This is sick. Obesity is one of two things, a serious problem, or an accepted attribute. Depending on the person who is obese. Whoever believes children should be taken from their parents should be branded corrupt with a hot iron symbol, then tossed off a cliff.
Allowing children to become obese is a form of neglect, emotionally and physically.Children do not get fat because they are being "overfed." Normal, mentally healthy children will not eat too much food. What is causing these problems is distractions like TV and video games, which literally turn off the ability for a child to judge when they are properly nourished. But Social Services only has the right to educate, not to take them away.
Oh sure. Next it will be taking away the children of bad spellers or the ignorant, prejudiced, opinionated people who now have no compassion for the parental rights of all loving people. What, then, would you do when they tore your babies from your arms?
There comes a point when that Fat child stops being just the parent's concern and becomes a community's concern. I think its ridiculous to ignore such sad cases!
There is a point where it's abuse towards the kids ... It you who feeds them right ... But that's in extreme cases and this is why child protection works case by case ... But there is a point where misfeeding your kids is equivalent to beating em ... or mentally abusing them ... Every kid has the right to an opportunity to grow up ... no matter how cracked out his parents are... It's a fine line to walk but there are cases where I believe this can be done .. Far the kid's sake
From the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect:
Abuse Stats------------State vs Parents (USA)
(Number of Cases per 100,000 Children)
Fatalities---------------- 6.4 vs 1.5
Sexual Abuse-----------112 vs 13
Physical Abuse---------160 vs 59
Neglect-----------------410 vs 241
Medical Neglect---------14 vs 12
State intervention kills children, the numbers show. 1 in 25 kids suffer state intervention. Search "confessions of a CPS headhunter". It's all a state funding scam.
in a way that's not going to get them in a worse condition. Realistically, one can lose 20Lbs in a month if they do drastic overhaul, but with kids you can't do overly drastic things to lose weight and realistically kids should be losing about 10Lbs a month if obese. Did the mother try? did the kids lose ANY weight in her "time line"? I agree with the guy. This is completely ridulous.
I can see taking them away if they are INTENTIONALLY getting them obese and sick and not trying to help them improve their health and weight. We don't know the whole situation in this case. Did the parents try? Some people can try and lose weight but if not done in the right way for THEIR motabulism and all that they won't lose much. What did we expect the mom to do, get the kids to purge to lose 100Lbs in a month? Realistically a child losing weight (or any age) is hard and has to be done.tbc.
The problem is if you treat one person that way, then you have to treat all other obese people the same way and we all know that both in UK and US there are A LOT of obese people, therefore a lot of kids taken away from their parents. From a financial perspective - it is just too costly and also from a social perspective - too invading.
My ex had a friend whose daughter died of childhood obesity. I don't think CPS should take a kid away simply because a parent is obese, however I think when many parents let their children get extremely overweight it can equate to child abuse. My ex's friend overfeed her daughter, and she died. She never got in trouble, and CPS was never a factor in her situation, but in my opinion this was child abuse resulting in the death of a child.
If a former child molester has a child, it should be taken away. Maybe they won't harm the child, but it's not likely. Obesity is a serious health risk that's associated with a variety of physical and psychological problems.
Now you "might" make a good case for keeping the child in the home because the foster care system is terrible. But if a legitimate alternative were available, it should be taken. Parents are obligated to provide the best possible care.
Children these days are way overweight. Maybe C.P.S helping the parents make better decisions for their children diets would be the first thing to do. If a parent is not willing to do that i think they should take away the child. If you don't feed your child that would be unhealthy and your child would be taken away by C.P.S. Over feeding your child is also unhealthy. Parents need to be responsible for the health of their children. If they cant give the child to some one who can be responsible
These social workers are a bunch of pussy's. If they really want to help kids, why dont they take them away from parents who are involved in organized crime. I dare them to do that. Obesity is serious but you cant take every fat child away from their parents. If that was the case many Italian kids in America would be taken away by social services.
Making your kids obese is PHYSICAL ABUSE! Obviously you should treat it like any other case of physical abuse to a child. People don't just become obese because of magic. The parents knowingly create this incredibly unhealthy condition in their child which they will be burdened with for the rest of their (shortened) lives. Almost all of the top causes of preventable death in the U.S. are caused by poor nutrition and obesity. Cenk is TOTALLY wrong here.
If we consider obesity an illness or a disease, don't you HAVE to take the kids away?
I mean if a parent was subjecting their kids to cholera or asbestos, wouldn't social workers intervene? I'm not sure where I stand on this issue but shit do I DESPISE parents like that.
How about enforcing mandatory licensing before parents are allowed to conceive and/or take care of children? The mother's right to the "miracle of life" is nice in theory, but when you've got rampant world overpopulation and children who are being neglected, abused and are in abject poverty, then it's time to step in.
This sound horrible! I think that there is much more to this story than merely taking the kids because they're obese. If weight was the soul issue it's appalling but there are health issues that should be dealt with through education & counseling but those are best dealt with as a family together. I'd like to know if there are more relevant facts.
I can understand why they took away their kids, cuz they'll probably die from heart attacks by the time their 25. However it's wrong to take children away from their parents, its a very difficult issue.
Looks like you're backing the wrong team then, Turks. The liberal party is for a large, interfering government and conservatives are for small government and personal rights. Small governments that believe in upholding your rights don't take kids away from their parents for being fat, and they don't surveilance citizens either.
322 pounds isn't that much, I let myself go for about a year and before I knew it I was 298 lbs, it's going to be hard work getting back down to 220, but aside from that, c'mon, it's the UK, they take children away for pretty much anything, you smoke? take your children away, you're fat? take your children away, you got an IQ under 100? they take your children away, the UK is the child stealing center of the world.
tyt got it wrong on this one. being obese at young ages like that is horrible neglect. Can effect the kid's life long term. You telling me if i want to starve my kid its neglect but overfeed them its ok?
i'm for taking away the kids. if they weren't feeding their kids, an their kids were in danger of starving to death, then that's negect, but feeding them until they have diabetes an heart prblems?? its the same thing.
I think parents who have extremely obese children should have to pay a penalty tax and be put threw consoling; I'm not even who of those people who wants government involved in everything but I see it as endangering a child's health if you allow those situation to slip so out of control.
But I don't think they should get taken away from there parents the only time I ever thought that was when I saw videos of "Fat Jessica" look that up if you haven't seen it that women should be imprisoned.
The parents CLAIM that this is all because they are overweight. But social services have publicly stated that they would not take this action simply because of a weight issue.
We don't know enough about this family to be making sweeping claims like 'obese kids taken away from obese mom'.
It should also be noted that the oldest child actually VOLUNTEERED to be taken into foster care. There's more to this than meets the eye.
@RedGaribaldi yeah this is clearly just a catchy headline and from nothing but that title they have created a story and opinions on that story and made up their facts or only partialy reported them.
Imagine if I feed my kids really healthy food, and I also give them some sort of pill that would mimic the effects of fatty food. They get morbidly obese, but since "I can raise my kids the way I want", there shouldn't be a problem? Wouldn't that be viewed as an extreme form of malice?
In my state of New Jersey it is called DYFS, the division of youth and family services. Before any Social Worker can take away the children there has to be proof of neglect or abuse. So when a poor parent tries to get help like in the case mentioned, the Social Worker starts collecting evidence against the parent. It is a trap. Counseling is a joke and the state protects itself by taking away the children. Rich people never have this problem because they can afford Psychologists.
If a kid gets twice the weight put on by eating one sandwich than all the other kids, you should feed him half a sandwich. Cenk, your dad is great for having the self-discepline to lose all that weight, but most kids will not have that. Making their bodies adjust to an unhealthy lifestyle is putting them at risk for their futures. Also, your penis growth is stunted is you're overweight during development. I'm not intending to discriminate, but to adress an issue with parents and their children.
Recently in SC they jailed a woman and took her son after she sought help from professionals for his obesity.
Where does it end?
