Government Intervention for Obese Children... *Sigh*

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43727876/ns/health-health_care/

Ugh. This is one of those issues where there's just no great solution - and unfortunately, the children lose no matter what.

Everybody knows that we, as a country, are getting fatter, but as this article states, "What's even worse is the epidemic of blubber among children. Obesity rates have skyrocketed among the nation's kids in the past two decades. Nearly 32 percent of U.S. children ages 2 to 19 are overweight or obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fully 12 percent have topped the category of extreme obesity. That's a lot of heavy kids."

It is a lot of heavy kids. And this article raises a great question: Whether or not severely obese children should be removed from their homes because their parents are contributing to the problem by essentially abusing their children through overfeeding.

We're all accustomed to children being removed from homes because of malnourishment/starvation, but "overfeeding" is new. It seems jarring for a moment to think of it as child abuse, but in essence, it is. The parents of these kids are clearly negligent. They are ignoring the fact that their offspring are unhealthy and undoubtedly going to develop horrible complications/comorbidities including diabetes, strokes, heart attacks, cancer, depression and arthritis. I would classify that as abusive. When you think of it in those terms, it is incredibly disheartening to realize then, that approximately 12% of the nation's parents have abused their children in this manner. What's even more disheartening is that I would venture to guess that the parents themselves are obese, so chances are they will ultimately orphan their children.

Here's one of the primary problems with the idea of using child abuse laws to remove extremely obese children from their homes. The article also sites the fact that social services is already overloaded. 12% of the nation's children = 2 million with a BMI over the 99th percentile. This is where I become a frustrated citizen. Clearly, there needs to be some type of intervention to get these kids on the right track, and clearly something needs to be done about the parents who allow their children to get this unhealthy, but our country can't afford to do anything - and even if it could, and I am sick and tired of our government having to resort to intervening in matters such as this because there is no such thing as personal responsibility anymore. It is INFURIATING. These parents are criminals.

What's even more disheartening is that chances are, the majority of these kids will be obese adults, which means our already defunct healthcare system is only gonna get worse. Can't wait for those insurance premiums to skyrocket...again... and I can't get in to see a doctor for a few months because they're too busy dealing with millions upon millions of coronaries and diabetics - many of whom will be kids.

Look, I know I must sound like a super-conservative callous bitch, but seriously folks. Should we really need the government to intervene because parents can't take care of their children??? Who lets their child become obese? And look, I understand what it is to be overweight, (I've struggled myself as I've mentioned before), but extremely obese? There's NO excuse when it comes to children. If I were to kid, and my child was starting to get a bit chubby, I, as a responsible parent, would address it STAT.

Remember that line in Parenthood, (the movie) - "You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, ... to catch a fish. But they'll let any butt-reaming asshole be a father."

Clearly any butt-reaming anything can be a parent - as evidenced by our nation's kids. They are not extremely obese because they wanted to be - of that I am certain.

So what is the solution? I have no idea - though obtaining licenses to have children doesn't sound so bad, even though it's just another indication that we are incapable of taking care of ourselves. Pathetic.

Comments, insults and attacks welcome as always.

Bullies

Bullies used to be relatively benign. I mean, sure... there were the bullies who would threaten to kill your child, but more often than not, their bark was worse than their bite and they would just muss 'em up a bit, (and usually, only if they were boys). There were fights in the playground - after school at 3:00 - but you never heard of anyone really winding up with anything worse than a black eye or a bloody nose.

Today's "bully" is a whole new version of evil. In fact, I am THRILLED and I mean, utterly and completely THRILLED that I am no longer in school. Today's bully is inherently cruel, seems to have virtually no moral compass whatsoever, and shares various personality traits with certain serial killers... namely - the enjoyment of torture inflicted upon other human beings.

When I was growing up, incidents like Columbine didn't exist. At the time, even that was an isolated incident - at least for anyone younger than college age. In fact, Columbine was the 4th deadliest school shooting since the 1927 Bath School Disaster - but the three deadliest shootings that preceded it, (including Bath), all involved college age or older individuals who were severely depressed, had brain tumors, and/or anxiety disorders, that were not properly treated. Columbine wasn't too different in that respect either. The primary culprit, Eric Harris, had expressed depression, suicidal tendencies, and anger prior to the Columbine massacre. He was placed on various anti-depressants and medications, which some speculate may have led to his ultimate demise, and the gruesome, tragic killing of 12 other students, 1 teacher, and the injury of 26 others.

That said, today's bullies scare the living bejeezus out of me. They seem to just simply be mean, cruel and inexplicably violent.

Take for example the recent retaliation of one brother, (Wayne Treacy, whose other brother committed suicide), against a girl, (Josie Lou Ratley), he'd never met. He literally sought her out due to a text message exchange, (pertaining to his deceased brother), and decided she needed to die too. He found her thanks to the help of one of her "friends," and with no warning whatsoever, proceeded to stomp on her head with steel-toed shoes until she was unconscious and barely clinging to life.

This followed another gruesome incident at the same school... wherein a few boys who were squabbling over the cost of a video game, sought out the boy who they claimed owed them money - and set him on fire, using a flammable liquid. THEY SET HIM ON FIRE.

What befuddles me about all of this, is the continued speculation that it is all the result of violent movies, music and video games.

Really? Somehow, I don't think so. Does anyone EVER want to call into question the ability of the kids' parenting abilities? Anyone?

