200 lb. third grader placed in foster care

[Lovin Learnin]

You are right, Iucounu, we don't know the particulars of this case so we shouldn't speculate. It just reminds me of the notion that the inferior education of poor folks is their fault for not moving out of the ghetto.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

When I was a kid, "walking distance" was defined a lot differently than it is now. And that is probably why kids were skinnier then. That's a lifestyle and health issue in itself. Drive through here - you'll see Aldi's and other groceries all over the place.

 

Yes but many areas are pedestrian unfriendly to say the least:( Many areas do not provide sidewalks or crosswalks and it becomes a dangerous proposition to walk in these cases. Honestly, IMHO sidewalks and crosswalks should never be optional:glare:.

[SKL]

When we lived in Hawaii there were lots of grocery stores down in Honolulu. But, you'd *easily* pay double the price that you would in a normal grocery store. Honolulu is also *tops* in pedestrian deaths. Why? Because the speed limits were too high and pedestrian crossings too few for the area. Lots of factors go into things like "walking distance."

 

There isn't a safe road or sidewalk to travel if I wanted to walk to my nearest store. It's 2.8 miles away (driving) and takes 8 minutes to drive it. It would be 2.4 miles if I could walk, but I would have to walk down a street where the speed limit is 45 miles per hour. When I had little kids that would have meant pushing a stroller or pulling a wagon for 45 minutes, 2 miles of it down the road without sidewalks and a 45 mph speed limit.

 

Don't worry, there are sidewalks on both sides of every street in Cleveland. The speed limit is 25. We seem to be digging for excuses here. A pp said there were 3 Aldis in a 4 mile radius, among other stores. Aldi is an affordable grocery store that stocks decent food.

 

This case just isn't about reasonable access to food for a normal healthy diet.

[Georgiana Daniels]

I agree with the PP's who said the mom should have been offered the same resources as the fosters.

 

Who knows what keeps the family from walking to the grocery store, if in fact that's the problem? Bum ankle, other kids, lack of proper clothing for the weather?

 

Kids should only be taken from parents if they are in immediate danger. Yes, parents are responsible for seeing to the health of their children, but there's obviously other issues going on in this case.

 

Of course, I'm not a fan of gov't intervention in most situations, anyway.

[Iucounu]

How specific have the instructions of the doctors been? If they can get a personal trainer to help a foster parents, then why can they not do that for the mom? How does it make sense to provide *more help* for a foster parent than to the natural parent(s?)?

 

Again, like Faith, my son is underweight. It's easy to say, "you need to put some weight on him" and much harder to actually *make that happen*. I can't feed him a jar of mayonnaise every meal.

 

If they are going to provide help to the foster parents, it makes more sense to me to provide that help to the natural parent(s?).

Sure, the instructions of the doctors are relevant. So are the attempts of the mom to comply with them. She might not have been neglectful, and the authorities might have made a mistake-- and I don't think anyone would thoughtfully assume the contrary without knowing more information. I don't understand the assumption that the decision to take the child away was definitely wrong, though. There's not enough information. (Anyone savvy about media knows the risks of relying on single news reports, and anyone savvy about lawyers know that they tend to represent a view of things most helpful to their clients as well.)

 

Have the foster parents refused to do what a doctor told them to do, or just missed a few appointments? Again, a factual issue-- but people here seem to be assuming that the foster parents are behaving just as badly as the mother, and that hence the child is no better off. In addition, it's simply bad logic to assume that there was no proper basis for placement in foster care based on the particular result with one foster parent. Anyone who's dealt with foster care knows that there are subpar foster parents, just as there are subpar parents.

 

I agree that taking a child from a parent is a sad event to be avoided if possible. In the judgment of people who deal with these decisions every day, this mother's actions warranted it in this case. Those decision-makers generally err on the side of not doing that, as noted correctly in the article.

 

Another thing that bugs me about this thread are the arguments that obesity alone cannot be a medical issue sufficient for a finding of neglect. Has anyone seen the people on those so-fat-they-can't-move cable shows? Sure, there are probably appestat problems in the majority of those extreme cases, but as I recall there was always someone helpfully bringing in the multiple chickens for lunch, etc. The primary caregiver is the person most responsible for a child's diet, and teaches the child eating habits that can last a lifetime-- why assume that the mother is blameless here? Sure, she might be, but why assume?

 

But even more than that-- why are we arguing that extreme obesity is not a health problem a parent should work to avoid and treat? Why is it all right for parents to ignore medical instructions and contribute to poor health over a long period, simply because no "imminent" life-threatening peril has yet resulted? Are parents really not to blame until an extremely obese child actually turns out to have been caused diabetes, heart failure, etc.-- until the risks they've caused come to fruition?

 

Here's the text of a couple of Ohio laws on child neglect:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2151.03

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2151.05

 

Neglect is like negligence, in that deciding whether it's occurred takes judgment applied to specific facts. Anyone can see that there are certain sets of facts (undiagnosed rare medical conditions, food-sneaking completely unknown to the mother and which she couldn't have avoided, etc.) where this mother may have done nothing wrong-- but we shouldn't assume without more facts that she did nothing to justify the foster placement.