Do we remove infants and children from homes of parents who smoke? Second hand smoke can lead to illness and death and living with a smoker may increase the chance of the child starting that dangerous habit.
Underweight kids? I saw a girl who looked like a strong wind would knock her down. Was she being starved? Anorexic? Remove all skinny kids too.
Cenk and Ana are so wrong on this one. You say that they "have the right to raise their children anyway they like," but what about the children's rights? What about the life long problems of obesity?
Not everyone has "enormous self discipline", if the parents are endangering their child's life, society owes it to the child to protect him/her.
It takes a village to raise a child - especially when there are irresponsible parents.
220 lbs? When you're 13? And when the mother is quite plainly dictating the child's diet?
That's abuse, in exactly the same way that smashing your kids around, indoctrinating them into your religious cult or refusing to get them medical aid is abuse. Parents do not own their children, as if children are some form of property - and they certainly don't have the right to destroy their health like that.
Those kids will forever be scarred because they were taken from their loving mother just because she's fat....yeah...that's going to make things better???
I hope to God she gets her kids back, especially her newborn baby!
Without knowing the details you can't really say whether or not the government is in the right. Suppose these kid's health is in danger so the parents contact the government for help and the government council's them and gives them a good plan for getting the kid's weight in check and two years to get the weight down at least a little. Now if two years later the kid is even heavier and suffering health problems that can result in a young death do you leave the kid in danger?
In the 1800s, the theory was that poverty was inherited, so it was best to take poor kids from poor parents and place them with rich families so they would not breed more poor kids. Fat kids come from fat (poor) families. Same theory, same prejudice. Still very wrong. Why not correct poverty, regulate food engineering, and create situations wherein all families have equal access to quality food and activity? Oh yeah - that would be "Socialism." Scratch that.
Being morbidly obese in Britain is grounds for public assistance. I read an article in which an entire family is on welfare (or whatever they call it). The family was concerned that they were going to lose their monthly payments. One comment that was outrageous was that one of the children said that they might have to try to lose weight if the government no longer provided support.
I don't think that counseling the family about their weight is appropriate, either. We still don't know what makes someone fat, and whether a persons food choices make them fat or not. Food effects health, for sure, but your weight stays within a 30 lb range unless you have health problems complicating the situation.
Also, what counts as being obese? According to the bmi chart, I am, but I've maintained the same weight and fitness level for years, and feel very healthy.
Hahaha. So, because someone didn't decide to have parents 'blessed' with genes that result in thinness, they're obviously lazy, and enjoy a big mac far too much.
I'm not saying that diet doesn't affect your health, I'm saying you can't eat yourself fat, or thin. If you can, then you either have some serious mental/physical health issues, or are a freak of nature.
I'll continue having a healthy, active lifestyle too, and OMG! still be fat. You have fun living your sad, prejudiced life.
Actually in the case of genetics causing someone to be overweight, it makes up a VERY small percentage of the obese.
>I'm saying you can't eat yourself fat
Actually, you can.
That being said, I don't know all the specifics of this case, but taking the kids away is a VERY LAST RESORT, and I'm not sure if they exhausted all other options before doing it. In fact, taking a newborn baby leads me to believe they exhausted no options.
Actually, your genes have a huge play in your weight. We're predisposed to put on weight; when food was irregular, those that would store the excess food as fat would survive the longest. Skinny + famine = not living to pass on your genetics.
Reality is that being overweight increases longevity, aids your body in fighting off all manners of diseases, and is not something that you can or should change.
First of all, yes putting on weight was used to store excess calories for energy. However, even if you are fat, you can still starve to death. So if there is a famine you could still probably die, you just might last a little longer. Now to the extent of genetics, yes we naturally are predisposed to gain weight, but I'm talking about the kind of genetics that can make you become OBESE even if you are eating light diet and exercising regularly, which is rare.
Now, being slightly overweight can actually be good for you, and at worst is not too detrimental to your health, but being obese is. If your 5'5" and you weigh 330 pounds, that isn't helping your health.
And YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR WEIGHT. You gain weight by taking in more calories then you burn. If you want to lose weight then you should burn more calories then you take in, and if your, like I said above, 5'5" and 330 pounds, you should change your weight through a stable diet and exercise routine
If you are 5'5" and 33o, you likely have a health problem that is causing the obesity, and should go to a doctor who is fat friendly. The evidence says that if you have no health problems, then you aren't going to gain much weight at all.
As for dieting; it doesn't work. At all. 95% of people who lose over 50lb from a diet gain it all back within 5 years.
Probably the most unhealthy part about being overweight is the fact that overweight people are treated horribly in our society.
First: If you sit on your ass eating food and watching TV without exercising, you will gain weight, and if you do it long enough you can reach 330 pounds.
Second: Diet doesn't mean like "grapefruit diet" or bullshit like that. I'm talking an actual diet, not the kind of stuff you find in magazines. One where you stop eating fast food, put down the krispy kreme donut and actually eat a consistent healthy diet. 3 full meals a day with a REGULAR EXERCISE ROUTINE.
If you have an extenuating health condition, then you might gain weight from a poor diet and a lack of activity; i.e., diabetes, food allergy, celiacs, certain medication, PCOS, etc. However, if you've no diseases, no allergies, no nothing, you won't gain weight any more than what would be considered average. That being said, you won't be healthy.
What I'm trying to say is that health is not synonymous with weight. You can be healthy and heavy, and unfit and thin.
To be quite frank, I find your opinion to be ignorant and quite offensive. Blaming obesity on krispy kremes is ridiculous, and it implies that fat people wouldn't be fat if they only had some self control, and weren't such ignorant, lazy, slovenly people. Fact is, though, that people come in a variety of sizes, and expecting to be able to standardize everyone is ridiculous. Just as there is nothing wrong with you if you're short, there's nothing wrong with you if you're fat.
Nice job putting words in my mouth. You obviously didn't understand what I was saying. I wasn't saying all fat people are fat because they are lazy and they stuff themselves with unhealthy food loaded with calories, though some do, I was trying to argue against your false claim that you can't "eat yourself fat." You can. If you eat more calories then you burn you will gain weight, there may be some genetic disorders that contribute, but disorder or not, it works the same for EVERYONE
Health isn't synonymous with weight, if you eat unhealthy foods, even if you are skinny you can be unhealthy. HOWEVER; IF YOU TAKE IN A LOT OF CALORIES WITHOUT BURNING THOSE CALORIES OFF, YOU WILL GAIN WEIGHT.
Disease or not, that is what will happen. That is how the human body works, end of story.
one more thing: the more you seek out "studies" or ANYTHING that helps take the guilt and responsibility of your weight and fatness off you, and puts it on your genes, the better you feel about it.
Perfect victim mentality!
It helps assuage your guilt. "oh it's not me, I'm healthy, I REALLY try!, but my body just happens to naturally be fat!"
There is nothing healthy about being overweight, it ups your chances of the #1 cause of death in America, HEART DISEASE.
Genes playing a role is pure conjecture. My parents don't look like me, nor do they share my build, they also doesn't follow my lifestyle... Are you starting to notice the trend here fatty?
I've had fat, and chubby friends join me in weight training and begin cardio, and guess what? THEY LOSE WEIGHT. And the more they do what I do, and maintain it, the more they start to mirror me physically.
In learning/studying physical fitness and the human body and having trained many people, I'm pretty sure my experience is just a bit more "universal" than yours.
Also, there is no "privilege" with working incredibly hard 6 days a week to achieve personal goals. It's earned.
Anyone is capable of transforming their body, it just depends on their willingness to push passed theirs limits and plateaus, and not make excuses for themselves or get lazy.
You are presumptuous in saying that my experience doesn't surpass yours. I'm working in the nursing field while going to school to become an md. My family works almost exclusively in the medical field, so what experience and knowledge I've yet to gain, I can learn from them.
95% of the population is incapable of altering their set point weight, no matter how much they try. Demanding a person lose more than 30lb+ is like demanding a person grow taller; neither can do so.
