posted
I was in McDonalds today and saw something that bothered me. There were a bunch of kids playing on the playground, but one little girl caught my eye. She was about five years old, cute, cheerful, gentle, and painfully obese. She wasn't chubby, or thick, or stocky, or overweight, she was obese. She was so large she had to swing her legs around one another to take each step, and had a hard time getting herself up onto things. She also repeatedly got stuck on the slide.
Before anyone gets angry with me, I considered the fact that she might have a medical condition--until, that is, her mother brought out her food. She started her meal with two orders of french fries, a chocolate sunday, and a coke. Before the little girl had finished the second serving of fries, her mom got up, went to the counter, and came back with another full bag of food. She pulled out chicken nuggets and some other stuff, but it was time for us to leave, and I didn't really want to see more.
I felt like what I was seeing was a form of child neglect, a mother so intent on indulging her child that she was actually hurting her. I came home to do some research and found ChildAbuseMD, a sight for child abuse evaluation and treatment for medical providers from SUNY Upstate Medical University. It said this:
quote:Emotional abuse can also occur when physical needs are excessively provided. This includes overprotection of children, overfeeding leading to obesity, and excessive medical care or Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, described below.
But there are a lot of obese children all over the world. Are all their parents "emotionally abusing" them? Can it really be compared with Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy?
I don't know what to think.
-------------------- The technical term is narcissism. You can't believe everything is your fault unless you also believe you're all powerful.--House Posts: 2684 | From: Budapest | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
In the long run, quite possibly. As a formerly chubby child, I can tell you that my childhood years were traumatized by the teasing and being made fun of. I hate to see this. It breaks my heart.
While I was chubby because I had a serious sweet tooth and snuck sweets from under my parents noses, I know people who constantly feed their child just to shut them up or ensure good behaviour. In my opinion, that is abuse. These parents have no idea what they are doing to their child, both short and long term. In the short term, there are the risks of juvenile diabetes, heart problems, yada yada yada. In the long term, these children are going to be mercilessly teased until their self-esteem is so low they sink into a deep depression.
It happened to me, and my parents cared about what I ate. What's going to happen to these children that are fed absolutely anything to ensure the parents don't have to do their job?
This upsets me to no end.
-------------------- - ChildofMusic
"Music is one of the fairest and most glorious gifts of God." -Martin Luther Posts: 231 | From: Somewhere up in Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure whether I would call it abuse or neglect, but it's certainly unhealthy, and parents who do it aren't doing their children any favors or helping to prepare them for adulthood in any way, shape, or form.
It's sad, because what with all of the media attention on how bad obesity is for you, you'd think that the parents would know better.
Posts: 533 | From: Davis, CA | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think the article meant that ALL cases of overfeeding leading to obesity are emotional abuse. It meant that overfeding leading to obesity is one way that abuse "can" occur.
As for the people you saw in McDonald's, I'd say bad parenting perhaps, but bad parenting doesn't automatically equal abuse.
I grew up being overweight, and my parents were great. They didn't actively try to make me eat a lot, but they didn't clamp down on me when I did. Now, in hindsight, I wish they would have come doen a bit harder on me, as I wouldn't have had to fight the battles that I did as an adult to lose the weight. But to call them abusive? That's ridiculous, I think.
posted
I think this is one of the most overlooked forms of neglect- perhaps not abuse, but certainly neglect. A parent should try to raise as healthy and happy a child as possible, and allowing a child to become obese accomplishes neither.
Learning to eat healthily and excercise are two of the most important things for children to do. It's so sad when parents don't care. They're setting up their children for lifetimes of health problems and unhappiness.
-------------------- ÒIf you shut up truth and bury it under the ground, it will but grow, and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it bursts through it will blow up everything in its way.Ó -Emile Zola Posts: 1046 | From: Massachusetts | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by violetbon: As for the people you saw in McDonald's, I'd say bad parenting perhaps, but bad parenting doesn't automatically equal abuse.
No, it doesn't, but it didn't help that the mom was a normal weight and didn't order any food for herself. She just sat watching her daughter eat. Something wasn't right about it.