Edited November 28, 2011 by Iucounu

[Pretty in Pink]

I do think it's a shame if the same resources currently being allocated to the foster parents were not even offered to the biological mother. That said, you do not just wake up one morning with a 200 lb. 9 year old on your hands. Goodness, my dh is 6 ft tall and doesn't weigh that much. That's not just baby fat and that didn't just happen overnight. Barring some medical anomaly the mother has got to take responsibility for her own actions. Maybe she was already doing that...there really isn't enough information in the article to go on.

[Ester Maria]

That poor child. Almost every adult is overweight at 200 lb, let alone a nine year old. That is not being a little off charts so that one can close an eye on it and it may very well be a form of medical neglect. And IF the child was sick, by now he should have an ample medical record of oversight and systematic intervention, with cooperating parents who changed a lifestyle.

 

Half of the article totally misses the point. It does not really matter who advertises what, who puts toys in kids' meals, it is a free country. People have choices. Parents make those choices for their children. If their children get severe health problems due to those choices, perhaps the parents truly are not the best environment for the children, at least for the time being.

 

I am also not really sure being underweight is comparable, the health risks of being underweight are MUCH smaller than the health risks of being this overweight, unless it is combined with malnutrition and lack of nutritients. I have one child that is slightly underweight, but I can assure you that there is no malnutrition to speak of, because we really keep an eye on her there as parents, plus she has a proper medical check up once in a while just in case that we miss out on something and her food antics go too far. There are things you simply do not mess with, health being one of those.

 

I cannot understand how did it GET there that the child is 200 lb in the first place! Would not being over half that weight already be a red flag for a child of average height in third grade, already a sign that parents should keep a special eye on the child and seek preventive medical advice? I mean, 200 lb do not happen quite overnight.

 

With all that being said, I also do not get why were the resources offered to the foster family not offered to the biological family first. This may be an unnecessary trauma for the child.

[beaners]

I do think it's a shame if the same resources currently being allocated to the foster parents were not even offered to the biological mother. That said, you do not just wake up one morning with a 200 lb. 9 year old on your hands. Goodness, my dh is 6 ft tall and doesn't weigh that much. That's not just baby fat and that didn't just happen overnight. Barring some medical anomaly the mother has got to take responsibility for her own actions. Maybe she was already doing that...there really isn't enough information in the article to go on.

 

 

I think that weight at that age is really tough for a lot of people to envision. We have a child in the extended family who weighs about half that and is the same age. He is very tall for his age (his still-growing sister is nearly 6'), but he is also visibly overweight. It does have an impact on his quality of life, but I know his parents are trying to keep it under control as best they can. I can't imagine a child at his height weighing twice as much, and he is quite tall.

 

I have petite children here. I believe everyone is on the chart at the moment. It's part of the reason I'm resistant to the idea of BMI as the bottom line for health, although I think in general BMI values are a good indicator. I wouldn't want them taken away when they weren't gaining weight, but I don't know enough about this case to say whether it was justified.

[TracyR]

If you read, there was a girl that was taken away from her as well and was put in foster care. But the little girl didn't lose weight. So who's to say this boy doesn't have an underlying medical condition.

Everyone is always first to assume that if you eat right and exercise all that fat will melt away. Not if you have an endocrine problem. You could eat all the vegetables you want until they come out of your ears and exercise until your feet fall off , yet you may lose little to no weight.

I think also with all the plastics that we are exposed to as well, really offsets hormonal problems as well.

 

My sister's daughter is 10 and weighs as much as my 13 yr old. She is much shorter than my 13yr old too. My sister has done everything under the sun to help her daughter yet she's still gaining weight.I belive its hormonal in some nature. But my sister can't travel to get her to a pediatric endo to look further into it anyways. So my sister is frustrated as all get out.

 

Thyroid problems are much harder to diagnose in the pediatric population. Most doctors don't even know how to diagose it in adults let alone children. Children are exposed to estrogens through soy and plastics in their enviroment.

I have thyroid problems and am a poster child to what can happen to your body when your hormones are all out of wack. The same goes for kids.

 

Its hard to tell in this situation because I have seen shows were parents just give their children whatever they want whenever they want. I've seen were a 4yr old can eat more food than all 4 of my girls combined in one sitting. Its just to hard to say what is going on in this situation. But something to me says , something medical is going on with her kids.

[Myeightkiddies]

I don't know what is really happening or the truth from both sides, so I won't speculate on that.

 

However, my heart goes out to the child. I'm sure he has self-esteem issues due to his weight. There's little doubt in my mind that he has and does endure a lot of teasing for it. With being taken away, he must be consumed with more guilt and self-dislike. He may not be able to emotionally recover from this. In time he may lose weight but I'm sure the scars will last - both from the weight and the being taken away from his family. It's all so very sad.

[Iucounu]

You are right, Iucounu, we don't know the particulars of this case so we shouldn't speculate. It just reminds me of the notion that the inferior education of poor folks is their fault for not moving out of the ghetto.

I hear you. I sort of knee-jerked the other way. :eek: It really wasn't based on anything about her being poor, though. It's more like while I am skeptical in general, I don't really want to assume automatically that just because something like this has a bit of shock value ("In overweight America? Are you kidding me?") the decision was wrong. There's got to be more to the story. I was skeptical of the idea that there was no basis at all.