I like this show you share some good views. Social services should have monitored the kids diets before taking them, at least give the mother a chance to prove she can parent and if not then yea take them away.
If this pattern is followed, then the children of smokers should be taken away from their families. Living in a house with a smoker on a daily basis is equally detrimental to a child's health. Children of smokers often become smokers. Also, secondhand smoking has been proven to be just as bad as smoking itself. Why are these children not being taken from their families when obese children are? I simply don't see the logic.
i do agree that this action was a HUGE infringement on privacy rights, and parents do get the right to raise your kids any damn way you like... however
I don't know, I think everyone would be in agreement if the mother was a drug addict and her 13 year old was also. I think being a food addict is almost as bad.
Cenk was referring to a US private health insurance company denying coverage to a young boy because he was "too fat". I don't think anything of this sort could happen in Britain.
If the family was going to get help, I'm not OK with taking the children away.
But otherwise, I don't see the difference between feeding your child to death and smoking in a windowless room with your child 24/7. You may not instantly kill them, but eventually you will. Obesity is only slightly less deadly than tobacco. Either take them away for both or let them stay no matter what, but you should be consistent.
I agree with the gov't here... Doctors will never say you're overweight or obese. So, let the kids die just because the parents are stupid and obese? and the doctors are too scared to say the truth because of possible suits? bullshit.
a part of many doctors jobs is to people their family members are dead, and you think they're going to be afraid to tell a parent their kid is fat when there are specific numbers to define obesity and heavy?
what the fuck are you thinking? as for the parents, there is no crime against stupidity. that is the sacrifice of living in a free society. we dont make people second class citizens without that person having a violent crime on their record. having a fat family isn't enough.
I'm actually sort of in favor of Britain's action. It's dangerous for the kids. Very dangerous. Give her some counseling. Maybe don't take the kids away, but DO SOMETHING OMG! You've got to draw the line somewhere. Obesity can be just as dangerous as abuse.
wow..that is RIDICULOUS. Taking away kids is bad enough...but a newborn baby?? They're gonna take away kids and put them in a foster home b/c theyre obese, yet there are still so many cases of physical and sexual abuse going on and nobody does shit all. Prioritize, people!
I've heard some crazy stories about foster homes, in Canada at least. Apparently the screening process isn't as stringent as it should be.
And anyone unaware that chips&pop are unhealthy is borderline retarded, sorry.
It's either we are punished by paying for their healthcare and joblessness or they are punished for being fat. Guess what, I'd rather they pay the price for being fat than I.
I think the best, and only moral solution, is to let people live their lives by their own standards and to let them pay for the health care costs that they voluntarily incur. Sure, have the freedom to become obese, but accept the responsibility of paying your own hospital bills. That right there is more of an incentive to not become obese than taxes ever will. Plus, it doesn't infringe on one's freedoms.
Agreed. Why should the rest of the UK pay for the medical treatment caused by over eating that this child is likely to need. The social services gave them their chance, they did not care for their kids enough to put the effort towards healthy eating therefore they're poor parents. I am not totally for this but in some cases it is necessary.
They probably thought she was going to eat it. Seriously though, I can understand taking them away for overfeeding them. -Your wrong Cenk- What if she was starving them? This is neglect, just in the opposite direction. Ana how do you know they didn't counsel them? I wouldn't take the baby away, that's punishment before they even did anything in that instance. You can't mistreat your kids and get away with it with impunity. 1*
"Hello, we are policemen, who you called because you thought someone was breaking into your house. "
I don't know why you wrote that, but it should read like this: Hello, we are police men, we are wearing ski masks, kicking in your door, terrorizing your family and killing your dog because we are sadistic self-serving gang members.
So is that what happens when you call a government funded service? Every single time? Is that what you're saying? So if your house is burning down...you won't do anything. If someone broke into your house and stole a bunch of your stuff, you wouldn't call the police. Or are u saying that Firemen are also a gang of sadistic thugs as well? I understand there a good cops and bad cops. There are good people and bad people as well.
"So if your house is burning down...you won't do anything."
I didn't say that. I actually respect the services that help people. The couple only times I have EVER seen anyone call the cops to do their fucking jobs they FUBARed it up so bad I would never waste my time. They are nothing short of incompetent thugs who milk us for revenue, glorified tax collectors.
you people can't be serious! this is wrong and it's not helping anyone. everyone is presented with challenges in life to overcome, nobody can force you to change. only suggest it, and help. ESPECIALLY if you ask for help. if she doesn't ask for help, do they contact her out of thin air? why else would the state have come in contact with them, if they just live their lives without asking for help? they told on themselves? come on people.
Cenk is 100% wrong on this subject. I'm sorry, but if we take children away for far less things than endangering their lives at such young age. Considering over half of the US is obese, this is the exact right thing to do. The mother deserves everything she gets.
What do they take kids away for that is far less? You know the excuse they give for missing physically abused children? We are overloaded with cases. This is one of those cases. Fat people do not ask help from your government again...
"zbambam5" you are a fucking psycho and I hope that YOUR children get taken away by child protection services one day for not putting your kids to bed early enough.
Yeah, children still have a right to be protected from this kind of thing (parents can't just treat their kids like dirt) - this isn't the same as couples raising their children into a certain religion, this is a physical fact, harmful. That said, this is far too drastic an action - the government offers too little support at getting people healthier and helping businesses that sell healthy products. We have the Protestant work ethic without the asceticism. Viva la neoliberalism!
What they failed to mention is the toddler is 2 and 56 lbs. The average 2 year old is around 28 lbs. I think the government is right for doing this because there are people in the UK that collect welfare on the basis that they are too fat to work. I bet these parents are doing the same and setting up their children to do the same also.
Western society is the worse at parenting, both parents have jobs and need to raise kids while they get impossible competition from magazines and TV (wich basecly raises kids these days).
In other cultures it takes whole families or even entire tribes who take responsibility for their children so parents wont be overflooded with problems or make bad choises/neglect.
I like another comment pertaining to the other end of the spectrum where kids are malnourished. Certainly they should be taken away. Obesity (not overweight) poses a major risk and IMHO constitutes neglect or at the very least total ineptitude as parents. The child has the RIGHT to a happy, healthy and long life so they have the chance to choose their adult lifestyle for themselves.
The social services in the UK are FUCKED UP. They're complete bastards who dont give a shit about helping anyone.
I agree with Cenk to an exent, they shouldn't take away the kids, espiecally when they were asked for help, but there comes a point when someone has to step in. I mean if the kids were malnourished they'd step in, so if they're morbidly obese some ones got to do something.
At a certain point, not caring about whether your kid is being fat ( or obese in this case) borders on child-abuse! And NO, you are not allowed to raise your kids ANYWAY you like.
Kids dont know what is important to them. They need parents to guide them and teach them how to live, what to do and what not to do. It's called "good parenting".
We're not talking about being overweight, but about being OBESE! It will scar these children for life, emotionally and physically.
im from the uk, i like the fact they are setting a precedent. My elder sister was morbidly obese age 13, the school told my parents to help her get fit and she did lose the weight. You couldnt do this in America granted, at 230lbs but maybe you should be at 325, i think you guys span the story a little you mentioned they had a period of time for the kids to lose the weight. How long, did they lose any? this report was kinda biast towards your views, if it was 6 months and they gained? then what?
I wonder how long it will take for Republicans to latch on to this story, and with their usual and bizarre leaps of logic, try to besmirch the public option by making the connection that somehow it will give the government the right to take away obese kids from obese parents. Anyone want to bet how long?
I got $20 that says there's a clause in the plan that says DCFS will get involved if there's an issue like this. It's my opinion that DCFS should. But neo-cons blame the gov't for everything. Nevertheless, neo-cons don't actually read so they'll never find the clause if it even exists.
This is moronic, by that logic then they have to snatch away the kids of anyone who smokes, or anyone who goes out on the weekend to drink.... etc, etc.