This is a friend of a friend story, but I was told by a very reliable source that a woman from Ireland visiting an American friend commented on her first day in New York, "This must be the most selfish country in the world. I've never seen parents so fit with children so fat. They must spend all their money on gyms for themselves and fast food for their kids."
While I can't vouch for the source, today I sympathized with the sentiment.
-------------------- The technical term is narcissism. You can't believe everything is your fault unless you also believe you're all powerful.--House Posts: 2684 | From: Budapest | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Given that not providing a child with enough food can be seen as neglect (or abuse, depending on the circumstances for lack of food), I'm not sure why the opposite is necessarily different. It's certainly a sliding scale depending on individual circumstances, but both starving and over feeding can be detrimental to the emotional, physical, and medical well-being of a child. Rather than weight alone I would look at overall nutrition. It's possible to look a healthy weight but suffer from malnourishment due to poor diet.
We were at a cafeteria one time that had a choice of juice from concentrate among the fountain sodas. A little boy of 5 or 6 years wanted the juice, but his mother said "Ew, no, that stuff's gross" and made him pick a soda. We were both dumbfounded and I thought maybe they were sharing a drink which would make it more understandable, but no, he was getting his own 12oz cup of Coke because mom wouldn't let him have the juice. There are some parents that have to fight with their kids to get them to drink juice, and here this mother was actually denying it.
-------------------- "You're the opposite of troll. It's a compliment!" Posts: 12086 | From: Alberta | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fact is, McDonald's is easier than cooking. It's easier to plop the kids in front of the TV than it is to keep an eye on them outside and listen to all the little sibling spats, or drive them around to soccer, gymnastics, or swimming. It's easier to fork over the Twinkie than to listen to the crying.
WHY a parent would do these things consistently (we all do it occasionally) are the real questions here. Are they that ignorant? Lazy? Completely overwhelmed? Desperate for the child's approval? I don't see it as the typical kind of child abuse where the parent is punishing the child for some real or imaginary offense. It seems like overindulgence on a pathological scale.
I agree, though. It is very sad.
Posts: 264 | From: South Dakota | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
(oops, hit Enter by accident and posted before I was finished!)
Even if she did have it, the mother should not have been indulging her in food this way. With Prader Willi you really need to keep low calorie foods around for your child.
I'm just wondering if it was possible that this little girl had a disorder that could have led to such obesity.
-------------------- 28 days, 6 hours, 42 minutes, and 12 seconds. That is when the world will end. Posts: 7158 | From: D.C. | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenn: Given that not providing a child with enough food can be seen as neglect (or abuse, depending on the circumstances for lack of food), I'm not sure why the opposite is necessarily different. It's certainly a sliding scale depending on individual circumstances, but both starving and over feeding can be detrimental to the emotional, physical, and medical well-being of a child. Rather than weight alone I would look at overall nutrition. It's possible to look a healthy weight but suffer from malnourishment due to poor diet.
We were at a cafeteria one time that had a choice of juice from concentrate among the fountain sodas. A little boy of 5 or 6 years wanted the juice, but his mother said "Ew, no, that stuff's gross" and made him pick a soda. We were both dumbfounded and I thought maybe they were sharing a drink which would make it more understandable, but no, he was getting his own 12oz cup of Coke because mom wouldn't let him have the juice. There are some parents that have to fight with their kids to get them to drink juice, and here this mother was actually denying it.
It could have been, as is sometimes the case with my kids, is that you know your kid just hates a particular type of juice (With one of ours it's apple.) yet consistantly tries to order it, resulting in wasting the juice and having him try to drink half of whatever his brother or I have. If he asks for it now, I tell him no. Even if it means him having a soda. (House rule is sodas are allowable while were out and about. Never when were in.)
A perfect example of this came about last night. We ate at the mall because I had an appointment there. Hubby asks the kids where they want to eat. (Mistake number one.) Then he askes them what they want to eat. (Mistake number 2.) Youngest asks for something riducules, expensive and doubtful that he would even eat it. I went to another restaurant, ordered my food, and waited and waited....