[Pamela H in Texas]

I don't know what I think. Kids should be with their families if at all possible, healthy, and safe. I didn't get a chance to read the article yet, but it was mentioned in another post that CPS worked with the family for a year. What do you think they did for a year? If it is ANYWHERE close to what CPS did for my kids' family, it was probably what most of us would considered "too much." Seriously, if people need THAT much help, maybe they don't need to be parenting. And the cost to the state was EXTREME.

 

So CPS works with the family for an entire year. They offer services to help the family take care of the child appropriately. After a year of not complying well enough to help the child and no evidence of something further going on, the state finally decides the child is in significant danger.

 

Now, the child goes to a foster home who finds the appointments challenging. Goodness, do I know how THAT is. Is it a therapeutic foster home or a regular one? If the child's needs are great enough, the child qualifies for "leveling." Not all homes are licensed for any level of child (my husband and I are which is how we got "the three") which may necessitate moving him to a home that can accommodate his level of service required.

 

Anyway, but yes, if they have found that the child's needs are not because of non-compliance of the parents but the child's particular issues, then they need to return the child to the parent and provide additional services to her just as they would a foster parent.

 

It looks as if that isn't the case though. First, there had to be DOCUMENTATION argued in front of a judge to take the child. The documentation had to prove that it was very likely the issue of the parent causing the issue or significantly hindering progress of the child. Second, they likely STILL don't have DOCUMENTATION that the child's needs are more than what was understood so it wasn't the parent's neglect or abuse. Else, they'd be sending him home.

 

Anyway, I so feel badly for the family and the child. I have no doubt that they love one another. And foster care *is* an issue even if the kid is in a great home. Kids *should* be with their parents if at all minimally safe and healthy. The best foster home can't compete with a half-decent first family. And fact is that not all foster homes are like ours. Additionally, weight and food issues are typically HUGE issues in foster care, not only what kids come with but because it is one of the few areas children have control over so they inappropriately control it.

 

I hope that the family learns to do what is necessary to help the child. I hope the child gets better and can return home.

 

But I absolutely believe that if CPS worked with the family for a year, giving them half as many services that they offered my children's parents, and the family was neglectful, allowing the child to get so big, possibly causing it....I definitely believe fostercare MAY help the child get healthier physically as well as help the parents learn to do better so they can parent safely. Hopefully everyone takes advantage of everything possible to help this child get healthy and home.

 

BTW, I do understand the slippery slope concerns also. I think you have to remember that we take children away for severe abuse, for example, but not for spanking. If you made your 4yr old smoke cigarettes and refused to stop, we would likely have him removed from your care, but hubby smoking outside is not really the same. If your house is messy on occasion, it is significantly different than your house being a foot deep in trash. You feeding your kid McD's is not the same as you causing your 8year old to weight 200 pounds!

Edited November 28, 2011 by 2J5M9K

[SKL]

I don't like government intervention into parenting choices unless it's a life or death or very severe situation and clearly under the parents' control.

 

As we've all said here, we don't know enough facts to judge whether or not this is the case. I will not assume one way or the other.

 

I will say that I have a daughter who has a tendency to be chubby and who loves food (really loved it way too much as a tot). Because I know from family experience how problematic obesity is in many ways, I didn't want that for my child. I became very careful about what she was allowed to eat before she was 1yo and developed a rigorous exercise program for her beginning shortly after she started to walk. (She preferred to sit and "read.") I kept this up for years. People thought I was crazy and mean and some even accused me of being neglectful and not loving my child. But I plugged on. My child is now at about 50%ile for both height and weight, but I still have to be careful with her. She can still gain weight from just a couple days of indulgence. I should note that I have another child about the same age, who lives under the same rules, and is petite, slim, and super healthy. So it's not just that I overfed the heavier child.

 

What I learned from this is that (a) genetics play a bigger role than some people think; (b) diet and exercise do make a difference, but they have to be a long-term lifestyle change; © there isn't much support for parents who try to manage their kids' weight in the early years - if anything, it's discouraged.

 

I still think a 200lb 9yo has something medical going on. I know too many kids who can eat anything they want in any quantity and still remain skinny, or at least not become obese. I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that a sudden weight gain in such a child is definitely due to the parents' knowing choices. But, I don't know that the authorities did "jump to the conclusion." I hope they did not. Disrupting a child must never be done lightly, and social workers know that.

[FaithManor]

 

It looks as if that isn't the case though. First, there had to be DOCUMENTATION argued in front of a judge to take the child. The documentation had to prove that it was very likely the issue of the parent causing the issue or significantly hindering progress of the child. Second, they likely STILL don't have DOCUMENTATION that the child's needs are more than what was understood so it wasn't the parent's neglect or abuse. Else, they'd be sending him home.

 

Anyway, I so feel badly for the family and the child. I have no doubt that they love one another. And foster care *is* an issue even if the kid is in a great home. Kids *should* be with their parents if at all minimally safe and healthy. The best foster home can't compete with a half-decent first family. And fact is that not all foster homes are like ours. Additionally, weight and food issues are typically HUGE issues in foster care, not only what kids come with but because it is one of the few areas children have control over so they inappropriately control it.