Why not even go farther, let's take away the kids of anyone who is in a religion we dont like, cant have the kids growing up to be heathens now can we.
Take away those muslim kids, they could grow up to be terrorists.
so far even the kids of known religious extremists arent taken away in any western countries
and by that logic we can allow parents to let their kids smoke, drink alcohol aso.
anything can decay or escalate, community institutions just as much as families, community institutions have the benefit of being transparent and supervised
this whole freedom and family ideology strikes me as lack of maturity to acknowledge and accept that we live in a bigger society
I think government intervention has its rightful place but I often feel that the UK goes way too far. A child being obese is hardly a good enough reason to take a child away from its parents. For the most part a parent has a right to raise their child however they wish. If they want their kid to be a racist, sexist even a Neo Nazi the government has no business taking the child away. Obesity for sure isnt a big enough offense.
If anything, socail services in the UK is too lenient. I live there, my mother is a teacher and every day is a struggle with innaction on the side of child services.
And this matter concerns the health and well-being of the child, so its not up to mummy if she wants to kill the kids with shit food.
The duty of a parent is to raise and protect a child and let them figure shit out for themselves.
The health and well being of a child is primary the responsibility of the parents. If the parents are lacking in this area then assistance is the proper response from the government not take the kids away. I had a drunk for a father and an abusive mother and after my parents got a divorce I became morbidly obese. These experiences drove me to be a better person and Im stronger now because of the hardships I suffered as a child. Children are far more resilient then people give them credit for.
I don't really get your arguement. Are you saying that because children are resilient that the socail services in this case were wrong?
You did say the health is the primary responsibility of the parents to their child(ren). As such, surely something as harmful to health as causing her other two children to become obese warrants the third child to also be taken away?
I'm saying that if parents are having difficulty raising their children the correct government response is providing assistance for the parents. For this particular situation things like aggressive food counseling or offering financial aid for memberships to local gyms would have been a good response. However just swooping in with ridiculous ultimatums isn't the answer. Also unless there's a reasonable threat of serious immediate danger taking a child shouldn't even be considered an option.
dont take the kids away help the family but dont take them away the government has to much power
xoxcourtneygreenexox 3 months ago
THE SECOND AMENDMENT. WE HAVE GUNS IN AMERICA.
p71280 3 months ago
This is sick. Obesity is one of two things, a serious problem, or an accepted attribute. Depending on the person who is obese. Whoever believes children should be taken from their parents should be branded corrupt with a hot iron symbol, then tossed off a cliff.
reedscott3 4 months ago
Allowing children to become obese is a form of neglect, emotionally and physically.Children do not get fat because they are being "overfed." Normal, mentally healthy children will not eat too much food. What is causing these problems is distractions like TV and video games, which literally turn off the ability for a child to judge when they are properly nourished. But Social Services only has the right to educate, not to take them away.
sj145sunny 7 months ago
i weighed exactly 200 lbs when I was 14.
dclark12553 7 months ago
Oh sure. Next it will be taking away the children of bad spellers or the ignorant, prejudiced, opinionated people who now have no compassion for the parental rights of all loving people. What, then, would you do when they tore your babies from your arms?
camerrill 7 months ago
I think that they should take them away because we don't need more bitchy fat people in this world but I do like when I see them tri to loss watt
gam3rization 7 months ago
whats up with this take kids away and send them away with strangers.. not right...
Jesusfan50 7 months ago
There comes a point when that Fat child stops being just the parent's concern and becomes a community's concern. I think its ridiculous to ignore such sad cases!
ZimDefender 8 months ago
There is a point where it's abuse towards the kids ... It you who feeds them right ... But that's in extreme cases and this is why child protection works case by case ... But there is a point where misfeeding your kids is equivalent to beating em ... or mentally abusing them ... Every kid has the right to an opportunity to grow up ... no matter how cracked out his parents are... It's a fine line to walk but there are cases where I believe this can be done .. Far the kid's sake
Cheers
659851 8 months ago
This is so stupid
NotMyBirthday 9 months ago
i used to weight 265 back when i was 13 now im at 215 and im 15 still fat just nowere neer as fat haha
xX2oscar2Xx 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
From the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect:
Abuse Stats------------State vs Parents (USA)
(Number of Cases per 100,000 Children)
Fatalities---------------- 6.4 vs 1.5
Sexual Abuse-----------112 vs 13
Physical Abuse---------160 vs 59
Neglect-----------------410 vs 241
Medical Neglect---------14 vs 12
State intervention kills children, the numbers show. 1 in 25 kids suffer state intervention. Search "confessions of a CPS headhunter". It's all a state funding scam.
niennumb01 11 months ago
Wow a liberal against taking someone's kids away? Amazing
NJburbsSeeker 1 year ago
in a way that's not going to get them in a worse condition. Realistically, one can lose 20Lbs in a month if they do drastic overhaul, but with kids you can't do overly drastic things to lose weight and realistically kids should be losing about 10Lbs a month if obese. Did the mother try? did the kids lose ANY weight in her "time line"? I agree with the guy. This is completely ridulous.
OutcastEntertainment 1 year ago
I can see taking them away if they are INTENTIONALLY getting them obese and sick and not trying to help them improve their health and weight. We don't know the whole situation in this case. Did the parents try? Some people can try and lose weight but if not done in the right way for THEIR motabulism and all that they won't lose much. What did we expect the mom to do, get the kids to purge to lose 100Lbs in a month? Realistically a child losing weight (or any age) is hard and has to be done.tbc.
OutcastEntertainment 1 year ago
The problem is if you treat one person that way, then you have to treat all other obese people the same way and we all know that both in UK and US there are A LOT of obese people, therefore a lot of kids taken away from their parents. From a financial perspective - it is just too costly and also from a social perspective - too invading.
woah455 1 year ago
My ex had a friend whose daughter died of childhood obesity. I don't think CPS should take a kid away simply because a parent is obese, however I think when many parents let their children get extremely overweight it can equate to child abuse. My ex's friend overfeed her daughter, and she died. She never got in trouble, and CPS was never a factor in her situation, but in my opinion this was child abuse resulting in the death of a child.
langox510x 1 year ago
Is letting your child be morbidly obese to the point of extreme danger neglect?....I think so....
Radialshifter 1 year ago
i agree with the social workers if thyr parents r obsese thy should be taken away
optimusmikey 1 year ago
If a former child molester has a child, it should be taken away. Maybe they won't harm the child, but it's not likely. Obesity is a serious health risk that's associated with a variety of physical and psychological problems.
Now you "might" make a good case for keeping the child in the home because the foster care system is terrible. But if a legitimate alternative were available, it should be taken. Parents are obligated to provide the best possible care.
Vazeroth16 1 year ago
Children these days are way overweight. Maybe C.P.S helping the parents make better decisions for their children diets would be the first thing to do. If a parent is not willing to do that i think they should take away the child. If you don't feed your child that would be unhealthy and your child would be taken away by C.P.S. Over feeding your child is also unhealthy. Parents need to be responsible for the health of their children. If they cant give the child to some one who can be responsible
WARFOX101 1 year ago
These social workers are a bunch of pussy's. If they really want to help kids, why dont they take them away from parents who are involved in organized crime. I dare them to do that. Obesity is serious but you cant take every fat child away from their parents. If that was the case many Italian kids in America would be taken away by social services.
vonnes3 1 year ago 2
Making your kids obese is PHYSICAL ABUSE! Obviously you should treat it like any other case of physical abuse to a child. People don't just become obese because of magic. The parents knowingly create this incredibly unhealthy condition in their child which they will be burdened with for the rest of their (shortened) lives. Almost all of the top causes of preventable death in the U.S. are caused by poor nutrition and obesity. Cenk is TOTALLY wrong here.
Nayr747 1 year ago
If we consider obesity an illness or a disease, don't you HAVE to take the kids away?
I mean if a parent was subjecting their kids to cholera or asbestos, wouldn't social workers intervene? I'm not sure where I stand on this issue but shit do I DESPISE parents like that.