Anyway, kid had changed his mind several times, causing a HUGE delay, my husband obliged him. Then he was mad that kid had ordered what he ordered, then proceded not to eat it. I was really about ready to strangle him. (My husband, not the kid. Though I was annoyed at him for pulling it with hubby, because he knows that's not the way things go.)
Maybe I'm a food nazi, but I regulate what the eat and what sizes. I don't gives the options on where we go. I don't give them choices about what they want, aside from very minimal ones.(Choolate or white. Cheese or no cheese.) At home is the same thing, we have what we have, and thats that. Hubby tries to cater to them too often, and I often put my foot down making me the evil parent.
That being said, I don't ever critisize my children for how much they eat. I never say your going to finish that or else. I never deny a second helping of mashed potatoes. And I won't keep a scale in the house. My father was very strict at mealtimes, and with my wieght and I ended up with a phobia of eating in public and an eating disorder.
As far as nutrition advice goes I tell them eat when they're hungry, stop when they're full. Try to eat more good stuff than crap, exercise and you won't have problems. It's worked pretty well so far. (Except my youngest is as thin as death. But his doctor said thats fine.)
Vesta
-------------------- Innocence, on the Bicycle of Propriety, carrying the Urn of Reputation safely over the Abyss of Indiscretion. Posts: 1170 | From: Tucson, AZ | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Vesta: Maybe I'm a food nazi, but I regulate what the eat and what sizes. I don't gives the options on where we go. I don't give them choices about what they want, aside from very minimal ones.(Choolate or white. Cheese or no cheese.) At home is the same thing, we have what we have, and thats that. Hubby tries to cater to them too often, and I often put my foot down making me the evil parent.
I'm inclined to think that your parenting is perfectly fine, Vesta. But as I read your post I did wonder about a potential side effect of a "food nazi" approach. Could this kind of childhood produce the type of kid who, the moment they get to college and no longer have their food controlled, start binging and eating ridiculously poorly BECAUSE they haven't had the feeling of freedom to choose what they eat before?
The ideal approach would seem to be to educate the kid on good reasons for making good choices, rather than policing what they eat. Easier said than done, of course. How many bad choices does the kid have to make before you step in and remove choice? How do you reward good choices (or make them visibly their own reward) and avoid using shaming tactics to discourage bad choices ("Eat this or you'll get fat! Are you sure you should have ice cream two nights in a row -- think of the consequences!")?
Being a good parent seems to be just about as difficult as being a truly effective welfare state -- even when you think you've got things working reasonably well, someone will come along and accuse you of injustice.
Also, on another note: maybe the legal definition is peculiar, but wouldn't "neglect" by definition imply some form of inactivity or inattention? The over-feeding behavior in the OP sounds like a very active "spoiling" of the child, and hence probably more in the "abuse" camp.
--Logoboros
-------------------- "If Men were Wise, the Most arbitrary Princes could not hurt them. If they are not wise, the Freest Government is compelld to be a Tyranny."
posted
I would classify the OP as more neglect than abuse.
I mean, you can never rule out a disorder. However, obesity caused by a disease or disorder is pretty rare. Still, that doesn't mean this child didn't have *something* causing weight gain/retention.
I once was a fat kid (and now a large adult). And, as much as I hate saying it, I did inherit a lot of my size from the family. I have 4 uncles who are over 6' and weigh over 270 lbs. I take after them, being 6'5" and 300 lbs. I don't look obese, but I'm certainly not skinny.
And I'm a Veggie too.
I was *rarely* taken to McDonald's to eat when I was young. It was more of a once every other month treat we'd have. My mother typically cooked for us (and not very well either), and she also taught Elementary school all day. So she'd get home at 5:00 or 6:00 and make some quicky dinner.
When I got old enough, dinner fell on me. I'd have to cook dinner when I got home from school.
So, we'd usually have "home-cooked" meals as opposed to eating out all the time. I think there's something in this.
Even if you're making Hamburger Helper or home-made, from scratch noodles, home-cooked food tends to be more nutrious (less empty calories) and you tend to eat less.
Even if it is quicky meals from a pouch.
