the best interest of the child?
Should parents lose custody of their kids if they get too fat?
A commentary in Wednesday’s Journal of the American Medical Association says yes.
Harvard obesity specialist David Ludwig says putting children in temporary foster care can be more ethical than providing weight-loss surgery – but only in extreme cases.
Ludwig says the point is not to punish the parents – but to act in the child’s best interest, and provide care that the parents do not or cannot provide.
Ludwig says the goal is to get those kids back to their parents as soon as possible – and for parents to learn the proper ways to prevent future obesity.
There have previous calls for government intervention, in cases where parents either neglect or refuse proper efforts to control a child’s extreme weight.
A doctor from London cited a Wisconsin case from 2009 in which a 440-pound 16-year-old almost died at UW Hospital in Madison.
Doctors had talked about reporting the parents for neglect – but they didn’t have to, because the girl later lost 100 pounds with her family’s help.
The Journal article comes a week after an annual study reported that 27-percent of Wisconsin adults are obese.
This method will further punish a child with enough to contend with as it is. No parent wants their child to be obese. Yes, some do more than others to avoid obesity, but that doesn’t mean that they are not loving and caring parents. Many of them, as reported, suffer from obesity themselves.
As a society we must learn to support rather than threaten. The child’s welfare does not rely on just a loss of weight but also the continued love and support from their parents. We must not fingerpoint or punish parents for obesity. It won’t help one bit. Instead we must offer as much support, education and guidance as we can to ensure that families are able to pass up cheap calorie laden products for the more expensive, yet far more healthy alternatives.
Topical Teaching 