Who gets to make sure your children eat healthy, you or the government?

[RadishRose]

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-39381859

The government must do more to reduce the number of cut-price and multi-buy offers on unhealthy food to help curb childhood obesity, a group of MPs say.

The main features of the government's long-awaited childhood obesity plan, published in October 2016, were a sugar levy and a voluntary target to cut sugar in children's food and drink by 20% by 2020.

But health organisations and campaigners were almost universally of the view that there should have been wider action.

Do you agree that governments should be doing more to control childhood obesity which often results in, among other diseases, diabetes? Or educate the parents and leave it to them instead?

Do you believe allowing a child to become obese and bringing fattening foods into the house for them could be labeled child abuse?

:chocolate:

 

[Aunt Bea]

IMO it is up to the parents to get kids on a solid footing concerning nutrition and exercise before a child enters kindergarten. I believe the government can play a part in this by providing information to parents and schools, help with product labeling, school lunch programs, etc... I don't hold out much hope for it happening though.

In my area all city schools now provide breakfast, lunch and after school snacks. We also have a summer free lunch program for kids in need. One school is experimenting with providing dinner at the end of the school day and a sack of basics to get kids through the weekend. These kids will grow up believing that it is normal for them to be fed by the government or perhaps graduate to the local fast food restaurant for a fast, inexpensive, alternative to being fed at school.

I don't know how you break the cycle and I don't know why some kids grow up lean and strong on a junk food diet while others grow fat. Maybe someday we will find a genetic link to why some folks store fat and others don't.

This subject is just way too complicated for your old Aunt Bea, LOL!!!

 

[Knight]

My youngest is 47 so the question is the kind that calls for comparison.
Way back when our meal menus were written with charcoal on a stone our kids had no choice but to eat what they were fed. It did help that the played outside all day and had to be rounded up and drug into eat. No surprise that they were hungry and ate their veggies along with whatever starch & meat was on the menu that day. How we managed without dietary guides and the government telling us what was good and what wasn't I don't know. At home soda and junk food were 3 times a year. 3 kids 3 birthdays. Later in their teens an occasional pizza was a treat.

Now at their age they point to their kids lean healthy bodies and say to us. Mom & Dad we hated not having junk food like the other kids but when ours came along and we saw what our friends looked like and their kids look like. And we understand what being a parent is all about.

 

[SeaBreeze]

I think it's the parent's responsibility to make sure their children eat healthy and exercise, especially if the child tends to be overweight. I grew up in the 50s and my parents knew way back then not to have a lot of sweet junk food in the house with empty calories. They also didn't have sodas in the fridge for us. We didn't have a lot of money, but my parents did what all parents should do, and took care of us in the best way they could. In grade school and high school, I brought my own lunch packed at home by either my mother or me.

 

[Butterfly]

I believe it is the parents' responsibility. When I was a kiddo, we didn't have junk food or sodas in the house. We didn't have a lot of money, either, but my parents provided meals that were nutritious. The family sat down together for dinner in the evening together every day and I don't recall ever getting fast food; we were also encouraged to go out and play and get some exercise.

 

[jujube]

If the government could get my (sort of) granddaughter to eat anything but chicken nuggets and French fries, I'd definitely give them the go-ahead.

Like Butterfly, I grew up without junk food. Heck, there wasn't much junk food to be had and my parents couldn't have afforded it, anyway. Our big treat was to get to go to the first McDonald's in town, get one order of French fries and all four of us would have to share it. I remember so badly wanting to eat the French fries in the car (for some reason, I thought that was the height of sophistication, but we weren't allowed to. We had to sit out on the concrete benches and eat them. For really, really, really special occasions (once a year or so), my mom would get a six-pack of Coke and a bag of potato chips. We were in heaven!!!

 

[Lon]

The responsibility of raising,clothing and feeding children rests with the parents and not government.

 

[Lara]

Some children don't have responsible parents. As the African proverb said, "It takes a village to raise a child." A team effort is good...both parents and government and churches and non-profits, and volunteers, etc etc etc

 

[Lon]

Some children don't have responsible parents. As the African proverb said, "It takes a village to raise a child." A team effort is good...both parents and government and churches and non-profits, and volunteers, etc etc etc

If parents abandon their parental responsibilities the children should be taken from them and be put up for adoption.

 

[Lara]

That depends on the level of irresponsibility, Lon. I wasn't speaking of abusiveness.

 

[Butterfly]

I don't think the government has any business regulating what we eat, for whatever reason. We have the right to make our own choices, good or bad.

 

[Debby]

So lots of comments about how 'it is the parents responsibility', but what if they aren't meeting that responsibility? And putting older children up for adoption is simple to say but winds up being a whole lot more difficult to do. Foster homes aren't waiting and begging for children out of a loving desire to help them, same for adoptive homes and warehousing them has the potential to develop future citizens who are not going to support a good society......

Would you pull school lunches and allow children who have no recourse, to be hungry? Tell them to 'buck up kid, it ain't the governments responsibility to feed you' and then expect them to learn so that they can become contributing members of society? A penny saved is a penny earned is the saying. Feed them today so that they can learn (hungry children don't learn) and they have a chance of growing up to contribute tomorrow. And the same goes in my opinion for at least providing healthy food in those lunches so that their little growing bodies have a chance at overcoming the other issues they may face regarding diet.

This kind of discussion puts me in mind of that Spanish town I started a thread about, where the people work together and help one another and are stronger and blessed for doing it. I had a discussion of this nature with my own mom the other day, and we came to the conclusion that while the 'Spanish town' arrangement is a lovely idea, it is unlikely to spread because it would take a complete change of heart for modern humanity.

 

[Aunt Bea]

I don't believe that any child should go hungry.

I also believe that we should help anyone that needs it but being helped should not become the family business.

I believe that everyone should pull their own wagon!

If my beliefs make me a bad person, then I'm a bad person.

 

[RadishRose]

"Bad Person"? I doubt that's possible, Aunt Bea!