-------------------- "As convenient as it may be, it's time I started taking responsibility for the messes I've created instead of always blaming everything on the law of entropy" Posts: 453 | From: Denver, CO | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I have seen there is also a lack of phyiscal activity in children.
It appears to be common that some children are still in strollers at over 5 years old. We were at Marineland in Niagra Fallls in October last year and I saw a "plump" child aged around 7 years old . He appeared closed to DD1 and classmates size and vocabulary(sp?).
He was pushed around in one of those umberella strollers by one or other of his parents in the park. Around the show area he appeared to be capable of walking (ie no sign of phyiscal impairment). But his backside was touching the ground while he was being pushed.
DD2(aged 4) kept asking why he was not walking ....I was at a loss to explain
This week I saw a young girl of around 4 get out of their car, run around on the grass and then sit in a stroller before being pushed about 50 yards into the store where she was placed in the seat of the shopping trolley while the adult with her shopped.
I was stunned..... I want my children to walk with me supervised once they are about 3 years old. I do not want to spend my time pushing large children who are capable of walking themselves.
-------------------- Focus On The Family- An opinion group who think more about Gay Sex than gay people do- Rick Mercer Posts: 590 | From: Rawdon, Quebec | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ali_marea: Is it possible this girl had Prader Willi Syndrome?
Maybe, but that doesn't justify feeding your kid like she was five kids in one.
I was tested for it in high school (no one suggested it before then), but I didn't have it...for me, it was just a low metabolism brought on by insufficient exercise and overeating. I'm sure parents can control a kid's eating habits...that's basically what happened to me (my parents are both overweight.)
In this case, this girl may have this disorder, but her mother is doing her no favors giving her large helpings of food.
-------------------- A gigantic force on the 'Net, and even BIGGER in person. Posts: 508 | From: Ohio | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't imagine what issues the mom in the OP must have to do that to her child, and I must hope she was doing it unintentionally.
I feed my kids when they want food. I usually assume that a request for food is driven by literal hunger (although sometimes it's thirst, boredom or sleepiness). I sometimes feed them (gasp!) less than nutritious food, because it's easy and they like it. Sometimes they eat a lot of food in one sitting, but they'd generally have to ask before being provided more than the usual amount. So, taken out of context, the mother's actions in the OP wouldn't shock me.
What does bother me is that the mother appears to be ignoring very obvious evidence that her feeding scheme is destroying her child's body. There would have to be a very compelling unknown to justify this ignorance. As I can't even imagine what that might be, I conclude that this is very probably neglect, and I claim the right to change my mind when the unknown is made known.
-------------------- We also ask that you follow the guidelines above and try not to over-think these guidelines. - the transportation safety administration's permitted and prohibited items air travel list Posts: 240 | From: Kansas | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ali_marea: Is it possible this girl had Prader Willi Syndrome?
Maybe, but that doesn't justify feeding your kid like she was five kids in one.
I was tested for it in high school (no one suggested it before then), but I didn't have it...for me, it was just a low metabolism brought on by insufficient exercise and overeating. I'm sure parents can control a kid's eating habits...that's basically what happened to me (my parents are both overweight.)
In this case, this girl may have this disorder, but her mother is doing her no favors giving her large helpings of food.
Did you not read further to the part where I said that Prader Willi was not an excuse for over-feeding the daughter?
-------------------- 28 days, 6 hours, 42 minutes, and 12 seconds. That is when the world will end. Posts: 7158 | From: D.C. | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by queen of the ...ouch caramels: From what I have seen there is also a lack of phyiscal activity in children.
It appears to be common that some children are still in strollers at over 5 years old. We were at Marineland in Niagra Fallls in October last year and I saw a "plump" child aged around 7 years old . He appeared closed to DD1 and classmates size and vocabulary(sp?).
He was pushed around in one of those umberella strollers by one or other of his parents in the park. Around the show area he appeared to be capable of walking (ie no sign of phyiscal impairment). But his backside was touching the ground while he was being pushed.
