The State of Ohio

[3rdnlng]

http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-puts-200-pound-third-grader-foster-care-191032515.html

[LeviF]

Well, it is child abuse.

[Joe Miner]

An 8 year old boy should be about 50" (4' 2") tall, and weigh about 55lbs to be in the 50th percentile for height and weight.

 

For the 95th percentile the kid should be about 54" (4' 6") tall, and weigh about 75lbs.

 

http://www.kidsgrowth.com/stages/viewgrowthcharts.cfm?id=BH318

http://www.kidsgrowth.com/stages/viewgrowthcharts.cfm?id=BW318

 

You can have your kids taken away for beating them.

You can have your kids taken away for mentally abusing them.

You can have your kids taken away for starving them.

 

But you can't have them taken away for making them morbidly obese?

[3rdnlng]

An 8 year old boy should be about 50" (4' 2") tall, and weigh about 55lbs to be in the 50th percentile for height and weight.

 

For the 95th percentile the kid should be about 54" (4' 6") tall, and weigh about 75lbs.

 

http://www.kidsgrowth.com/stages/viewgrowthcharts.cfm?id=BH318

http://www.kidsgrowth.com/stages/viewgrowthcharts.cfm?id=BW318

 

You can have your kids taken away for beating them.

You can have your kids taken away for mentally abusing them.

You can have your kids taken away for starving them.

 

But you can't have them taken away for making them morbidly obese?

 

Obviously there is a problem there. The abuse you refer to is inflicted by the parent. The article was lacking in specifics but I doubt that the parent is forcing the kid to eat. So, either there is a medical problem, the parent is not supervising or the kid is getting the food outside the home. Does the State really have the right to take a child from its parent for this reason? That's a tough one to answer. Where does the line get drawn? What should we do with 93% of American Samoa then? Just a little food for thought.

[B-Man]

An 8 year old boy should be about 50" (4' 2") tall, and weigh about 55lbs to be in the 50th percentile for height and weight.

 

For the 95th percentile the kid should be about 54" (4' 6") tall, and weigh about 75lbs.

 

http://www.kidsgrowth.com/stages/viewgrowthcharts.cfm?id=BH318

http://www.kidsgrowth.com/stages/viewgrowthcharts.cfm?id=BW318

 

You can have your kids taken away for beating them.

You can have your kids taken away for mentally abusing them.

You can have your kids taken away for starving them.

 

But you can't have them taken away for making them morbidly obese?

 

 

 

You are completely overstating the situation...............as are these government workers.

 

 

The state is saying that he is "at risk" for these diseases...............but at the present time, his only medical condition is sleep apnea.

 

There is NO indications of any social problems with the child at school....in fact he is on the Honor Roll

 

There certainly is no indication of neglect.........the mother has attempted to lower his weight, so far without success.

 

There is NO indication that placing him in a foster home will change anything......are the new "parents' dietary experts ? ?

 

Quoting what "percentile" he should be in is besides the point, each case should be addressed individually, this mother needed assistance and monitoring, not having her child taken from her by a government who "knows best".

 

There really is not enough information in this Yahoo story, I would encourage others here to read the many other sources out there, and then decide if this was for the childs own good.

 

 

 

.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

welcome to the nanny police state.

 

This is a disgusting outrage of "the state" invading private citizens lives. Who is the state to say they can do this? what about the mental and emotional stress they just caused this kid being ripped from his family.

 

The state has no right to take a kid out of a home for being fat. Is the mom a bad parent, probably. but it still is no reason for taking the kid. A more constructive approach would be to involve the doctors and find out if he has a medical condition or something along those lines.

 

How do we know this kid isnt stuffing his face full of crap at school, outside the home, has genuine medical issues etc...

 

Seriously I cannot believe there is not outrage over this government gross abuse of power. Are we that far indoctrinated and de-sensitized to the point where we are not outraged by the state doing this? what's next? this is sickening that it happened and that there is no outrage. I'm genuinely sad for the state of this country and where things are heading.

[B-Man]

Lawyers for the mother, a substitute elementary school teacher who is also taking vocational school classes, think the county has overreached in this case by arguing that medical conditions the boy is at risk for — but doesn’t yet have — pose an imminent danger to his health.

 

The Plain Dealer reports that as of right now, the child’s only medical problem resulting from excess weigh is sleep apnea and that he has a machine to monitor his breathing each night.

 

In addition to trying to monitor what her son ate, the mother is reported as saying some other family members may have been sneaking him food but she did enroll her son in a local hospital program that offers eduction on proper nutrition.

