Please read full article here.

-- Nephele

I find it funny that while so many countries continually deal with starvation and the inability to survive, one of the biggest social issues in the U.S. is that people are so damn fat.

I don't approve of the government at all and I approve less of the government getting involved at the family level. At some point you have to let Darwinism take its course on this. Of course if you just threw your kid outside all day and never let them come in til nightfall they may get a little excercise. At least that's how it was done with me and all my childhood friends.

It doesn't take much self discipline to say no to fast food. Its not hard to stop yourself or kid from becoming obese. Everyone wants to blame genetics and metabolism though. Easy scapegoat. Its easier to continue doing what you do if you can blame it on something other than yourself.

Its not hard to turn off the TV. Its not hard to turn of the video games. Its not hard to eat less. Its not hard to go outside. And if it is to hard well let's say hi to Mr. Darwin, no government intervention needed.

Meh the fact that americans are all heavy fat pieces of crap is so over hyped. Mainly due to the very flawed BMI scale. I don't see fat kids running around wherever I go. Cause fat kids are just as rare as they have always been for the most part.

Many parents beat the shit out of their kids, and even when it is reported to CPS. Nothing is done about it until they end up dead. The city I live in alone has several of cases like this every year. Sure when your 5 year old weighs 80 pounds that is pretty messed up. Though it is no differen't then anyone else raising their kids.

It might be unhealthy. Yet so is showering your little girl with everything she could ever want, and giving her a sense of self entitlement. There are tens of thousands of things that parents do that could be considered "unhealthy" for their children. The only reason this is making a headline is due to the ridiculous health craze that has been mostly created by companies that specialise in diet foods/supplements/excercise etc.

In short yes the government should stay the hell away. Though as history has taught us, that will never be the case.

That is the sad truth about Child Protective Services in our nation. Added to that, when CPS does determine to remove a child from a parent's custody, many times that child winds up in a neglective and abusive foster care system.

It would be outrageous if a child were to be removed from an otherwise loving environment based on the fact that CPS had determined that the parents weren't feeding the child correctly, only for that child to be landed in a house of strangers that might abuse that child. Granted, there are many wonderful foster parents out there who do an outstanding job -- but there is also a frightening percentage of those who are in it primarily for the extra cash the State gives them per child, or for less savory reasons.

-- Nephele

What about the opposite situation; where the parents are not feeding a child and it's going to die from malnutrition if nothing is done? CPS puts kids in foster care because of those types of situations and while it sucks that this has to happen, I don't see any alternative.

I don't know of anyone who would disagree that deliberately starving a child constitutes child abuse, and children who are being starved, beaten, sexually abused, etc., rightfully should be removed from such an abusive environment.

But (as pointed out by University of Pennsylvania bioethicist Art Caplan in the article linked in the OP), there can be other factors involved in obesity in children, and parents are not always entirely to blame for their children's over-eating.

An overweight child may simply be the product of a family in need of education on nutrition, or the child may have been hitting too many candy vending machines while away from home (shockingly, a lot of public schools have these candy vending machines).

And that overweight child could still be way better off with his or her own family, than placed into often questionable foster care (which provides no guarantees, either, of foster parents being better educated on nutrition than the child's own parents).

-- Nephele

Needless to say I have a lot to say about this.

I agree with ThePaganMafia and Malkavius.

The government has no right to tell me how to raise my children, or tell me that I am a bad (or even good) parent based on what "they" think my parenting should be.

I feel that only in extreme situations what CPS should ever be called, such as physical abuse or the like. If their lives (be it their physical life or mental one) is in danger then CPS should called.

Not that they tend to do much about it in some places, while in others they are too quick to make a child. I think it is fucked up that there are children being killed daily by their parents and CPS does nothing, yet in other matters, CPS cares all too much. Instead of helping the children and removing the children from truly terrible parents, they screw people over and rip apart perfectly good families.

A good example was my sister. Her infant was coughing up blood and we took her straight to the emergency room. The doctor assumed my sister tried to kill her and called CPS. My sister had her rights stripped away, no one listened to her and no one believed her, not even her own lawyer who did nothing to help.

So her children were given to a doctor and a firefighter to raise. they pretty much paid the state to give them custody, before my sister's trail was even over. She did not stand a chance. Years later, my sister was shown to be innocent of the charges, was given her rights back and allowed to keep her other two children. Her first two, which should never have been taken, were lost to us by this time to the doctor and firefighter. Why? Because they had money and good social standing, we didn't.

My sister is a good mother, even the state thinks so, but nothing can change the past and she will never know her first two kids. They will never call her mama, she never seen their first step, heard their first words, took them to their first day of school, all because CPS decided she was unfit and the foster family did everything they could to prevent her from getting them back and it worked.

So yeah, I'm bias, but I have reason to be. They can take my sister's kids, but there are some who are truly being injured that they do nothing about and it makes me mad.

Of course, some could say that obesity/ underwieght is a form of neglect or abuse, and it is hard for me to say one way or another.