DD2(aged 4) kept asking why he was not walking ....I was at a loss to explain
This week I saw a young girl of around 4 get out of their car, run around on the grass and then sit in a stroller before being pushed about 50 yards into the store where she was placed in the seat of the shopping trolley while the adult with her shopped.
I was stunned..... I want my children to walk with me supervised once they are about 3 years old. I do not want to spend my time pushing large children who are capable of walking themselves.
I've noticed this as well and I wondered if it was a reaction to the way so many parents have been scared to extremes at the possibility of their child being abducted.
It may just be that it is easier for the parents to control their child's movements by keeping them in a stroller but I admit my first thought is "there is a parent running scared".
It's certainly not helping with getting kids fitter if their every movement is so severely curtailed by parental fear of something that is so unlikely to happen.
-------------------- If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it's just possible you haven't grasped the situation. - Jean Kerr Posts: 18428 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
Joe Bentley
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
I think Christie and Queen of the Caramels hit upon a good point.
The concept of "stranger danger" and this popular modern image of a world that is just waiting to snatch your child up the second you blink has been so over hyped lately that perhaps they have really been a factor here.
After all in a parent's mind there is much less danger of your child getting snatched out from in front of their Playstation then from out in their front yard.
Is this what it is? Are people really that scared of letting their children do anything, lest the worst happen?
-------------------- "Existence has no pattern save what we imagine after staring at it for too long." - Rorschach, The Watchmen Posts: 8929 | From: Norfolk, Virginia | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Joe Bentley: I think Christie and Queen of the Caramels hit upon a good point.
The concept of "stranger danger" and this popular modern image of a world that is just waiting to snatch your child up the second you blink has been so over hyped lately that perhaps they have really been a factor here.
After all in a parent's mind there is much less danger of your child getting snatched out from in front of their Playstation then from out in their front yard.
Is this what it is? Are people really that scared of letting their children do anything, lest the worst happen?
I was just discussing this same thing with a friend of mine. She was saying that she is afraid to let her kids ride their bikes any further than the nearest corner. In other words, never out of her sight. Her kids are around 11 yrs old. Obviously thats not much fun for them, and so the bikes are usually left sitting unused in the garage. While I personally thought she was being a bit extreme, I could relate to her fears.
The terror is very real. I all too often put my 4 yr old in the grocery cart rather than have her walk. The reason is because I am VERY afraid she will jet off and be hurt and taken from me. The world is not as safe as it used to be in my opinion. I try and counter this by taking her lots of places where she can run freely and I can pay closer attention to her than I could while shopping for groceries or whatever.
Its sad I feel these kind of measures are necessary. Better safe than sorry though.
Posts: 40 | From: Michigan | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Childhood obesity linked to fear of abduction? Interesting... i guess it is tougher to grab a kid who weighs over 100 pounds.
I saw a video somewhere (can't remember where) of a couple of guys hopping out of a van, grabbing a guy from the sidewalk and trying to abduct him. But they couldn't get him into the van, so they left him. The final message on the screen: Fat people are hard to kidnap. It was made to look like a commercial, but have no idea who made it.
I have the opposite problem at home; my son doesn't seem to like to eat. And definitely not anything vaguely vegetable-related.
Posts: 225 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yleemjseg: Childhood obesity linked to fear of abduction? Interesting... i guess it is tougher to grab a kid who weighs over 100 pounds.
I saw a video somewhere (can't remember where) of a couple of guys hopping out of a van, grabbing a guy from the sidewalk and trying to abduct him. But they couldn't get him into the van, so they left him. The final message on the screen: Fat people are hard to kidnap. It was made to look like a commercial, but have no idea who made it.
I have the opposite problem at home; my son doesn't seem to like to eat. And definitely not anything vaguely vegetable-related.
I don't think people are letting their kids get obese because they will then be to heavy to take off with!
I hear you on the vegetable deal though. Man I have tried everything to get her to eat something green.
Posts: 40 | From: Michigan | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Joe Bentley
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
quote:Originally posted by willowsma: The terror is very real.
The terror might well be very real, but the danger is incrediably exaggerated.
quote:The world is not as safe as it used to be in my opinion.
