MCMGM
Vegeta
WC's Official Jeff Buckley Stalkeress.
Red Sonic My Ass
Posts: 9,184
|
Post by MCMGM on Jul 25, 2009 11:53:14 GMT -5
HereA British woman who was told she couldn't adopt due to her obesity lost 112 pounds and gained a 4-year-old son. Melanie King, 39, weighed around 280 pounds when she began her quest for adoption after previous efforts to give birth resulted in tragedy. Through determination and sacrifice, she finally got the child she always wanted
|
|
|
Post by twiggy101 on Jul 25, 2009 11:58:12 GMT -5
That is all.
|
|
|
Post by aka Cthulhu on Jul 25, 2009 12:00:38 GMT -5
Good for her and congratulations to her.
|
|
|
Post by Toom E. Guci on Jul 25, 2009 12:28:02 GMT -5
Why is weight even an issue to adopt?
|
|
triplethreatmark
Grimlock
Party Fouler
I look exactly like this avatar in real life.
Posts: 14,074
|
Post by triplethreatmark on Jul 25, 2009 12:41:52 GMT -5
Why is weight even an issue to adopt? I guess the adoption agencies in England think that your gonna be to busy scarfing down a footlong instead of watching you kid.
|
|
polexia
Don Corleone
keep bleeding love...
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by polexia on Jul 25, 2009 13:00:43 GMT -5
Why is weight even an issue to adopt? I guess the adoption agencies in England think that your gonna be to busy scarfing down a footlong instead of watching you kid. what a horrible sterotype. it cost so much to adopt as it is; if you have the money to go through the process you deserve a child. but still; congrats to her for all her dedication.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jul 25, 2009 21:15:28 GMT -5
I guess the adoption agencies in England think that your gonna be to busy scarfing down a footlong instead of watching you kid. what a horrible sterotype. it cost so much to adopt as it is; if you have the money to go through the process you deserve a child. but still; congrats to her for all her dedication. I would hope there would be a little bit more of a requirement than having the disposable income to go through the process, personally.
|
|
|
Post by The_Punisher on Jul 25, 2009 21:17:50 GMT -5
It's discrimination.
And stupid discrimination at that.
|
|
|
Post by FrankGotch on Jul 25, 2009 22:57:03 GMT -5
Great job Britain. I can't wait till this trend catches on in other areas. Want a drivers licenses? Well first thing you'll have to do is quit smoking. Want to open a small business? Well first we need to see if you can bench press 300lbs.
|
|
|
Post by Janitor From Mars on Jul 25, 2009 23:10:59 GMT -5
HereA British woman who was told she couldn't adopt due to her obesity lost 112 pounds and gained a 4-year-old son. Melanie King, 39, weighed around 280 pounds when she began her quest for adoption after previous efforts to give birth resulted in tragedy. Through determination and sacrifice, she finally got the child she always wanted Since when does ANY government have the authority to tell someone that they can't adopt because of their weight? That's just stupid and it reflects the trend that it's O.K to pick on the obese and make laws against us.
|
|
|
Post by Non Banjoble Tokens on Jul 25, 2009 23:22:42 GMT -5
I agree fat people shouldn't have children. I mean what if they tried to eat them?
|
|
|
Post by LCR, Formerly Blue Nova on Jul 25, 2009 23:58:03 GMT -5
It could also be that weight is, y'know, a health issue that is taken into consideration. Hypertension, heart attack threat and the whole host of issues that can affect people who are obese.
And from the article: "I was told because I wanted to adopt a young child, I needed to be active enough to run around and look after them.”
It isn't that they were passing laws and edicts simply to pick on the obese, they are saying that she would not be able to physiologically handle the needs of the child if she kept the excess weight.
That's what the government does in adoption -- look for the best interest of the child.
|
|
|
Post by sunwukong on Jul 26, 2009 0:00:27 GMT -5
HereA British woman who was told she couldn't adopt due to her obesity lost 112 pounds and gained a 4-year-old son. Melanie King, 39, weighed around 280 pounds when she began her quest for adoption after previous efforts to give birth resulted in tragedy. Through determination and sacrifice, she finally got the child she always wanted Since when does ANY government have the authority to tell someone that they can't adopt because of their weight? In coming years, this is going to become more common. Not just adoption, but with insurance coverage and even employers opting not to hire people based on weight issues. It's already started in a lot of ways.
|
|
|
Post by Janitor From Mars on Jul 26, 2009 0:01:41 GMT -5
Perhaps my mom would be considered "unfit" though she raised my brother and I just fine and she probably fits their definition of "obese."