I do know, however, that it should not be the government's business. If it were, my own daughter could be taken away from me. She has a problem gaining weight, which is not helped by the fact that she is an extremely picky eater. Add genes and the fact that most everyone on my husband's side is very tall and rail-thin (along with most people on my side- skinny wise, not height- my side of the family is very short, I think because we are oriental) and it becomes obvious that her size is just common in my family.

However, from an outside perceptive, my daughter looks extremely underweight and I believe the doctor's say she is in the 10th to 20th percentile of what is considered normal and healthy. This, by the way, is pretty bad. It means that in all of America of kids my daughter's age, there are only 10-20% as tiny as she is.

I have taken her to specialists often, and take her to the doctor just as often. She is as healthy as can be, but if an outside source, not knowing her background thought I was being negligent, my daughter could be taken. Maybe only for a day or so until everything was straightened out (and it would be because I dare anyone to take my children from me) but that would still be time that my daughter was forced away from me, and as a default, my son would be taken as well (if they take one- they take them all).

So yeah, the government can but out. There are plenty of children who need their attention.

It should also be asked when they might draw the line. If a child keeps eating and eating and eating, then what can a parent do? Put locks on the frig and cabinets, not buy food, etc.. but if they do that- couldn't someone say that is child abuse as well because they are refusing food to their kids?

You can say a parent can buy them only 'healthy' food, but what will that really solve. If a person wants the food bad enough- they'll get it (my opinion, of course). I'm not saying that there is no point, just that sometimes things can be hard to control and at some point, a person has to resume responsibility for themselves.

Yes, but a firm hand on what your kids eat or don't eat, but don't like this be one more right the government takes from parents. I'd hate for them to tell me "you have to feed your kids this, this, and that and nothing else" etc..

It is my family, my business and the government needs to stay out of it. Like ThePaganMafia said, let Darwinism do its job, and what's more, let people take responsibility for their own bodies. And for parents who can't tell their 2 year old 'enough' when it comes to food- maybe a parenting class is in order, not a custody battle.

Many parents love their children, but some are simply misguided. That is not reason enough to take away a person's child.

I am also reminded of a recent article that I read. A poor family lived in a steel shed in houston. The parents of 6 were known as loving people who did care about their children.
They were just poor.

So CPS took the kids because it was deemed "unsafe" to live there. Everyone was happy there, but CPS as usual removes the children under the basis of "it will look bad if we dont". All that proves is that you can't be happy in society unless you have money.

I am startin to hate CPS. I reaaaaaallly am. Just due to how many children they let die every year from people who are actually irresponsible.

Here is part of the article. It's pretty long.


Tucked behind an iron gate at the end of a long gravel driveway in east Houston sits a small storage shed.

Outside, the corrugated steel structure is identical to the 76 others next to it, but the inside holds more than someone's possessions.

It is a home.

Inside the 12-by-25-foot shed are hand-built shelves where children's clothes are folded neatly next to canned goods, boxes of cereal and a stack of family photos. On another shelf, beside two king-size beds, textbooks lie next to board games.

Despite the cramped conditions, it overflows with love, said Charlomane Leonard, 35, as she stood in front of the shed that she, her husband, Prince Leonard, and six children have called home for years.

"That's what makes it comfortable," she said.

But to Child Protective Services, the shed is an unsafe environment for the children. After receiving a phone call about the Leonards' living conditions, agency caseworkers removed the couple's children last month.

The Leonards said their children were safe and happy and felt they were targeted by the agency because they are poor.

CPS spokeswoman Gwen Carter said poverty was not an issue and that the agency does not remove children from their parents' custody based on the family's economic circumstances, but on other factors such as unsafe living environments, abuse and neglect.

"You could live in a mansion and be in an unsafe living environment," Carter said. "It's not the place as much as it was the circumstances."

She said the agency uses removal only as a last resort, and that caseworkers try to help parents in need find ways to provide safe living conditions for their children. Carter said CPS was committed to helping the Leonards.

Hearing set for August

Prince Leonard and his wife said CPS caseworkers made one three-hour visit to their home and removed the children immediately.

"They didn't ask us if we needed help or anything," Charlomane Leonard said. "They just said, 'You can stay here, but your children can't.' "

Carter referred further questions to the court where the Leonards' case is being heard. No one at the court returned calls for comment Wednesday. The family is scheduled to appear in court again in August.

The agency, which was granted temporary custody of the children June 30, has placed them with their maternal grandparents. The Leonards are allowed to visit their children for only six hours a week, according to the couple.

"I really miss them," Charlomane Leonard said. "I'm used to being with them all day every day."

The couple has struggled to make ends meet since they married 14 years ago. Their situation got worse about four years ago, when they were living in an apartment in northeast Houston.

Prince Leonard, who now works as a welder, said the family was forced to move out of the crime-ridden apartment complex after he was hurt while working at a discount warehouse, and the couple could no longer afford the rent.

The family lived for a while in their pickup, parking in the Lyndon B. Johnson Hospital overnight, where security guards made them feel safe. They then resided at a Star of Hope shelter for three months before moving into the storage unit in the 12000 block of McNair, where they were already storing some of their belongings.