 

But that apparently wasn’t enough.

 

Liz Klimas.....The Blaze.

 

 

This does not appear to be the case of a neglectful mother "stuffing" her child, she was trying to address the issue, but the government took him away any how.

 

.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

Liz Klimas.....The Blaze.

 

 

This does not appear to be the case of a neglectful mother "stuffing" her child, she was trying to address the issue, but the government took him away any how.

 

.

Thats crap... this whole story really pisses me off. That poor kid is suffering emotional trauma because some D-bag liberal civil servant wannabe activist hero. F-them

 

seriously for all you people that don't think this is a big deal ask yourself, if you were that mother how would you feel? what would you do? and if you still cannot comprehend that, what if the state decides to impound your sports car because it has the potential to break the speed limit. Or confiscate your tobacco products because they are a known carcinogen, or take your kid away because you took them to a loud concert or monster truck show than can damage their hearing.

 

what next? where does it stop? this is beyone a slippery slope were already cruising down the mountain.

 

what ever happened to individual liberty and freedom? why do these "do gooder" nanny state agents think they always know whats best for everyone else.

 

Just keep ignroing the over reaching government because it's PC and ignore the problem until somewhere down the road they are your problem and don't agree with something you are doing in your life good luck dealing with that.

[DC Tom]

Liz Klimas.....The Blaze.

 

 

This does not appear to be the case of a neglectful mother "stuffing" her child, she was trying to address the issue, but the government took him away any how.

 

.

 

case workers considered this mother‘s inability to get her son’s weight down a form of medical neglect,

 

Nice logic. Not unwillingness, but inability.

 

In other words, not "Sorry, you're neglecting your child," but "Sorry, you're not meeting the appropriate standards for being a parent."

[B-Man]

Nice logic. Not unwillingness, but inability.

 

In other words, not "Sorry, you're neglecting your child," but "Sorry, you're not meeting the appropriate standards for being a parent."

 

 

 

Exactly DCT,

 

She needed more assistance...........not the "all-knowing" government sending the boy into a situation where he he may not have any improved help (foster home) and now the loss of his mother on top of it.

 

 

 

.

[Joe Miner]

You are completely overstating the situation...............as are these government workers.

 

 

The state is saying that he is "at risk" for these diseases...............but at the present time, his only medical condition is sleep apnea.

 

There is NO indications of any social problems with the child at school....in fact he is on the Honor Roll

 

There certainly is no indication of neglect.........the mother has attempted to lower his weight, so far without success.

 

There is NO indication that placing him in a foster home will change anything......are the new "parents' dietary experts ? ?

 

Quoting what "percentile" he should be in is besides the point, each case should be addressed individually, this mother needed assistance and monitoring, not having her child taken from her by a government who "knows best".

 

There really is not enough information in this Yahoo story, I would encourage others here to read the many other sources out there, and then decide if this was for the childs own good.

 

 

 

.

 

So it's not the parents fault for this 4' tall kid being 200lbs? The percentiles are around to show how out of normal this kid is. Being that far from the norm will have a negative affect on him. That's not a guess. If there are circumstances that allow this child to be that far out of the norm, that's one thing. But there are no indications that this kid is any different medically from any other 8 year old.

 

It's not a risk. This kid is morbidly obese.

 

I'm not up to date on the specifics on the case (as I doubt the rest of you are as well), but the 'government' didn't just show up one day, see a fat kid, and take him away. I'll almost guarantee you that the mother was notified of the issues, and probably given opportunity to correct them. If not, she should have been. But assuming that she was, she has now failed twice. Once to raise a healthy kid, and once to correct an unhealthy kid. Neglect is a funny word. Her kid didn't need to be 200lbs. She has already neglected his health by letting him get that fat.

 

So because a kid that is abused in some mental or physical way at home can hide it from his teachers and classmates means that kid is just fine and dandy? No problem worth worrying about there, because he doesn't have any issues at school.

 

There's no indication that a foster home won't beat or abuse a kid either. So are you saying since we can't prove that foster parents will do a better job than the currently abusive parents, we should get rid of the whole foster parent system? There's no way to prove another set of parents will be better ahead of time.

 

And nowhere did I state that each case shouldn't be handled individually. Good Strawman.

 

Exactly DCT,

 

She needed more assistance...........not the "all-knowing" government sending the boy into a situation where he he may not have any improved help (foster home) and now the loss of his mother on top of it.

 

 

 

.

 

Who gives her this assistance? The "all-knowing" government?