Watch out people. Before you know it, you won't be able to adopt, reproduce or even buy anything if you allow the government to dictate all of the terms.
|
|
|
Post by The_Punisher on Jul 26, 2009 0:02:45 GMT -5
Since when does ANY government have the authority to tell someone that they can't adopt because of their weight? In coming years, this is going to become more common. Not just adoption, but with insurance coverage and even employers opting not to hire people based on weight issues. It's already started in a lot of ways. It's discrimination. Ever heard of the term red lining?
|
|
|
Post by sunwukong on Jul 26, 2009 0:05:43 GMT -5
In coming years, this is going to become more common. Not just adoption, but with insurance coverage and even employers opting not to hire people based on weight issues. It's already started in a lot of ways. It's discrimination. Ever heard of the term red lining? They don't regard it as discrimination, they regard it as someone making unhealthy lifestyle choices that they can fully control, and they see themselves as punishing the person for making those choices. Or, in other words, they believe a person CHOOSES to be fat and harm themselves. I never claimed it made any sense (it doesn't, for a lot of reasons. And I DO agree that it is discrimination. Unfortunately, I've got no power in this world., but it's unquestionably the way the wind is blowing.
|
|
|
Post by The_Punisher on Jul 26, 2009 0:10:04 GMT -5
It's discrimination. Ever heard of the term red lining? They don't regard it as discrimination, they regard it as someone making unhealthy lifestyle choices that they can fully control, and they see themselves as punishing the person for making those choices. Or, in other words, they believe a person CHOOSES to be fat and harm themselves. I never claimed it made any sense (it doesn't, for a lot of reasons. And I DO agree that it is discrimination. Unfortunately, I've got no power in this world., but it's unquestionably the way the wind is blowing. I know what your saying. Red lining is a practice in which banks don't lend money to people living in the projects, the ghetto, or an undesirable location.
|
|
|
Post by LCR, Formerly Blue Nova on Jul 26, 2009 1:01:41 GMT -5
They don't regard it as discrimination, they regard it as someone making unhealthy lifestyle choices that they can fully control, and they see themselves as punishing the person for making those choices. Or, in other words, they believe a person CHOOSES to be fat and harm themselves. I never claimed it made any sense (it doesn't, for a lot of reasons. And I DO agree that it is discrimination. Unfortunately, I've got no power in this world., but it's unquestionably the way the wind is blowing. I know what your saying. Red lining is a practice in which banks don't lend money to people living in the projects, the ghetto, or an undesirable location. Redlining is not even in the same ballpark. People that were redlined didn't choose to be minorities or immigrants. With 40+% of the country obese/overweight, much of that is a choice made -- either by the individual to consume the food or by parents who lack the knowledge/skills to give their kids healthy food which starts them on the dangerous track of obesity and developing those habits as adults. The only ones I feel sorry for are the kids shoehorned in to a difficult situation. Only then does the redlining comment even begin to be similar and even then it is tenuous. While I'll say that any person medically has a right to see a doctor, I fail to see "discrimination" here. The government wanted to ensure that a woman who was almost 300 lbs. and fairly short would have the mobility and energy to take care of a four year old. Their interest is the child and if having an obese mother would cause harm to the child, then it is right for them to deny the adoption. In fact, the weight may have been a causal factor in her body rejecting the three fetuses because it is very difficult to have a successful birth when one is overweight. I've actually experienced a child who was essentially housebound because his mother couldn't get out of the house except sometimes to go grocery shopping. To say that this isn't harming the kid is ridiculous. I'm not saying that everybody needs to aspire to an anorexic idea of beauty, but it is really easy to say "Discrimination!" when discussing obesity. One can be at a healthy weight and not be stick-figure thin. But, I'd also argue that weight can be a factor in determining whether or not active parenting can take place with young children, if it would inhibit with the requirements of a job, the Northwest Airlines "If you take up 2 seats, you buy 2 seats" policy etc. In these situations, it is not discrimination. It is a consequence of choices that were made by these individuals to consume.
|
|
Goldenbane
Hank Scorpio
THE G.D. Goldenbane
Posts: 7,331
|
Post by Goldenbane on Jul 26, 2009 3:20:38 GMT -5
I have to wonder...when does "weight" and "You look like you weigh..." start to factor in? This is why I've voted against every smoking ban there's ever been. Why? First they target the smokers: "You can't smoke in this resturante because some people don't like it. You can't smoke in this work place because some people don't like it. You can't smoke in the privacy of your own home because some people stick their nose in your business and think it's hurting your kids/wife/neighbor/friend/dog/cat/fish/blah/blah/blah."
If we let these pricks go after smokers...we can expect them to come after us next. "You're fat, I'm not giving you insurance because you're a health risk. You're fat, I'm not letting you adopt a child because you may or may not be able to 'keep up' with them. You're fat, I won't sell you a house because you might fall and put a hole in the floor." Next, it WILL be: "You're ugly and you offend my wife/child/me, I won't let you by this car as others might also be offended and have accicents. You've got a beard/long hair, I won't hire you because your hair follicals might float into other people's work space. You're smart, I won't put you in position as my aid because you might develope some radical idea to give back the rights to the people that I've taken away."
|
|
|
Post by Janitor From Mars on Jul 26, 2009 3:57:24 GMT -5
What's wrong with being yourself?
What if that woman had raised the kid like any other kid if she had succeeded the first time?
We don't know what made these folks obese. It could be lack of exercise, poor diet, lethargy, low self-esteem, thyroid issues, etc.
It's not easy to just drop everything and go on a diet. Diets never work. They are unhealthy. If you change your overall diet to cut back or cut out fatty stuff, you should be able to work it off with little effort.
Instead of demonizing folks, a little more empathy would be appreciated.
Would you pick on someone for being handicapped and consider them a "health risk" as well?
|
|