While it's small and can seem crowded, the Leonards said the storage shed is the safest place they've lived in a long time. Prince Leonard said management is aware the family lives there, as are others who rent space at the facility.

"No one can get in and no one can get out without the remote," Charlomane Leonard, a stay-at-home mom, said as she pointed to the automatic gate at the front entry.

The couple said they have done their best to turn the shed into a suitable living environment for their children — Sabrina, 12; Prince Leonard II, 10; Raheem, 8; Saleem, who turns 7 today; Abdullah, 4; and 2-year-old Jamil.

Prince Leonard built all the shelving and a makeshift loft. There's a refrigerator, an air conditioner and wood-burning heater. On land behind the storage units, the children and their mother plant a garden every summer, harvesting squash, tomatoes, okra and peppers.

Lacking in the shed is running water, but Prince Leonard fills a 55-gallon barrel daily from a spigot at the end of the storage lot so the family can take baths. They fill jugs of drinking water at grocery stores and use a "compost" toilet, Charlomane Leonard said.

Plan to rent a house

The older children are enrolled at Texas Connections Academy, a Houston Independent School District online school. The shed is also furnished with two computers, one on loan from the school, Charlomane Leonard said.

The couple said none of their children has ever gotten less than a B in school, and they hope all of them can attend college.

"That just speaks volumes about the kind of people we are," Prince Leonard said. Around the time they moved into the shed, the couple were able to buy land in Liberty County where they planned to build a home.

They've had troubles getting a loan to build the home while also paying for the land. Now, they will use the money to rent a house.

"We were building ourselves up and trying to get out of the hole," Prince Leonard said. "That's their (children's) future we've been working hard for."

I think there should be intervention because letting a child get to a morbidly obese state (notice I've used the term "morbidly") by over-feeding them is definately neglect, even if unintended. But I think that education is really the key here. Fat parents tend to have fat kids, because they don't know how to eat well themselves, so they just feed their kids the same crap. Teaching a family to eat healthily and engage in an active sport together (just an example, they could all go on bike reads together or go swimming, as a family activity) would probably have everyone very happy. Leave removing a child for extreme cases.

There are worse things than being fat... like taking people's children away with out a REALLY good reason. Its a pretty sad state of affairs, for it to be ok to split families apart because some one doesn't like how the look... that sort of shit leaves us all open, and our families vulnerable to be broken and torn, and for what? To help perpetuate some vague value of health and normalcy.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it is healthy to be morbidly obese, but its not healthy to push kids into sports where they can get hurt, or to brainwash them into religion either.

I do think that it is wrong to take a child from their family who loves them and doesn't beat or sexually abuse them just because they're fat.

What reasons are they gonna think of next? People are going to have kids taken away because their 6 year old happened to not have a shirt on in their own house?

ZOMG!!!PR0NZ!!!




BTW, awesome fuckin' avvie, AD!

Yeah, and there's ALWAYS some super uptight busybody bitch who's gonna abuse it and make a lot of people's lives miserable and unhappy, just because they can.

BTW thanks... its me.

I should have been taken from my mother, who was literally a crack whore.

when we ate, it was only junk food and mc donalds, and I was not allowed to go outside.

and now, at 24 and a mother myself, the health problems started in my early childhood are now really taking a toll on me.

I try to exercise, but my heart won't do it

Thank you mom, for locking me in the back of your semi truck or upstairs for years while you smoked crack about 2 feet away.

Part of the problem is also my thyroid, and that's why I'm scared for Anna. She's perfect in weight for her age, and a little longer than most babies, but thyroid problems run in my family.

But we were taken from my dad, who was just poor, and even though a drunk, didn't beat us and never drove drunk, and GIVEN TO OUR MOTHER. yeah, they know what they're doing, sure.

Government needs to butt the hell out of people's affairs. I know that I'm beating a dead horse by saying that, but it's true, and unfortunately, will never happen.

I really think shit like this goes deeper than what they report on the news. IMO, at the end of the day, stuff like this is the result of one thing: GREED

I agree with you there.

The news all too often blows stories out of proportion, and when that happens the government steps in and starts making laws and regulations saying you can't have trans-fats, or you should put a calorie count on the food.

Call me cynical, but the people within government who pushes these agendas are only doing it so they can be supported by our tax dollars. Studies are pretty much just money hungry researches trying to jump up and down trying to get the attention of Uncle Sam for more money by doing frivolous studies; that's all.

Listing calorie counts on your fast food menu isn't gonna do squat. Every time I see the calorie count on a menu it feels like the government is bitching at me saying "that's not healthy"; It's more irritating than helpful really. Also, trading a certain cooking oil for another isn't gonna make the world skinny, and government intervention isn't going to solve society's problems with overindulgence and careless lifestyles. Every time I see one of these government dietitians or nutritionists that want to control what we eat I want to fire them and keep them locked in a gym somewhere. Yes I am careful about what I eat and I am very fit, but dammit when I want a big fat burger cooked to perfection I want to be able to get one without someone breathing down my neck and getting bent out of shape.

Besides, if we learned anything in our lifetimes, is that the government has a gift of fucking up everything it has a say in, how will this be any different?