 

I hope that the family learns to do what is necessary to help the child. I hope the child gets better and can return home.

 

But I absolutely believe that if CPS worked with the family for a year, giving them half as many services that they offered my children's parents, and the family was neglectful, allowing the child to get so big, possibly causing it....I definitely believe fostercare MAY help the child get healthier physically as well as help the parents learn to do better so they can parent safely. Hopefully everyone takes advantage of everything possible to help this child get healthy and home.

 

I do see your point. But, I'd also like to say as a parent who has had a pediatrician attempt to get me in trouble with CPS about my son's underweight issue, that it is very difficult to prove you are doing what the doctor says. Short of CPS living in my house, I can't prove that I feed my son the calories, amounts, foods, etc. that the doctor says I need to. I follow the endocrinologists instructions to the letter. At times "P" feels like he is being force-fed. At times he has a belly ache because 3500 calories with 35% of it from healthy fat sources so fills him up that he is very uncomfortable. However, short of having a film crew in her 24/7, I can't prove I follow doctor's orders. Sometimes I wonder what future problems he might have from being forced to eat more than he wants, but letting him eat less is not an option.

 

If I did not have two other doctors who are personally convinced that I do follow instructions and do the best I can for my son, and if it weren't for the fact that my male cousin (now 41 years old) was in care for 48 hrs. at 13 when a hospital nurse became convinced that my aunt and uncle could not possibly be doing what they'd been told about his diet and inability to gain weight (documentation of the outcome of that case is kept on a table by the door for when CPS comes knocking, along with ds's food journal, growth chart, medical records, and pictures of him eating macadema nuts, peanut butter, and drinking a 16 oz. glass of milk), the first pediatrician would have absolutely pursued having my son taken into care one year ago.

 

Additionally, I know of three kids who developed eating disorders that lead to anorexia while in care because they could not cope with the trauma of being removed from their homes. Dh and I used to do respite care for therapeutic families and sooooo many of these kids had food issues; it was CRAZY trying to deal with it.

 

That's why I have a hard time siding against the mom though I certainly don't know the details and might feel differently if more information were available.

 

Given the boat I am in with DS, I can only imagine how difficult it would be for a mother or father to prove they were compliant. I can't PROVE that ds eats all of the food I make for him. I can't PROVE that all of it has the EXACT nutritional content that it should. I can't PROVE that we restrict his aerobic activity but make him work out with weights in order to help increase muscle tone, but are careful of how many calories he burns. Even a videotape taken by me would be suspect. I suppose I could I ask our pastor to move in here and be a character witness for dh and I which I suspect he is not interested in doing.

 

If I thought the burden of proof might be on CPS to PROVE the family absolutely did not make any attempt to comply, then maybe I would think differently. Though, I still wonder what the chances of the child having further eating problems due to the emotional trauma would be and if that would be completely counter-productive. But, if I can't prove that I feed my son what he needs to eat, then I can't be convinced that this mom could prove she wasn't mis-feeding her son either.

 

I've struggled. I could post more about what it is like to deal with a child with a weight issue, but I think that probably for my own emotional well-being and ds's privacy, I shouldn't. Yes, it may be an underweight issue, but if you had any idea what this is like, you wouldn't dismiss it so lightly. I can only imagine the mom on the extreme other end. I can only imagine trying to get my child to exercise, trying to eat better, trying to get the other siblings on board who don't have that issue, trying to work and go to school, etc. I can easily imagine trying very, very hard and still being labeled "non-compliant" and having my child taken away.

 

Faith

[Pamela H in Texas]

Faith,

 

I would LOVE some suggestions from you if you ever have the time. I don't know how old "P" is, but I assume you probably had him as a preschooler also. If you have ANY ideas for me to get some food into my stbas, I'd be all ears. I am terribly upset that I can't get him on the weight chart (esp as I've packed 10 pounds onto his brother in the last 7months, which is about double what the average child gains in a year). He will *either* eat "well" or drink 3 Pediasure, neither being enough to consistently keep the little weight gain he had immediately when he came here (at 21 pounds). I can't get him to do both. He just pukes if we try to force him. He lost weight for the second time in a row his last doctor visit (we go back tomorrow and I'll absolute cry if he loses again).

 

Anyway, I *do* have to provide documentation of what we do, what he's offered versus eats, etc. I have also taken videos of him to show people what we see. The fact that what we've done has worked with one child helps though.

 

I am sorry I offended you. I'm also sorry you've had issues with a doctor. It is *really* hard dealing with doctors around this issue!

 

I am well aware CPS makes mistakes. And I wouldn't say that they didn't in any particular case. I'm just saying it is likely that there were real concerns with how the family is doing. However, I did read that the adjudication is next month which will determine if the child stays in care or gets home based services again. I would guess some of that decision will hinge on the progress the child has made (I testified in my children's parents' TPR trial stating the miraculous gains they've made). It definitely says something when a child's progress changes drastically in care (for example, the first time my 4yr old was hospitalized, he gained about 1kg per day suggesting he simply wasn't being fed adequately at home).