Maybe we should all take a look at the following and read up on Matthew Bent's parents - the parents of the child who actually set Michael Brewer aflame:

http://www.truecrimereport.com/2009/10/teens_douse_15-year-old_michae.php

Um... I grew up watching scary, violent, and sometimes gruesome movies - and I'm FINE. Maybe thanks to the fact that I had a good set of parents, who appropriately disciplined me when I did something wrong. Fortunately, I didn't do anything all that wrong all too often.

Back to today's "bully." There's the recent story of Phoebe Price - a pretty 15 year-old transplant from Ireland to Massachusetts, who was literally cyberbullied and physically bullied by a group of catty, jealous girls, who clearly had no moral compass whatsoever, that ultimately led to Phoebe's suicide. Should we go ahead and blame that on the movie "Mean Girls' which the girls in question were referred to by their peers in school? Or should we perhaps examine the lack of reasonable parenting in today's society that led to those girls' abhorrent behavior? It sure is a hell of a lot easier to blame a movie, isn't it?

One of my favorite quotes from the movie Parenthood, "You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they'll let any butt-reaming asshole be a father."

But no, godforbid anyone point a finger at a parent. That's an outrage...

That said, I am NOT saying parents are the ultimate culprits here. There are, in countless incidences, MANY occasions where a great set of parents end up with a rotten egg... and it is truly unfortunate - and more often than not, inexplicable when their children do something horribly, terribly wrong...

But if people continue to point the finger at media... well... then I hate to say it folks, we're going to have a long, nasty, horrific chain of evil, violent events taking place at the hands of our children, thanks to evolving and ever-accessible media and the lack of accountability among parents.

And now... the conclusion of an altogether too long post: why I wrote this in the first place.

Every day when I'm watching the news, my jaw drops every time a story is presented along the lines of what I've summarized here. I can't believe what kids are like today - and part of me wonders... do I really want to bring another life into this?

GIGANTIC

Has anyone seen this movie, Gigantic? I watched it for the second time today with John. There's something about the movie that I'm incredibly attracted to - and it ties back in to our discussion from yesterday regarding adoption.

It's kind of this strange indie flick about the youngest of three brothers, (Brian Weathersby played by Paul Dano), who works in a very high-end mattress shop, (and I mean seriously high-end - we're talking $14,000 mattresses). Anyway, the primary point of the story is that this 28 year-old wants to adopt a little girl from China. He's been trying to for years, and evidently, he has known for his entire life that this is what he wants to do.

Because he's single, and 28, the answer is continually a resounding NO. The powers-that-be who determine who is, or is not, a "fit" parent are looking for a married couple, 30 years-old plus...

Zooey Deschanel plays the daughter of an eccentric, neurotic, wealthy, artistic, hypochondriacal/alarmist-type, (played by John Goodman), who purchases one of the aforementioned insanely expensive mattresses. (Mind you, I wouldn't mind having one of those myself). In fact, I'd be more prone to purchasing a seemingly overpriced mattress than a luxury automobile. Think about it for a moment...

Anyway - back on track... so, Zooey's character, named Harriet and nicknamed "Happy" is also a bit of an eccentric type - though she's much more grounded than her father and seemingly, much happier as well. She is sent to the mattress warehouse to check out and pay for the $14,000 mattress - and in so doing, meets, Brian.

This throws a wrench into Brian's plans to some extent. For reasons unbeknownst to us, (the audience), he wasn't planning on meeting a lady friend. That's the way life works sometimes however, and of course, (SPOILER ALERT)... Brian is informed that another couple who backed out on an adoption has made him the prime candidate of choice for a little girl from China.

He's elated. Happy however, is a bit alarmed. Gee, I wonder why... Maybe 'cause THEY JUST MET???

In any case, she winds up coming around - and to make a long story short, they make quite a cute, unconventional, happy little fambly.

Both John and I teared up towards the end. (Yes, we're Gay), and we couldn't help but notice how adorable the little baby girl was.

*Sigh*

Completely, totally, utterly confused... about children.

So here's the deal. I'm an opinionated gal - who usually knows precisely what she wants - and goes after it. I knew I wanted a dog, and I found him online. I knew I wanted a husband, and I found him online. I thought I knew how I felt about children, until I turned 27 - and then the light switch which had been on my entire life, suddenly went off, with no notice whatsoever. It was strange. I always thought I'd be a young mother... married and impregnated by 26 or 27. Well, that plan didn't exactly come to fruition - and today, I have ABSOLUTELY NO EFFING CLUE as to what I do or don't want anymore when it comes to this decision.

I am married to John B. Fountain, a ridiculously talented, loving, wonderfully caring man, who is, unfortunately, also very confused about whether or not to have kids.

Hence the name of this blog - To Kid or Not to Kid... because ultimately, that is the question.

When I decided to create this blog, I thought - hmm... how cool would it be to let America decide for us?

My husband, (wiser and less impetuous than I), quickly put a stop to that.

But here is what I ask of you... (as what will hopefully become my vast and loyal readership), what do you think?

I want to know. Do you have kids? Will you share the truth about how you feel about them - either publicly or anonymously? I hope so.

Did you choose not to have kids? If not, why not? Are you happy about the decision, or do you have regrets?

Are you on the fence, like John and I? What do you think will 'turn the tide' one way or the other?

Bottom line is, I'm confused, as is John.

By the way, we have two adorable Boston Terriers, Otto and Anna, (pictured here), that we couldn't live without. They will become a post as well... down the line, thanks to the fact that I'm a neurotic over-thinker, who is already concerned about what babies would do to the little 'fambly' we've already created.

I look forward to creating an open, online dialogue with you... the world at-large.

Sincerely,

Leigh Hope Fountain