VocabWord 1 year ago
How about enforcing mandatory licensing before parents are allowed to conceive and/or take care of children? The mother's right to the "miracle of life" is nice in theory, but when you've got rampant world overpopulation and children who are being neglected, abused and are in abject poverty, then it's time to step in.
Christianitylol 1 year ago
This sound horrible! I think that there is much more to this story than merely taking the kids because they're obese. If weight was the soul issue it's appalling but there are health issues that should be dealt with through education & counseling but those are best dealt with as a family together. I'd like to know if there are more relevant facts.
msgerto 1 year ago
YAY FOR TAKING AWAY KIDS!!!
ZOMBIEMoviProduction 1 year ago
I can understand why they took away their kids, cuz they'll probably die from heart attacks by the time their 25. However it's wrong to take children away from their parents, its a very difficult issue.
MrMcConnon 1 year ago
Looks like you're backing the wrong team then, Turks. The liberal party is for a large, interfering government and conservatives are for small government and personal rights. Small governments that believe in upholding your rights don't take kids away from their parents for being fat, and they don't surveilance citizens either.
AWickedMind 1 year ago
Maybe the social workers were worried that the fattie was going to eat the baby.
jimbrown257 1 year ago
wonder how this has worked out 6 months later?
tomitstube 1 year ago
if some one was freezing u dont set them on fire to warm them
copnite12342 1 year ago
Those kids are likely to have eating disorders for life now.
emmyjo720 1 year ago
200 POUNDS AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL?!
Nooooooooooooooooo...............
I was a fat child, and even I didn't manage to pull that off! I weighed only 60 kg, that is 120 pounds!
Borschtschow 2 years ago
322 pounds isn't that much, I let myself go for about a year and before I knew it I was 298 lbs, it's going to be hard work getting back down to 220, but aside from that, c'mon, it's the UK, they take children away for pretty much anything, you smoke? take your children away, you're fat? take your children away, you got an IQ under 100? they take your children away, the UK is the child stealing center of the world.
luke666808g 2 years ago
That's almost like taking away a child from a smoker, or a child who might have an anorexic mother or something.
That's messed up.
Cepghef 2 years ago
tyt got it wrong on this one. being obese at young ages like that is horrible neglect. Can effect the kid's life long term. You telling me if i want to starve my kid its neglect but overfeed them its ok?
Curseoftheearth 2 years ago
i'm for taking away the kids. if they weren't feeding their kids, an their kids were in danger of starving to death, then that's negect, but feeding them until they have diabetes an heart prblems?? its the same thing.
B00mBoomboy 2 years ago
a fatass dosent know how to loose weight her baby would probbly eat mcdonolds for dinner every night
Willettes1 2 years ago
I think parents who have extremely obese children should have to pay a penalty tax and be put threw consoling; I'm not even who of those people who wants government involved in everything but I see it as endangering a child's health if you allow those situation to slip so out of control.
But I don't think they should get taken away from there parents the only time I ever thought that was when I saw videos of "Fat Jessica" look that up if you haven't seen it that women should be imprisoned.
SilentFishHeads 2 years ago
someone should take away the social workers children, then they might be more understanding.
mytecc88 2 years ago 3
just watched the pistachios commercial. Wouldn't the plural form of dominatrix be dominatrices?
gellerstudent 2 years ago
Be careful with the facts here TYT.
The parents CLAIM that this is all because they are overweight. But social services have publicly stated that they would not take this action simply because of a weight issue.
We don't know enough about this family to be making sweeping claims like 'obese kids taken away from obese mom'.
It should also be noted that the oldest child actually VOLUNTEERED to be taken into foster care. There's more to this than meets the eye.
RedGaribaldi 2 years ago 27
@RedGaribaldi Totally agree.
bluepurpleglasses 1 year ago
@RedGaribaldi yeah this is clearly just a catchy headline and from nothing but that title they have created a story and opinions on that story and made up their facts or only partialy reported them.
dom182 1 year ago
They take this kid away but left Baby P with his parents.
Wow. Just wow.
DaReal2k9 2 years ago
Imagine if I feed my kids really healthy food, and I also give them some sort of pill that would mimic the effects of fatty food. They get morbidly obese, but since "I can raise my kids the way I want", there shouldn't be a problem? Wouldn't that be viewed as an extreme form of malice?
Kawlinz 2 years ago
I worked with a Child Study Team for years and if there is one thing I learned it is to NEVER trust Social Services.
chairde 2 years ago
Would you care to explain? I'm interested in hearing the reasons.
wheresurhat 2 years ago
In my state of New Jersey it is called DYFS, the division of youth and family services. Before any Social Worker can take away the children there has to be proof of neglect or abuse. So when a poor parent tries to get help like in the case mentioned, the Social Worker starts collecting evidence against the parent. It is a trap. Counseling is a joke and the state protects itself by taking away the children. Rich people never have this problem because they can afford Psychologists.
chairde 2 years ago
If a kid gets twice the weight put on by eating one sandwich than all the other kids, you should feed him half a sandwich. Cenk, your dad is great for having the self-discepline to lose all that weight, but most kids will not have that. Making their bodies adjust to an unhealthy lifestyle is putting them at risk for their futures. Also, your penis growth is stunted is you're overweight during development. I'm not intending to discriminate, but to adress an issue with parents and their children.
DarkOceanAdam 2 years ago
Comment removed
phantomofmyopera 2 years ago
No you can't take kids away because of that.
Counseling. Yes.
Support. Yes
Alternative programs. Yes
Taking the kids away?? What benefit is that?? Are they thinking about the side effects of taking the children away? I mean:
"oh let's take them away so they can be safe. oh wait. now they are angry and sad because they can't be with their parents anymore."
And I agree with the smoker parents perspective on the comment below by 4tuitive. The nurturing is up to the parents not to someone else.
mrselfdestructpart5 2 years ago 15
that kid weighs over twice as much as i did when i was 13, i was really slim.
somonesetusupthebomb 2 years ago
Cenk is right.
Recently in SC they jailed a woman and took her son after she sought help from professionals for his obesity.
Where does it end?
Do we remove infants and children from homes of parents who smoke? Second hand smoke can lead to illness and death and living with a smoker may increase the chance of the child starting that dangerous habit.
Underweight kids? I saw a girl who looked like a strong wind would knock her down. Was she being starved? Anorexic? Remove all skinny kids too.
canycme 2 years ago 3
Yes, they can't take care of themselves and they can't take care of their child.
Chimera1591 2 years ago
Cenk and Ana are so wrong on this one. You say that they "have the right to raise their children anyway they like," but what about the children's rights? What about the life long problems of obesity?
Not everyone has "enormous self discipline", if the parents are endangering their child's life, society owes it to the child to protect him/her.
It takes a village to raise a child - especially when there are irresponsible parents.
mack8attack 2 years ago
WRONG!!!!
This is child abuse.
This is neglect.
This is extreme health risk.
k87jury 2 years ago
I'm forced to disagree with Cenk here.
220 lbs? When you're 13? And when the mother is quite plainly dictating the child's diet?
That's abuse, in exactly the same way that smashing your kids around, indoctrinating them into your religious cult or refusing to get them medical aid is abuse. Parents do not own their children, as if children are some form of property - and they certainly don't have the right to destroy their health like that.
ExaltedLeader 2 years ago
th kid can be 6'0, or 5'10 meaning he isn't obese, just fat.
uhh06 2 years ago
Those kids will forever be scarred because they were taken from their loving mother just because she's fat....yeah...that's going to make things better???
I hope to God she gets her kids back, especially her newborn baby!
Mika20 2 years ago
Children should be saved from heavily Christian / Obese parents.
ampdgmr 2 years ago 2
Without knowing the details you can't really say whether or not the government is in the right. Suppose these kid's health is in danger so the parents contact the government for help and the government council's them and gives them a good plan for getting the kid's weight in check and two years to get the weight down at least a little. Now if two years later the kid is even heavier and suffering health problems that can result in a young death do you leave the kid in danger?