 

I do hope kiddo gets sent home soon :)

[Pamela H in Texas]

I wish the truth was known.

 

I so know how hard it is to make a difference for MYSELF when *I* WANT to make a change. And keeping it going is really really really hard also. And It has been *EXHAUSTING* to try to help my two little boys (failure to thrive), especially the one where my efforts aren't working. So I want to sympathize with the mom. I *definitely* feel for the little boy because it simply is a bad situation to be removed from your parents. Unless it was worse to be left with mom, he shouldn't have been removed. And yet, even if it was justified and necessary, it still is VERY VERY VERY hard on him. Even a child who EVERYONE says should be removed struggles GREATLY with being taken from his mama!

 

But my overwhelming thought is...200 pounds. My mom was a little overweight. My dad has been over 300 pounds for as long as I can remember. My dad and stepmom took us out to eat almost every single night when I was a teenager. We ate Thanksgiving and a few other rare meals at home, but mostly we went to The Spaghetti Warehouse and Steakhouses and... My dad modeled things like eating an entire package or two of cookies at night, stopping for A LOT of donuts on the way to work, drinking milkshakes (yes plural) during the day. I learned the lessons WELL. Though I *like* healthy food, I'm very addicted to junk. I have a thyroid disorder that threw my weight up SEVENTY pounds in TWO months when my ds was 5 months old. I've gained the rest since. All of that and I'm a few pounds heavier than this child.

 

Does that mean he has a health issue? Maybe. Or? I mean, doctors don't know everything. I, of all people, know THAT! My past posts outline years and years and years of no answers. But the GREAT MAJORITY of people DO find answers. Doctors *do* find the answers much of the time.

 

I just don't think we should ASSUME....We can only go based off what was written and it LOOKS like the parent was negligent IF CPS didn't mess up. Of course, they could have mssed up. Ohio has one of the worst CPS reputations (though usually the complaint is the other direction).

[happyhomemaker25]

I think I'm with Faith on most of this.

Someone stated you don't get to be 200 pounds overnight. You don't but if we are honest sometimes we don't even notice until we are bordering 200. Every time I see a picture of myself I always wonder where all that weight came from.

Maybe he and his mom need some family counseling to figure out if there is a root problem. Is he an emotional eater? Is he a bored eater?

It could be neurological. I know I for one have a real live physical addiction to carbs. I know people who scoff at this but I have come to recognize it as an addiction. If I eat any carbs other than whole grain (and even that has to be in moderation) I crave more so badly that I can't even think about anything else.

We know how hard it is as adults to lose weight and keep it off. Now for a little kid who does not yet fully understand the health dangers...

I don't know what his mom has done to help him. I'm just saying that while he did not get to be 200 pounds overnight it's not going to come off and stay off easily.

CPS offered all of my kids' parents the same case plan. If that's what they offered her as far as services go then it probably was not a big help. I don't know what was offered, I'm just saying from experience that they seem to have a one plan fits all kind of mentality sometimes.

I think they are probably doing more damage separating him from his family.

For the record, I'd never heard the term "food dessert" until I heard it here. Not to long ago, though, I heard the First Lady mention it. She said alot of cities have a hard time getting fresh/non processed foods and it's something that her healthy kids initiative is working on. I believe it is a real problem.

If we are going to bring parents to task for this than the schools should definitely share some blame. Most lower income kids get two meals a day at school and I know where my kids went to school there was a snack cart with cookies and chips and popcorn they could purchase.

[lula]

I think pulling a child out of his home and putting him into foster care when he has loving parents (even if inept) is undercutting his emotional health to such an extreme as to be unconscionable. Obviously, this kid has a huge potential for future health problems, this is clear. I have a few questions however:

 

1. was he getting some of his food at school from a school lunch or breakfast system? If yes, look at the quality of the food/calorie/sugar/sodium content. Does it count french fries or ketchup as a vegetable? Does it consider milk laced with high fructose corn syrup to be an acceptable way to get Vit D and calcium? Perhaps this child could start losing weight by being taken out of the school lunch program. Most low-income families have children that have at least one but often two meals a day at school. This would be a great place to improve a child's nutrition.

 

2. Is this child going to be emotionally better off in foster care and only seeing his mother for two hours a week? One's emotional state is often not as easily fixed as one's weight. How do they intend to address this issue? Is it really cost effective to provide emotional support instead of further nutritional guidance?

 

3. Is this child part of a food stamp or food assistance program? What is available as part of this program? Can foods that are completely horrid be purchased? If yes to both of those questions blame the government program along with the mother.

 

4. Consider the social cost to this child that he must deal with after being put into foster care. He was a child who was participating in school activities even while overweight. Now he gets to be the overweight kid who was pulled out of his home because of his weight. Isn't this potentially a larger social stigma for both him and his mother? Is this equal to the offense?

 

5. Was the health plan given to the mother even feasible for her to do? Did it actually include physical activity? What is the percentage of sedentary activity at the school? Is it more than %75? Why can't more physical activity being included as part of his school day to assist ALL children in healthy lifestyles?

