Mon 26 Feb 2007
Extreme Liberal Diet
Posted by Bill S-R under News, Political
[3] Comments
I have no problem with governmental intervention in the health of its citizens. A government should try its best to give its citizens the tools to live long, productive, and healthy lives. Programs such as Medicare and Medicaid are vital to the overall health of our citizens. However, intervention must be kept below a certain level. There is a line that separates private actions and governmental guidance. It is an established fact that the modern world faces an unprecedented obesity problem, and it is a long tradition that new strains of viruses constantly threaten the global population. I appreciate a government’s proactive thoughts and actions to help its citizens alleviate their health needs. However, the a nation’s government does not have the right to go into some one’s home to enforce their “suggestions.” A government cannot force a family to follow the food pyramid. A government cannot force a person to wash their hands. Even if it is in the best interest of the person, the government does not have complete control of its citizen’s life. However, a situation similar to this is happening in Great Britain.
British authorities may take custody of 8-year-old Connor McCreaddie, who weighs 218 lbs. Although the child is under good care, Social Services may take him from his parents because of their neglect to take him to government sanctioned doctors, nutritionists, and social workers to help him with his obesity. Both the parents and the child recognize the problem and are trying to find a lifestyle that can work. The mother does not force feed her son. His weight results largely from his own actions. I do not understand how the government feels it can intervene in this child’s life because the right things are not being done in their mind. The child has his own unique problems and his family has the right to solve this problem in their own privacy. If the parents are not breaking any laws, how can he be taken on extreme liberal ideals?
What concerns me most about this whole predicament would be the precedent set by such action. I wonder if we are entering into a world where the government knows best, and we are forced to follow all suggestions that cover every aspect of our private life. And, if such a situation were to exist at what point would the government have complete control of our mind and what we believe to be correct. Citizens need to realize that there is a limit to government interaction and they must step up in the family’s defense.
This is indeed a problem, because it is clear this child needs help, but no one seems to really know what is causing it. Perhaps this could have been caused by a chemical problem in the brain that is failing to tell the boy he is full; his mother does not appear to be fat. These things are not always clear-cut cases and simple cases of overeating as many would like to believe. For more cases of government intervention check out the recent post on Ituning while crossing http://www.haynes.tv/ituning-while-crossing-may-soon-be-illegal-in-new-york/news/2007/02/25/
How do you feel about employers dictating our private habits? BusinessWeek had a cover story about Scott’s Miracle Gro, and how they fired someone, pretty much because the guy smokes.
Now, it was a bit more complicated; the guy was in his probationary period, but the point is that he was let go because of the smoking.
Personally, I don’t like too much gov’t intervention, either. Think Terry Schiavo. But I really don’t want employers doing this, either.
OTOH, we are all paying for the unhealthy habits of our fellow citizens. Can you say “McDonalds Drive Thru”? Bad for any number of reasons.
So, I agree, there are often no clear-cut answers. It becomes a matter of degree, and of who decides where the trigger-point is.
More like Wendy’s drive through. Notice while McDonalds gets busted for being fast food Wendy’s continues to increase the sizes of everything..