KidOmniMan 2 years ago
*sigh* I wish someone would have taken me away from my fatass religious parents.
ZKoftherebellion 2 years ago
Hey guys, subscribe to my show, The Third Hour. A progressive talk show similar to The Young Turks
TheThirdHour 2 years ago
In the 1800s, the theory was that poverty was inherited, so it was best to take poor kids from poor parents and place them with rich families so they would not breed more poor kids. Fat kids come from fat (poor) families. Same theory, same prejudice. Still very wrong. Why not correct poverty, regulate food engineering, and create situations wherein all families have equal access to quality food and activity? Oh yeah - that would be "Socialism." Scratch that.
hollywoodartchick 2 years ago 3
Being morbidly obese in Britain is grounds for public assistance. I read an article in which an entire family is on welfare (or whatever they call it). The family was concerned that they were going to lose their monthly payments. One comment that was outrageous was that one of the children said that they might have to try to lose weight if the government no longer provided support.
happytravelling 2 years ago
I don't think that counseling the family about their weight is appropriate, either. We still don't know what makes someone fat, and whether a persons food choices make them fat or not. Food effects health, for sure, but your weight stays within a 30 lb range unless you have health problems complicating the situation.
Also, what counts as being obese? According to the bmi chart, I am, but I've maintained the same weight and fitness level for years, and feel very healthy.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
"We still don't know what makes someone fat..."
I live a very active lifestyle, workout, and eat fairly healthy. I look healthy, and physically fit.
But according to what you just said, I could somehow fluctuate 30 lbs and become flabby, regardless of my lifestyle, RIGHT????
Now go read more studies that try to pretend fat people aren't fat for eating themselves into obesity and being inactive lazy fucks.
I'll continue living a healthy, active lifestyle, and OMG! not being fat either.
mangaas 2 years ago
Woot! I like your thinking!
SamuraiKnights 2 years ago
Hahaha. So, because someone didn't decide to have parents 'blessed' with genes that result in thinness, they're obviously lazy, and enjoy a big mac far too much.
I'm not saying that diet doesn't affect your health, I'm saying you can't eat yourself fat, or thin. If you can, then you either have some serious mental/physical health issues, or are a freak of nature.
I'll continue having a healthy, active lifestyle too, and OMG! still be fat. You have fun living your sad, prejudiced life.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
Actually in the case of genetics causing someone to be overweight, it makes up a VERY small percentage of the obese.
>I'm saying you can't eat yourself fat
Actually, you can.
That being said, I don't know all the specifics of this case, but taking the kids away is a VERY LAST RESORT, and I'm not sure if they exhausted all other options before doing it. In fact, taking a newborn baby leads me to believe they exhausted no options.
kklol7 2 years ago
Actually, your genes have a huge play in your weight. We're predisposed to put on weight; when food was irregular, those that would store the excess food as fat would survive the longest. Skinny + famine = not living to pass on your genetics.
Reality is that being overweight increases longevity, aids your body in fighting off all manners of diseases, and is not something that you can or should change.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
First of all, yes putting on weight was used to store excess calories for energy. However, even if you are fat, you can still starve to death. So if there is a famine you could still probably die, you just might last a little longer. Now to the extent of genetics, yes we naturally are predisposed to gain weight, but I'm talking about the kind of genetics that can make you become OBESE even if you are eating light diet and exercising regularly, which is rare.
FFF stupid youtube word count
kklol7 2 years ago
Now, being slightly overweight can actually be good for you, and at worst is not too detrimental to your health, but being obese is. If your 5'5" and you weigh 330 pounds, that isn't helping your health.
And YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR WEIGHT. You gain weight by taking in more calories then you burn. If you want to lose weight then you should burn more calories then you take in, and if your, like I said above, 5'5" and 330 pounds, you should change your weight through a stable diet and exercise routine
kklol7 2 years ago
If you are 5'5" and 33o, you likely have a health problem that is causing the obesity, and should go to a doctor who is fat friendly. The evidence says that if you have no health problems, then you aren't going to gain much weight at all.
As for dieting; it doesn't work. At all. 95% of people who lose over 50lb from a diet gain it all back within 5 years.
Probably the most unhealthy part about being overweight is the fact that overweight people are treated horribly in our society.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
First: If you sit on your ass eating food and watching TV without exercising, you will gain weight, and if you do it long enough you can reach 330 pounds.
Second: Diet doesn't mean like "grapefruit diet" or bullshit like that. I'm talking an actual diet, not the kind of stuff you find in magazines. One where you stop eating fast food, put down the krispy kreme donut and actually eat a consistent healthy diet. 3 full meals a day with a REGULAR EXERCISE ROUTINE.
kklol7 2 years ago
If you have an extenuating health condition, then you might gain weight from a poor diet and a lack of activity; i.e., diabetes, food allergy, celiacs, certain medication, PCOS, etc. However, if you've no diseases, no allergies, no nothing, you won't gain weight any more than what would be considered average. That being said, you won't be healthy.
What I'm trying to say is that health is not synonymous with weight. You can be healthy and heavy, and unfit and thin.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
To be quite frank, I find your opinion to be ignorant and quite offensive. Blaming obesity on krispy kremes is ridiculous, and it implies that fat people wouldn't be fat if they only had some self control, and weren't such ignorant, lazy, slovenly people. Fact is, though, that people come in a variety of sizes, and expecting to be able to standardize everyone is ridiculous. Just as there is nothing wrong with you if you're short, there's nothing wrong with you if you're fat.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
Nice job putting words in my mouth. You obviously didn't understand what I was saying. I wasn't saying all fat people are fat because they are lazy and they stuff themselves with unhealthy food loaded with calories, though some do, I was trying to argue against your false claim that you can't "eat yourself fat." You can. If you eat more calories then you burn you will gain weight, there may be some genetic disorders that contribute, but disorder or not, it works the same for EVERYONE
kklol7 2 years ago
Health isn't synonymous with weight, if you eat unhealthy foods, even if you are skinny you can be unhealthy. HOWEVER; IF YOU TAKE IN A LOT OF CALORIES WITHOUT BURNING THOSE CALORIES OFF, YOU WILL GAIN WEIGHT.
Disease or not, that is what will happen. That is how the human body works, end of story.
kklol7 2 years ago
one more thing: the more you seek out "studies" or ANYTHING that helps take the guilt and responsibility of your weight and fatness off you, and puts it on your genes, the better you feel about it.
Perfect victim mentality!
It helps assuage your guilt. "oh it's not me, I'm healthy, I REALLY try!, but my body just happens to naturally be fat!"
There is nothing healthy about being overweight, it ups your chances of the #1 cause of death in America, HEART DISEASE.
Enjoy your heart attack
mangaas 2 years ago
Genes playing a role is pure conjecture. My parents don't look like me, nor do they share my build, they also doesn't follow my lifestyle... Are you starting to notice the trend here fatty?
I've had fat, and chubby friends join me in weight training and begin cardio, and guess what? THEY LOSE WEIGHT. And the more they do what I do, and maintain it, the more they start to mirror me physically.
It's not rocket science you fat fuck.
mangaas 2 years ago
Your experience is universal, I'm sure. You know someone who lost weight, so of course everyone who doesn't is a fat fuck!
Way to show your privilege, you self absorbed, self righteous, conceited prick.
I hope you never reproduce, cos any child of yours who turns out fat is likely going to be driven to suicide by your abuse.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
In learning/studying physical fitness and the human body and having trained many people, I'm pretty sure my experience is just a bit more "universal" than yours.
Also, there is no "privilege" with working incredibly hard 6 days a week to achieve personal goals. It's earned.
Anyone is capable of transforming their body, it just depends on their willingness to push passed theirs limits and plateaus, and not make excuses for themselves or get lazy.
mangaas 2 years ago
You are presumptuous in saying that my experience doesn't surpass yours. I'm working in the nursing field while going to school to become an md. My family works almost exclusively in the medical field, so what experience and knowledge I've yet to gain, I can learn from them.