Well sorry but the facts just don't support that. Violent crime has been dropping steadily for decades now. The only difference is every child (well to be fair every pretty blonde girl) who is kidnapped is plastered across the news.
Obesity kills a lot more children then shadowy Snidely Whiplash people riding around in white vans offering them candy.
-------------------- "Existence has no pattern save what we imagine after staring at it for too long." - Rorschach, The Watchmen Posts: 8929 | From: Norfolk, Virginia | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yleemjseg: Childhood obesity linked to fear of abduction? Interesting... i guess it is tougher to grab a kid who weighs over 100 pounds.
YOMANK
I know that it could posibly be a medical condition but I've seen too many parents over feeding their kid just to shut them up with out trying anything else (like actually spending time with them).
Although I do want to come to the defense of strollers. Heck I even carried a diaper bag with me for a while after the kid stopped wearing them. The reason I did it is because it held a lot of stuff. Strollers can also hold a lot of stuff. Strollers can be used as a 'chair' while watching an outdoor concert or show. It can be used as a table (if it has one of those table trays on it). Also children don't always have the same endurance as adults so if you are going to spend 12 hours in the hot sun roaming a theme park it might be nice to give the kid a break on occasion. Remember the kid is the one that was climbing through the play area for an hour while you sat on your ass. Also once a kid gets heavy they will have less endurance and some excersize is better than none at all. I have no doubt that some parents find it easier to just always push a kid around that to have to keep a closer eye on a free roaming one or to hear the kid complain about walking. In fact I think it is often laziness or over indulgence on the parents part, but just like a posible medical disorder I'm sure a small percent have valid reasons for doing what they do even if it appears harmful.
-------------------- "The question for joining the protected forum for real magicians should be:
What is the use of women?" Steve W. from JREF's 'This is no fun' Posts: 7622 | From: North Carolina | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by willowsma: The terror is very real.
The terror might well be very real, but the danger is incrediably exaggerated.
quote:The world is not as safe as it used to be in my opinion.
Well sorry but the facts just don't support that. Violent crime has been dropping steadily for decades now. The only difference is every child (well to be fair every pretty blonde girl) who is kidnapped is plastered across the news.
Obesity kills a lot more children then shadowy Snidely Whiplash people riding around in white vans offering them candy.
I don't care if the danger is exaggerated. The fact that it exists is enough for me.
And maybe the facts 'don't support that' which is why I said it was my 'opinion' and not a detailed study by researchers.
Posts: 40 | From: Michigan | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by willowsma: I don't care if the danger is exaggerated. The fact that it exists is enough for me.
And maybe the facts 'don't support that' which is why I said it was my 'opinion' and not a detailed study by researchers.
You're posting in a place whose purpose is to dispel falsehoods. Joe Bentley just did that. Your opinion doesn't stand up to the facts.
-------------------- ÒIf you shut up truth and bury it under the ground, it will but grow, and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it bursts through it will blow up everything in its way.Ó -Emile Zola Posts: 1046 | From: Massachusetts | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can a person really hold an opinion that he knowns is false? I don't think so - I would say that either he does not truly hold that opinion or he does not truly accept that it is false.
-------------------- Fools! You've over-estimated me! Posts: 3745 | From: New York City | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chimera: Also once a kid gets heavy they will have less endurance and some excersize is better than none at all.
This is very true. Hell, my 10 year old can get a bit whiny after walking around all day and asks to be carried, or that we stop every few minutes because her feet/legs hurt. Their legs do get tired faster and it is a pain in the butt to carry around a 50 pound child sometimes. So, sometimes it isn't laziness, just planning ahead.
It is entirely possible that the woman in the OP was not the mother of that child.
I would rule out all other possibilities before passing judgement on someone else and acusing them of abuse or neglect. Usually an hour or so in public is not enough time for someone to make such a harsh judgement about someone's life.
Like others have said, I have a child who will not eat. She is very small and skinny and if she would sit down and eat a sundae and 2 orders of fries I would be thrilled. If she eats one full meal a day I am lucky. I do try to encourage her to clean her plate- usually she has very little on the plate to begin with, and I try to encourage her to eat healthy snacks. If she would eat anything- including ice cream, I am happy.