 

Personally, this case (if the facts are presented accurately) enrages me. Yes, what his mother is doing or not doing is problematic but it should not be met with pulling the child from the home. Sometimes I am in awe at the complete lack of regard for a child's mental and emotional needs. This child clearly needs help: I don't think this was the proper way to provide it.

 

OT slightly: I saw a study recently that suggested that middle income families consume more fast food and convenience style foods than lower income families? Did I completely read that wrong or not recall the correct details?

Edited November 29, 2011 by lula

[Laurie4b]

I don't know what I think. Kids should be with their families if at all possible, healthy, and safe. I didn't get a chance to read the article yet, but it was mentioned in another post that CPS worked with the family for a year. What do you think they did for a year? If it is ANYWHERE close to what CPS did for my kids' family, it was probably what most of us would considered "too much." Seriously, if people need THAT much help, maybe they don't need to be parenting. And the cost to the state was EXTREME.

 

So CPS works with the family for an entire year. They offer services to help the family take care of the child appropriately. After a year of not complying well enough to help the child and no evidence of something further going on, the state finally decides the child is in significant danger.

 

Now, the child goes to a foster home who finds the appointments challenging. Goodness, do I know how THAT is. Is it a therapeutic foster home or a regular one? If the child's needs are great enough, the child qualifies for "leveling." Not all homes are licensed for any level of child (my husband and I are which is how we got "the three") which may necessitate moving him to a home that can accommodate his level of service required.

 

Anyway, but yes, if they have found that the child's needs are not because of non-compliance of the parents but the child's particular issues, then they need to return the child to the parent and provide additional services to her just as they would a foster parent.

 

It looks as if that isn't the case though. First, there had to be DOCUMENTATION argued in front of a judge to take the child. The documentation had to prove that it was very likely the issue of the parent causing the issue or significantly hindering progress of the child. Second, they likely STILL don't have DOCUMENTATION that the child's needs are more than what was understood so it wasn't the parent's neglect or abuse. Else, they'd be sending him home.

 

Anyway, I so feel badly for the family and the child. I have no doubt that they love one another. And foster care *is* an issue even if the kid is in a great home. Kids *should* be with their parents if at all minimally safe and healthy. The best foster home can't compete with a half-decent first family. And fact is that not all foster homes are like ours. Additionally, weight and food issues are typically HUGE issues in foster care, not only what kids come with but because it is one of the few areas children have control over so they inappropriately control it.

 

I hope that the family learns to do what is necessary to help the child. I hope the child gets better and can return home.

 

But I absolutely believe that if CPS worked with the family for a year, giving them half as many services that they offered my children's parents, and the family was neglectful, allowing the child to get so big, possibly causing it....I definitely believe fostercare MAY help the child get healthier physically as well as help the parents learn to do better so they can parent safely. Hopefully everyone takes advantage of everything possible to help this child get healthy and home.

 

BTW, I do understand the slippery slope concerns also. I think you have to remember that we take children away for severe abuse, for example, but not for spanking. If you made your 4yr old smoke cigarettes and refused to stop, we would likely have him removed from your care, but hubby smoking outside is not really the same. If your house is messy on occasion, it is significantly different than your house being a foot deep in trash. You feeding your kid McD's is not the same as you causing your 8year old to weight 200 pounds!

 

You can't assume other CPS's work like yours. I wish they did. I worked at a mental health facility for kids with kids from all over the state and the CPS's varied from good (very few) to unbelievably bad. A lot of them don't do JACK. "Work with" the family for a year could have been 3 visits by an overworked CPS worker and 2 phone calls. With one county , if I knew all the details of a case, I could roll dice and predict what their response would be about as well as what I would have thought was a reasonable response given the facts. That county would sometimes take kids from parents who needed just a little support; on the other hand, I know of a case where they told someone calling from a drug intervention program that a mom with an infant had started using crack that they wouldn't do anything because they didn't have foster beds open for infants. Go figure. There is a large city in that county. In another case I reported an 8 year old child who could act out sex, etc. Their conclusion: she learned it from her brother. (he was 6.) The fact that the parents were alcoholics who regularly had drinking parties at the house with people flopping all over spending the night didn't factor in. And no one thought to ask where the 6 year old learned it? I could go on and on.

[Laurie4b]

That, and it's not like the kids who come through foster care do so well on average.

 

:iagree:

[Laurie4b]

Obesity is a health problem in and of itself. I'd rate it as quite serious in the case of a 200-pound third grader, unless the child is six feet tall already. No it's not. There are some people for whom being obese doesn't ever equate to health problems. There are certain gene pools for which this is more likely to be true.

 

 

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. You said that you're expending best efforts; the mother in the article is not (ETA: if the article is accurate that she ignored doctors' orders, ignored warnings from youth services for a year, caused the problem and didn't act reasonably in correcting it, etc.). That's how your situation is different. The mother in the article is alleged to not be following doctor's orders. Faith is saying someone could make the same allegation against her. It's hard to prove you are if the results are not what the particular "expert" expects.

 

 

Whether or not a particular foster parent provides adequate care has no bearing on whether a placement in foster care was appropriate based on neglect. .