[B-Man]

 

 

There's no indication that a foster home won't beat or abuse a kid either. So are you saying since we can't prove that foster parents will do a better job than the currently abusive parents, we should get rid of the whole foster parent system? There's no way to prove another set of parents will be better ahead of time.

 

 

 

 

 

No........................thats a strawman.

 

 

In fact your whole post is one after the other. I pointed out that if the government's basis for removing the child from his mother was his dietary needs, then are the foster parents experts in nutrition. You proceeded to wander off into 'closing the foster home system"....LOL

 

 

 

The only thing that you are correct about is that we do not know the whole story, but based on what the government is telling the media, this decision was an over-reaction.

 

 

.

Edited November 29, 2011 by B-Man

[Taro T]

So it's not the parents fault for this 4' tall kid being 200lbs? The percentiles are around to show how out of normal this kid is. Being that far from the norm will have a negative affect on him. That's not a guess. If there are circumstances that allow this child to be that far out of the norm, that's one thing. But there are no indications that this kid is any different medically from any other 8 year old.

 

It's not a risk. This kid is morbidly obese.

 

I'm not up to date on the specifics on the case (as I doubt the rest of you are as well), but the 'government' didn't just show up one day, see a fat kid, and take him away. I'll almost guarantee you that the mother was notified of the issues, and probably given opportunity to correct them. If not, she should have been. But assuming that she was, she has now failed twice. Once to raise a healthy kid, and once to correct an unhealthy kid. Neglect is a funny word. Her kid didn't need to be 200lbs. She has already neglected his health by letting him get that fat.

 

So because a kid that is abused in some mental or physical way at home can hide it from his teachers and classmates means that kid is just fine and dandy? No problem worth worrying about there, because he doesn't have any issues at school.

 

There's no indication that a foster home won't beat or abuse a kid either. So are you saying since we can't prove that foster parents will do a better job than the currently abusive parents, we should get rid of the whole foster parent system? There's no way to prove another set of parents will be better ahead of time.

 

And nowhere did I state that each case shouldn't be handled individually. Good Strawman.

 

 

 

Who gives her this assistance? The "all-knowing" government?

Joe,

 

Just out of curiosity, do you have children of your own? It doesn't appear that you do.

[Jauronimo]

The real problem is that dodgeball has been removed from public schools. Without dodgeball fat kids have no incentive to adopt healthy habits. How will kids ever learn that they are different, and that being different is in fact bad, in the absence of dodgeball?

[KD in CA]

Well, it is child abuse.

 

Yup. Pretty severe case too, IMO.

 

Unless there is some wacky medical condition that would already been known, the only way an 8 year old kid gets 150 pounds overweight is if the parent is grossly negligent in providing healthy food for the child. You don't let an 8-year old eat junk food non-stop. In fact, you don't even ask an 8-year old what they want to eat; you put what YOU want them to eat in front of them and give them the choice between eating it or going to bed hungry. I promise you that no kid has ever starved to death that way.

[Joe Miner]

No........................thats a strawman.

 

 

In fact your whole post is one after the other. I pointed out that if the government's basis for removing the child from his mother was his dietary needs, then are the foster parents experts in nutrition. You proceeded to wander off into 'closing the foster home system"....LOL

 

 

You retard.

 

The Doctors (who are the experts) already have the kid on a diet. Read your own damn link. The new foster parents don't have to be nutrition experts. They just have to listen to the doctors. Something the current mother has chosen not to do, and she's likely been making that choice since well before the gov't got involved.

 

Having a 200 pound 8 year old is not something that it takes a parent who is an expert nutritionist to prevent. Or even fix.

 

So you think it's terrible that the gov't would put some kind of requirement for the health of a kid, but you would put some kind of requirement on the qualifications of the foster parents. As if that were the only requirement that is necessary to help this kid.

 

By the way, you didn't answer who was going to provide this mother the assistance that she needs to not make her kid fat. The doctors have already given her the diet, and that's not working. So who is going to provide this magical assistance?

 

It sure seems like you hate the gov't intervening, but only because they aren't intervening like you want them to.

 

Joe,

 

Just out of curiosity, do you have children of your own? It doesn't appear that you do.

 

Yeah, I do.

 

Do I relish the idea of the gov't taking kids away from their parents?

 

Absolutely not.

 

But this kid needs help, just like many others that are abused daily. So tell me how you'd fix child abuse without the gov't stepping in?

[Taro T]

You retard.

 

The Doctors (who are the experts) already have the kid on a diet. Read your own damn link. The new foster parents don't have to be nutrition experts. They just have to listen to the doctors. Something the current mother has chosen not to do, and she's likely been making that choice since well before the gov't got involved.