-------------------- "My Very Educated Mother Just Said Uh-oh! No...Pluto..."~ Steven Colbert Posts: 3256 | From: Somewhere in Ohio | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
But if you know that your opinion doesn't stand up to the facts, why cling to it?
I do know how you feel, but I think that letting your daughter see your fear of what the world may do to her by having her always ride in your cart isn't doing her any favors. Kids see more than we think, and if she sees that you are afraid, she may become afraid, too.
I'm not saying that a four year old should be roaming her neighborhood alone, but I don't think she's going to be snatched while walking right next to you at the grocery store.
I'm an obsessive worryer, and if I didn't force myself to face my fears and see that they don't hold water, I would never leave my house. I'm afraid of driving (or even riding in the car, sometimes), I used to be afraid of getting a job, I'm afraid of unfamiliar social situations and familiar ones. I have to just keep telling myself that I can't let my fear of things that probably won't happen keep me from living. And I don't think you should, either.
Posts: 533 | From: Davis, CA | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by willowsma: Its sad I feel these kind of measures are necessary. Better safe than sorry though.
I think the real issue here is this point. You may say "better safe than sorry," but what if the safety measures are actually making your child's childhood far "sorrier" than the danger possibly warrants?
--Logoboros
-------------------- "If Men were Wise, the Most arbitrary Princes could not hurt them. If they are not wise, the Freest Government is compelld to be a Tyranny."
quote:Originally posted by willowsma: I don't care if the danger is exaggerated. The fact that it exists is enough for me.
And maybe the facts 'don't support that' which is why I said it was my 'opinion' and not a detailed study by researchers.
You're posting in a place whose purpose is to dispel falsehoods. Joe Bentley just did that. Your opinion doesn't stand up to the facts.
Joe said that the danger is exaggerated, not that it is a "falsehood." Willowsmama agreed, but said she still wants to be cautious. Why is this a problem? It would be less than responsible to act like there is no danger to children.
Having said that, I do let my 4 year old daughter walk in the store, but I keep her in sight at all times. But even if I chose not to, there are plenty of other ways for kids to get exercise. If a mom isn't comfortable letting her kids ride their bikes out of her sight, she can always put them on a soccer team or something. My parents were very cautious with us, but caution doesn't have to equal an inactive life style.
-------------------- The technical term is narcissism. You can't believe everything is your fault unless you also believe you're all powerful.--House Posts: 2684 | From: Budapest | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ali_marea: Is it possible this girl had Prader Willi Syndrome?
It's possible she had a disorder, though probably not this one, since the sight says most of those kids have an IQ of less than 80, and this little girl seemed bright.
And, unfortunately, she wasn't the only chubby bunny being fed too much of the wrong kind of food at McDonalds that day.
-------------------- The technical term is narcissism. You can't believe everything is your fault unless you also believe you're all powerful.--House Posts: 2684 | From: Budapest | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Joe Bentley
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
Before we drift too far from the topic at hand the point I was trying to make is that this concept of "Stranger Danger" which is brow beaten into kids from a very young age by every authority figure they know is dangerous.
The classic after school special, movie of the week image of the dirty old man with a bag of candy snatching little Billy into a white van almost never happens.
And in the event that your child is kidnapped, the vast majority of kidnappings are done by people who know the child well, with parents in fact composing the huge majority of perpetrators of all crimes against children, including kidnapping.
For instance in 1999 they were 800,000 cases where a child was kidnapped by a parent, guardian, relative, or close friend that knew the child well.
You want to know how many stranger kidnappings happened in 1999? 115. That's all.
115 versus 800,000.
From a purely stastical standpoint a child has more to fear from people the more they know them.
It got so bad that in July 2005 an 11 year old Boy Scout named Brennan Hawkins was lost in the woods of Utah for over four days because he hid from the rescue parties because they were "strangers!"
In fact the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children is now telling people that "stranger danger" causes more risk then it prevents. In practically every scenario when your child is in an unfamiler situation they would be safer finding the nearest adult. The odds of them finding someone who's going to cause them harm... really isn't there.