 

That last sentence is an incredibly naive statement. As someone who has had experience with the foster care system as both a mental health provider with many kids in my caseload in the CPS system and as a foster parent, I'd say of course it matters. There is no adequate care without a foster family to provide adequate care. Every time CPS moves a child, they are predictably regressing the child developmentally by about 6 months. The first 6 month regression is the original move. oops! Foster care family can't handle it--let's move the child again. Another 6 month regression. If a family did something to a child that made the child regress developmentally 6 months--no we're talking 12 months because it's two moves (what if the next family can't handle it either), it would be considered abuse, right? Furthermore, abuse/neglect is much more likely in the foster system than in the biological family. Part of this might be qualities of the foster parents (some are truly just in it for the money though there are dedicated ones--I've been one) but some of it is because some of the kids have qualities that make them very difficult. ALL of this must be weighed before you decide on an intervention as drastic as removing a child from the home.

Edited November 29, 2011 by Laurie4b

[Laurie4b]

:iagree: That child has siblings, but only he is obese. Why? Because he is sick. He can't stop eating because somewhere in his brain a part that's suppose to say that he had enough isn't working. I would have removed him to the hospital (my guess is the mother probably wouldn't have minded) that tailors to weight issues and if doctors advised consider surgery or other treatment options. That would have been a much better way to help this boy than pushing him into foster care system.

 

And I bet he'd get more than 2 hours visitation per week in the hospital. (That's what he's getting in foster care.)

 

Emotional health impacts physical health greatly.

[Iucounu]

That last sentence is an incredibly naive statement.

Nope; not even remotely. The fact that there may be a poor foster parent doesn't mean the whole foster care system is to be avoided when it's necessary to place a child... sorta like the way we don't run screaming from cops in times of need just because there's an occasional corrupt cop. :leaving:

 

As someone who has had experience with the foster care system as both a mental health provider with many kids in my caseload in the CPS system and as a foster parent, I'd say of course it matters. There is no adequate care without a foster family to provide adequate care. Every time CPS moves a child, they are predictably regressing the child developmentally by about 6 months. The first 6 month regression is the original move. oops! Foster care family can't handle it--let's move the child again. Another 6 month regression. If a family did something to a child that made the child regress developmentally 6 months--no we're talking 12 months because it's two moves (what if the next family can't handle it either), it would be considered abuse, right? Furthermore, abuse/neglect is much more likely in the foster system than in the biological family. Part of this might be qualities of the foster parents (some are truly just in it for the money though there are dedicated ones--I've been one) but some of it is because some of the kids have qualities that make them very difficult.

This is all faulty logic and doesn't really amount to an argument at all. It could be repeated verbatim to cry foul whenever any child is removed from the home and you simply don't like it.

 

No, in reality that part of the system works the way it should: though some children are neglected in the foster system, it doesn't justify turning a blind eye to known neglect by parents, and weighing it against potential neglect by a foster parent. No matter how convenient it might be for winning online arguments, the standard for intervention isn't whether some hypothetical neglect by the system will be worse than parental neglect; it's simply whether there is parental neglect (plus usually additional factors also never involving a consideration of hypothetical neglect by the system).

 

ETA: I don't see any provision for considering hypothetical system-caused abuse or neglect in statutes like this one:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2151.419

 

What am I missing? Perhaps I'm being incredibly naive. :crying:

Edited November 29, 2011 by Iucounu

[Carpe]

I feel bad for the boy. I was about 100lbs less than him at that age (and I was still obese) and it affected lots of things in my life.

 

Ignoring that he lost his family and friends and any sense of routine with this decision, he probably has enough emotional issues for two kids. I remember feeling limited in what I could do, being treated as inferior (mostly by adults) and being bullied. And I was just over half his size. I imagine those things I felt doubled and my heart aches for this child.

[kolamum]

I think this poor child is going to be set up beautifully for a wonderful life filled with regret, doubt, & body image problems. "I ate too much and was so fat people took me away from my family." "If I eat that even though I'm hungry and gain weight will they take me away again?"

 

Not to mention the rest of his family and how that will effect them in this particular mentality. Or how about the children's children.. Will their children be taken away for under nourishment because they are terrified of what happened to their brother happening to them?!

 

And how about the kids in his school.. "You were so fat you had to be sent away!" It's no longer a cruel mean teasing thing to say but the truth.

 

How can the govt. claim to take children away for being overweight and yet have overweight Politicians in office? How can they take them away for being overweight and yet permit under privileged people who need food stamps to buy chips, chocolate, and other empty calorie junk food with the govt. money?

 

I get that the govt. wants to wake people up and help them BE healthy. I just think they are going about it the very wrong way..

[Pamela H in Texas]

I think this poor child is going to be set up beautifully for a wonderful life filled with regret, doubt, & body image problems. "I ate too much and was so fat people took me away from my family." "If I eat that even though I'm hungry and gain weight will they take me away again?"