 

Having a 200 pound 8 year old is not something that it takes a parent who is an expert nutritionist to prevent. Or even fix.

 

So you think it's terrible that the gov't would put some kind of requirement for the health of a kid, but you would put some kind of requirement on the qualifications of the foster parents. As if that were the only requirement that is necessary to help this kid.

 

By the way, you didn't answer who was going to provide this mother the assistance that she needs to not make her kid fat. The doctors have already given her the diet, and that's not working. So who is going to provide this magical assistance?

 

It sure seems like you hate the gov't intervening, but only because they aren't intervening like you want them to.

 

 

 

Yeah, I do.

 

Do I relish the idea of the gov't taking kids away from their parents?

 

Absolutely not.

 

But this kid needs help, just like many others that are abused daily. So tell me how you'd fix child abuse without the gov't stepping in?

Fair enough.

 

Couldn't read the 2nd article (I pretty much refuse to click on popup ads to remove them), from the discussion here it doesn't seem to make it that clear that the mother has been forcing the kid to eat far too much. Maybe it did, like I said, I couldn't read it. Until I have more data, I'll stick with the opinion that the social workers overstepped their bounds - significantly.

[B-Man]

You retard.

 

The Doctors (who are the experts) already have the kid on a diet. Read your own damn link. The new foster parents don't have to be nutrition experts. They just have to listen to the doctors.

 

Something the current mother has chosen not to do,

 

and she's likely been making that choice since well before the gov't got involved.

 

Having a 200 pound 8 year old is not something that it takes a parent who is an expert nutritionist to prevent. Or even fix.

 

So you think it's terrible that the gov't would put some kind of requirement for the health of a kid, but you would put some kind of requirement on the qualifications of the foster parents. As if that were the only requirement that is necessary to help this kid.

 

By the way, you didn't answer who was going to provide this mother the assistance that she needs to not make her kid fat. The doctors have already given her the diet, and that's not working. So who is going to provide this magical assistance?

 

It sure seems like you hate the gov't intervening, but only because they aren't intervening like you want them to.

 

 

 

 

 

Joe.......you are apparently having trouble comprehending, so I will ignore your 'retard' nonsense. I know that it is born out of your frustration of having very little logic skills.

 

Your whole post comes down to the two bolded items................which are wild assumptions are your part, that you use to build your whole (ahem) argument.

 

We do not have the slightest idea what the mother has "chosen" to do. Her lawyers deny it and the officials just say that she is not doing enough......................but apparently you alone are privy to the fact that she is deliberately over-feeding him.

 

The other point is your simplistic grouping of "the government" as one entity. When I say that there are other ways that she could be assisted by Social services, thats what I mean, not employing the police or other agencies, that are just there to regulate, not assist. By the way....there are other sources besides the government that she could seek assistance, but I know, thats beyond your benificent Government thinking.

 

 

PS.

So you think it's terrible that the gov't would put some kind of requirement for the health of a kid, but you would put some kind of requirement on the qualifications of the foster parents. As if that were the only requirement that is necessary to help this kid.

 

Thats an assuming strawman too................perhaps you should stick to your own statements, instead of (incorrectly) revising other people's posts.

 

 

EDIT:

 

LOL......this is from the link that you claimed I didn't read..........You must have missed it.

 

For now, county officials are reported as saying at least temporary removal from the family could help the boy become healthier. But the mother‘s lawyers are reporting that even the foster mother is showing signs of having trouble keeping up with the boy’s many appointments. The lawyers have said that they heard talk of getting the foster mother extra help or perhaps the boy a personal trainer, causing them to wonder why the boy‘s biological mother wasn’t offered such help.

Edited November 29, 2011 by B-Man

[Joe Miner]

If you think this is the first the mother has heard from a doctor that her kid needs to lose weight, you're a bigger retard than I first thought.

 

This didn't happen overnight.

[Jauronimo]

Do you have to deliberately over feed to constitute child abuse in this instance? How about leaving the kid in a dangerous environment, in this case with grossly irresponsible family members who overfeed the fatso. I don't buy the argument that she's innocent because she's at school while the abuse occurs.

 

When you run errands you don't leave your children with a pedophile. And if you knowingly did you certainly are not innocent.

 

You don't gain 150, 100 or even 50 pounds all that quickly. If the child is being left in a dangerous situation by his mother it seems very well within the rights of CPS to remove the kid. If she only has 2 hours a week to spend with her child and cannot find a responsible caretaker then why should she have a child.

 

Hopefully she gets the message.