95% of the population is incapable of altering their set point weight, no matter how much they try. Demanding a person lose more than 30lb+ is like demanding a person grow taller; neither can do so.
DarknessWhispers 2 years ago
And if a kid of mine turns out fat, I'll just kick him off a cliff Spartan-style.
mangaas 2 years ago
@mangaas Epic
Antisocialnerd2 2 years ago
I like this show you share some good views. Social services should have monitored the kids diets before taking them, at least give the mother a chance to prove she can parent and if not then yea take them away.
P1ckAp8rt 2 years ago
Comment removed
mytecc88 2 years ago
I think they should be taken away under these conditions:
1) If it poses a serious health risk to the children
2) If the parents show they do not care about the health risk. (Not doing anything to help them lose weight, etc...)
xxxFaustusxxx 2 years ago
I completely agree with TheYoungTurks.
If this pattern is followed, then the children of smokers should be taken away from their families. Living in a house with a smoker on a daily basis is equally detrimental to a child's health. Children of smokers often become smokers. Also, secondhand smoking has been proven to be just as bad as smoking itself. Why are these children not being taken from their families when obese children are? I simply don't see the logic.
4tuitive 2 years ago 3
I agree with Cenk on this one.
odom602 2 years ago 4
Yes
xsabbathgamer 2 years ago
The kids will just end up too fat to work and join the familys social welfare aspirations.
1PercentRDA 2 years ago
F-a-T-S-o! ;)
LORDOFMUFF 2 years ago
Police state. Not an option.
GnosticAtheist 2 years ago 4
i do agree that this action was a HUGE infringement on privacy rights, and parents do get the right to raise your kids any damn way you like... however
Kids are not their parents property.
Are there not endangering the kids life?
bla34112 2 years ago
I don't know, I think everyone would be in agreement if the mother was a drug addict and her 13 year old was also. I think being a food addict is almost as bad.
chevon1920 2 years ago
About what Cenk said... "What are you - a health insurance company?"
In Britain, YES. The government is a health insurance company.
yhertwig 2 years ago
Cenk was referring to a US private health insurance company denying coverage to a young boy because he was "too fat". I don't think anything of this sort could happen in Britain.
rurikbird 2 years ago
If the family was going to get help, I'm not OK with taking the children away.
But otherwise, I don't see the difference between feeding your child to death and smoking in a windowless room with your child 24/7. You may not instantly kill them, but eventually you will. Obesity is only slightly less deadly than tobacco. Either take them away for both or let them stay no matter what, but you should be consistent.
andid 2 years ago
why does reading comments on you tube hurt my head?
Kemorowolf 2 years ago
I agree with the gov't here... Doctors will never say you're overweight or obese. So, let the kids die just because the parents are stupid and obese? and the doctors are too scared to say the truth because of possible suits? bullshit.
Snakekilla12 2 years ago
a part of many doctors jobs is to people their family members are dead, and you think they're going to be afraid to tell a parent their kid is fat when there are specific numbers to define obesity and heavy?
what the fuck are you thinking? as for the parents, there is no crime against stupidity. that is the sacrifice of living in a free society. we dont make people second class citizens without that person having a violent crime on their record. having a fat family isn't enough.
sheepwshotguns 2 years ago
Umm fatty boomba
Sweet sugar dumplin'....
TheFunkyDomination 2 years ago
I'm actually sort of in favor of Britain's action. It's dangerous for the kids. Very dangerous. Give her some counseling. Maybe don't take the kids away, but DO SOMETHING OMG! You've got to draw the line somewhere. Obesity can be just as dangerous as abuse.
thetotalvidwatcher 2 years ago
I think this is the first time I have agreed with ana when the issue was split... good job ana
Mezc0 2 years ago
wow..that is RIDICULOUS. Taking away kids is bad enough...but a newborn baby?? They're gonna take away kids and put them in a foster home b/c theyre obese, yet there are still so many cases of physical and sexual abuse going on and nobody does shit all. Prioritize, people!
I've heard some crazy stories about foster homes, in Canada at least. Apparently the screening process isn't as stringent as it should be.
And anyone unaware that chips&pop are unhealthy is borderline retarded, sorry.
smadgirl 2 years ago
hahaha at least we know she wasn't neglecting them :)
GhhhM2 2 years ago
That's stupid, let the mom keep the baby...
MrNDSteinbach 2 years ago 2
What they did might as well be marked as kidnapping!
SolidA 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
RadicalAwesomeness 2 years ago
Tax people for being obese and you will see them losing weight. Take aways and Mcdonalds cost more that any home cooked healthy meal.
medaa25 2 years ago
Why do you want to punish people for choosing to live their lives a certain way?
MDUMANOVIC 2 years ago 2
It's either we are punished by paying for their healthcare and joblessness or they are punished for being fat. Guess what, I'd rather they pay the price for being fat than I.
medaa25 2 years ago
I think the best, and only moral solution, is to let people live their lives by their own standards and to let them pay for the health care costs that they voluntarily incur. Sure, have the freedom to become obese, but accept the responsibility of paying your own hospital bills. That right there is more of an incentive to not become obese than taxes ever will. Plus, it doesn't infringe on one's freedoms.
MDUMANOVIC 2 years ago
Are you saying that universal healthcare shouldn't cover weight related medical problems? I think we can agree on this.
medaa25 2 years ago
If your fat you should get any free healthcare i dont workout 5 times a week and eat healthy so i can pay for some overwieght fastass.
Crenk again is a idiot because his dad lost weight that is going happen.
When i was in Jr high all those fat kids got excuse notes.
I hate fat people in general not all but most because of how lazy they are.
dragas222 2 years ago
Agreed. Why should the rest of the UK pay for the medical treatment caused by over eating that this child is likely to need. The social services gave them their chance, they did not care for their kids enough to put the effort towards healthy eating therefore they're poor parents. I am not totally for this but in some cases it is necessary.
sniper120mm 2 years ago
They probably thought she was going to eat it. Seriously though, I can understand taking them away for overfeeding them. -Your wrong Cenk- What if she was starving them? This is neglect, just in the opposite direction. Ana how do you know they didn't counsel them? I wouldn't take the baby away, that's punishment before they even did anything in that instance. You can't mistreat your kids and get away with it with impunity. 1*
jotunobsidianeyes 2 years ago
What those social workers did was outrageous.
Truly, truly, truly outrageous.
shovethissite 2 years ago 4
The scariest words that you NEVER want to hear are ...
"Hello, we are with the government and we've come to help"
Pv8man 2 years ago 2
Hello, we are firemen, come to put out your burning house.
Hello, we are policemen, who you called because you thought someone was breaking into your house.
banderwocky 2 years ago
"Hello, we are policemen, who you called because you thought someone was breaking into your house. "
I don't know why you wrote that, but it should read like this: Hello, we are police men, we are wearing ski masks, kicking in your door, terrorizing your family and killing your dog because we are sadistic self-serving gang members.
bamboo4tameshigiri 2 years ago 3
So is that what happens when you call a government funded service? Every single time? Is that what you're saying? So if your house is burning down...you won't do anything. If someone broke into your house and stole a bunch of your stuff, you wouldn't call the police. Or are u saying that Firemen are also a gang of sadistic thugs as well? I understand there a good cops and bad cops. There are good people and bad people as well.
banderwocky 2 years ago
"So if your house is burning down...you won't do anything."
I didn't say that. I actually respect the services that help people. The couple only times I have EVER seen anyone call the cops to do their fucking jobs they FUBARed it up so bad I would never waste my time. They are nothing short of incompetent thugs who milk us for revenue, glorified tax collectors.
bamboo4tameshigiri 2 years ago 2
I think Im with the social workers in this one
Nades129 2 years ago
is this that same family that wanted the government to give them money so they wouldnt have to work because of how fat they were?