-------------------- "Existence has no pattern save what we imagine after staring at it for too long." - Rorschach, The Watchmen Posts: 8929 | From: Norfolk, Virginia | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Vesta: Maybe I'm a food nazi, but I regulate what the eat and what sizes. I don't gives the options on where we go. I don't give them choices about what they want, aside from very minimal ones.(Choolate or white. Cheese or no cheese.) At home is the same thing, we have what we have, and thats that. Hubby tries to cater to them too often, and I often put my foot down making me the evil parent.
I'm inclined to think that your parenting is perfectly fine, Vesta. But as I read your post I did wonder about a potential side effect of a "food nazi" approach. Could this kind of childhood produce the type of kid who, the moment they get to college and no longer have their food controlled, start binging and eating ridiculously poorly BECAUSE they haven't had the feeling of freedom to choose what they eat before?
The ideal approach would seem to be to educate the kid on good reasons for making good choices, rather than policing what they eat. Easier said than done, of course. How many bad choices does the kid have to make before you step in and remove choice? How do you reward good choices (or make them visibly their own reward) and avoid using shaming tactics to discourage bad choices ("Eat this or you'll get fat! Are you sure you should have ice cream two nights in a row -- think of the consequences!")?
Being a good parent seems to be just about as difficult as being a truly effective welfare state -- even when you think you've got things working reasonably well, someone will come along and accuse you of injustice.
Also, on another note: maybe the legal definition is peculiar, but wouldn't "neglect" by definition imply some form of inactivity or inattention? The over-feeding behavior in the OP sounds like a very active "spoiling" of the child, and hence probably more in the "abuse" camp.
--Logoboros
As far as the regulation thing goes, I was speaking more to restaurants, than at home. They're allowed to graze pretty freely and have whatever lunch and breakfast hey would like, since I stock a pretty healthy pantry. Dinner is a no negotiations policy, though. I'm not a short order cook. They, of course, don't have to eat it, but I'm not making them anything special.
Like someone elses said, I would be pretty pleased if my youngest ate anything. I swear he survives on one yougurt cup and a hard boiled egg a week.
I've found that both their schools do an excellent job of teaching nutrtion and encouraging exercise. I was quite impressed that both of them wanted to eat healthier after hearing the lesson plan on nutrition.
A s far as the stranger danger goes, I'm more lienant than a lot of the parents in my school. My parents were bailbondsman, and I spent a lot of my childhood around the seedier elements in town. I think it made me a better judge of charector, and prepaired me for life out in the world.
I still keep an eye on them in public places, but I don't mind them exploring a bit. On the flip side I would never leave them anywhere alone while I went shopping on the other side of the store. My phychiatrist of many years told me he would often see his pedophile clients hanging around the toy section in stores.
Vesta
-------------------- Innocence, on the Bicycle of Propriety, carrying the Urn of Reputation safely over the Abyss of Indiscretion. Posts: 1170 | From: Tucson, AZ | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Joe Bentley: In fact the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children is now telling people that "stranger danger" causes more risk then it prevents. In practically every scenario when your child is in an unfamiler situation they would be safer finding the nearest adult. The odds of them finding someone who's going to cause them harm... really isn't there.
True of course and unless there is a high profile case in the news I think most parents do relax a little bit as their children get older and they get more experienced as parents.
That said I was never overwhelmingly worried about my children being abducted - I was worried about them being molested or otherwise harmed. Sadly, the statistically likelihood of that happening is not insignificant. Not worried to the point of obsession I hasten to add, but worried nonetheless.
Even so though there is a risk in keeping your kids in swaddling clothes. And I do think putting an otherwise healthy 7 yr old in a stroller when you are right there with them is, to say the least, not a good idea.
-------------------- If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it's just possible you haven't grasped the situation. - Jean Kerr Posts: 18428 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
that a woman from Ireland visiting an American friend commented on her first day in New York, "This must be the most selfish country in the world. I've never seen parents so fit with children so fat. They must spend all their money on gyms for themselves and fast food for their kids." 
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[lol]](graemlins/lol.gif)