Pelonetillo 2 years ago
you people can't be serious! this is wrong and it's not helping anyone. everyone is presented with challenges in life to overcome, nobody can force you to change. only suggest it, and help. ESPECIALLY if you ask for help. if she doesn't ask for help, do they contact her out of thin air? why else would the state have come in contact with them, if they just live their lives without asking for help? they told on themselves? come on people.
hollaboutit 2 years ago 2
Cenk is 100% wrong on this subject. I'm sorry, but if we take children away for far less things than endangering their lives at such young age. Considering over half of the US is obese, this is the exact right thing to do. The mother deserves everything she gets.
zbambam5 2 years ago
What do they take kids away for that is far less? You know the excuse they give for missing physically abused children? We are overloaded with cases. This is one of those cases. Fat people do not ask help from your government again...
RodgersRevolution 2 years ago 6
"zbambam5" you are a fucking psycho and I hope that YOUR children get taken away by child protection services one day for not putting your kids to bed early enough.
Pv8man 2 years ago
So you will then know how it feels, and why it's wrong.
It's up to the individual and the parents, not the government.
Pv8man 2 years ago
Yeah, children still have a right to be protected from this kind of thing (parents can't just treat their kids like dirt) - this isn't the same as couples raising their children into a certain religion, this is a physical fact, harmful. That said, this is far too drastic an action - the government offers too little support at getting people healthier and helping businesses that sell healthy products. We have the Protestant work ethic without the asceticism. Viva la neoliberalism!
yohaneuano4 2 years ago
The mental trauma from being taken from their parents and being put into an unknown situation, is far worse than them being obese.
Zeromus7 2 years ago 3
What they failed to mention is the toddler is 2 and 56 lbs. The average 2 year old is around 28 lbs. I think the government is right for doing this because there are people in the UK that collect welfare on the basis that they are too fat to work. I bet these parents are doing the same and setting up their children to do the same also.
bexstarr 2 years ago
Western society is the worse at parenting, both parents have jobs and need to raise kids while they get impossible competition from magazines and TV (wich basecly raises kids these days).
In other cultures it takes whole families or even entire tribes who take responsibility for their children so parents wont be overflooded with problems or make bad choises/neglect.
aces9876 2 years ago
I like another comment pertaining to the other end of the spectrum where kids are malnourished. Certainly they should be taken away. Obesity (not overweight) poses a major risk and IMHO constitutes neglect or at the very least total ineptitude as parents. The child has the RIGHT to a happy, healthy and long life so they have the chance to choose their adult lifestyle for themselves.
Cerberus221 2 years ago
The woman weighs 23stone. That's not a good outlook on those kids' lives. This is a tough call.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
The social services in the UK are FUCKED UP. They're complete bastards who dont give a shit about helping anyone.
I agree with Cenk to an exent, they shouldn't take away the kids, espiecally when they were asked for help, but there comes a point when someone has to step in. I mean if the kids were malnourished they'd step in, so if they're morbidly obese some ones got to do something.
Fangtorn 2 years ago
She feeds off bacon steak.
tommysch 2 years ago
At a certain point, not caring about whether your kid is being fat ( or obese in this case) borders on child-abuse! And NO, you are not allowed to raise your kids ANYWAY you like.
Kids dont know what is important to them. They need parents to guide them and teach them how to live, what to do and what not to do. It's called "good parenting".
We're not talking about being overweight, but about being OBESE! It will scar these children for life, emotionally and physically.
Newspin 2 years ago
im from the uk, i like the fact they are setting a precedent. My elder sister was morbidly obese age 13, the school told my parents to help her get fit and she did lose the weight. You couldnt do this in America granted, at 230lbs but maybe you should be at 325, i think you guys span the story a little you mentioned they had a period of time for the kids to lose the weight. How long, did they lose any? this report was kinda biast towards your views, if it was 6 months and they gained? then what?
david5076 2 years ago
This is an opinion show.
Zeromus7 2 years ago
this would NEVER fly in the US.
The UK is a different story. It's a nanny-state, police state ,broken system hellhole.
It looks nice, but god forbid you get caught in the system.
Misterunnamed 2 years ago
I wonder how long it will take for Republicans to latch on to this story, and with their usual and bizarre leaps of logic, try to besmirch the public option by making the connection that somehow it will give the government the right to take away obese kids from obese parents. Anyone want to bet how long?
alphacause 2 years ago
Yep. I've already seen and heard that argument.
Robfenix 2 years ago
I got $20 that says there's a clause in the plan that says DCFS will get involved if there's an issue like this. It's my opinion that DCFS should. But neo-cons blame the gov't for everything. Nevertheless, neo-cons don't actually read so they'll never find the clause if it even exists.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
how tall is the 13 year old? being 6ft or above and weighing over 200 is alright,
godzillaislarge 2 years ago
Hey guys, subscribe to my show, The Third Hour. A progressive talk show similar to The Young Turks
TheThirdHour 2 years ago
have a dietician meet with them
amp1616 2 years ago
i like this show.
MISSHAPPYFACE2025 2 years ago 3
The family definitely needs assistance in controlling their weight. But taking the child away is foolish.
audadvnc 2 years ago
This is moronic, by that logic then they have to snatch away the kids of anyone who smokes, or anyone who goes out on the weekend to drink.... etc, etc.
Why not even go farther, let's take away the kids of anyone who is in a religion we dont like, cant have the kids growing up to be heathens now can we.
Take away those muslim kids, they could grow up to be terrorists.
Xenite227 2 years ago
You hit the nail on the head! This action sets a very dangerous precedent that needs to be put in check immediately!
mamacass1972 2 years ago
so far even the kids of known religious extremists arent taken away in any western countries
and by that logic we can allow parents to let their kids smoke, drink alcohol aso.
anything can decay or escalate, community institutions just as much as families, community institutions have the benefit of being transparent and supervised
this whole freedom and family ideology strikes me as lack of maturity to acknowledge and accept that we live in a bigger society
random0815 2 years ago
good luck doing this in the future. you are going to run out of facilities.
manuelschindler 2 years ago
I think government intervention has its rightful place but I often feel that the UK goes way too far. A child being obese is hardly a good enough reason to take a child away from its parents. For the most part a parent has a right to raise their child however they wish. If they want their kid to be a racist, sexist even a Neo Nazi the government has no business taking the child away. Obesity for sure isnt a big enough offense.
deathmetalwolf85 2 years ago
What the fuck are you talking about?
If anything, socail services in the UK is too lenient. I live there, my mother is a teacher and every day is a struggle with innaction on the side of child services.
And this matter concerns the health and well-being of the child, so its not up to mummy if she wants to kill the kids with shit food.
The duty of a parent is to raise and protect a child and let them figure shit out for themselves.
Clembo 2 years ago
The health and well being of a child is primary the responsibility of the parents. If the parents are lacking in this area then assistance is the proper response from the government not take the kids away. I had a drunk for a father and an abusive mother and after my parents got a divorce I became morbidly obese. These experiences drove me to be a better person and Im stronger now because of the hardships I suffered as a child. Children are far more resilient then people give them credit for.
deathmetalwolf85 2 years ago 2
I don't really get your arguement. Are you saying that because children are resilient that the socail services in this case were wrong?
You did say the health is the primary responsibility of the parents to their child(ren). As such, surely something as harmful to health as causing her other two children to become obese warrants the third child to also be taken away?
Clembo 2 years ago
I'm saying that if parents are having difficulty raising their children the correct government response is providing assistance for the parents. For this particular situation things like aggressive food counseling or offering financial aid for memberships to local gyms would have been a good response. However just swooping in with ridiculous ultimatums isn't the answer. Also unless there's a reasonable threat of serious immediate danger taking a child shouldn't even be considered an option.
deathmetalwolf85 2 years ago
Disagree with TYT.
Having obese kids is neglect. Obesity causes problems that go beyond even the obese childs health, it impacts the future of the society.
This is about protecting the kids.
LDNLeon 2 years ago
(and in turn, our society).
LDNLeon 2 years ago