 

This is the case regardless of the reason for removal, but not one single one of you would, if you were privy to my children's story, would think they shouldn't have been removed (each time). BTW, my kids were removed for neglect but that is not how my four year old sees it. Maybe we shouldn't remove ANY kids because they'll "be set up beautifully for a wonderful life filled with regret, doubt, and (self) image problems. 'I went to the bathroom and couldn't control it so people took me away from my family. If I go potty, even though I really need to, it may be the wrong time and I'll get taken away again." (blog post a week or so ago if you a better understanding)

 

BTW, I completely and totally agree with the issue of the school lunch. This child probably has breakfast and lunch at school and that alone will make a kid gain weight. Though we got those free for Victoria, we started feeding her at home for breakfast and sending her lunch because her pants got snug IMMEDIATELY upon starting school. She was eating what WE would consider 3 breakfasts and the lunches are so unhealthy, it isn't funny. For some reason, they give them two milks for each meal and they can get chocolate if they want also. But *we* could easily make this choice. What about a family who can't? And then there is P.E. Our district switches out "specials" so you get it twice per week past Kindergarten. Twice a week isn't enough to maintain, much less lose. And yet, school is where a child spends his time from 7:15 to 3:15 (plus 30-60 min if he needs it) daily!

 

Anyway, I don't know. I really don't. I want to side with everyone because I feel for the parent and the child (remember, *I* was overjoyed to send my babies home at the beginning of the month though it ripped my heart out because I absolutely believe kids should be with mom if at all possible) and yet CPS worked with these people a year (which shouldn't be necessary in and of itself). But we simply don't know where the issue really is. I just hope the kid gets the help he needs on all fronts and he is returned to his mom as quickly as possible. I hope he can be safe and healthy.

[Just Robyn]

I am dying to know what you bought for a $40 pot of soup. I'm not being snarky. I am really curious what you bought, how prices are in your area, and how big the pot was. I can't imagine anything that would fill my largest stock pot and cost $40. If the recipe is awesome, you can include it. (But unless I could make it less expensively, I don't think I'd be able to!)

 

Well, I guess I don't know "how prices are" in my area because I have no point of comparison, but here's what was in the pot:

 

4 x 32 oz. chicken stock

1 pint cream

1 container (whatever the normal size is) button mushrooms

1 container shiitake mushrooms

1 package (I'm guessing it was 1 lb.?) sweet italian sausage

1 pkg spicy italian sausage

1 large white onion

[Slipper]

I wanted to comment on the previous comments about school lunches. My daughter has Celiac Disease and is also considered failure to thrive due to being significantly underweight. Her being so small has made me quite nervous. School systems and doctors are more likely to call on a child who is underweight than overweight in my opinion. Other than comments and questions from the school about whether she is being seen by a doctor, we've never had an issue. (And the school questions stopped once they realized how often she does see a doctor).

 

Due to her Celiac, she receives a gluten free lunch daily (they also keep gluten free items for breakfast on the rare times that she needs it). I've become a bit chatty with the lunchroom manager and she said that she provides numerous meals for kids with weight issues (all overweight, except for my daughter). If a doctor sends a note asking for low-fat (or whatever) the school must provide whatever the doctor specifies. (On a side note, although many jokes are made about lunchroom food, there are some good ones and we have a good one now. When my daughter had teeth pulled for orthodontic reasons, they served soft foods only and blended some things to make it easier for her to eat).

 

I hate to call any side in this story. Living with the fear that someone will accuse me of not treating MY child right, makes me automatically sympathetic. However, I also know that if the child is attending school, they are overseeing his lunch, possibly breakfast and one snack. That leaves the parents providing dinner and one or two snacks (after school/bedtime). A child that age weighing over 200 lbs is in crisis.

 

If I were in that parent's shoes, I would be cooking carefully and with the help of a dietician. If I couldn't afford a gym membership/personal trainer, I would be calling my most athletic friend and asking if I could trade babysitting for her helping my child. Of course, I'm also a stay at home mom and we can afford a gym membership and specialty foods. So, it's easy for me to point fingers and judge. I believe the article (or maybe another one?) stated that both parents were overweight (although another sibling had no weight issues). As hard as it is, sometimes the parents have to lead the way and be an example.

 

I hurt most for the child. Before we moved here, my daughter's best friend was overweight (and tall for her age). Her mother was devoted to her and looked after her diet (Grandma was sneaking her doughnuts and cupcakes). This girl was very sensitive about her weight. I hope so much that things work out for this family (and the child's health). With the child being in foster care, it will be evident soon whether he can lose weight somewhere other than home.

[Jen in PA]

Well, I guess I don't know "how prices are" in my area because I have no point of comparison, but here's what was in the pot:

 

4 x 32 oz. chicken stock

1 pint cream

1 container (whatever the normal size is) button mushrooms

1 container shiitake mushrooms

1 package (I'm guessing it was 1 lb.?) sweet italian sausage

1 pkg spicy italian sausage

1 large white onion

 

:confused: Even raising my guesstimate of what the shiitakes would cost fresh (I usually buy them dried), I can't make it cost half that much. I am glad I live in a low cost area for food.

[FaithManor]

This is the case regardless of the reason for removal, but not one single one of you would, if you were privy to my children's story, would think they shouldn't have been removed (each time). BTW, my kids were removed for neglect but that is not how my four year old sees it. Maybe we shouldn't remove ANY kids because they'll "be set up beautifully for a wonderful life filled with regret, doubt, and (self) image problems. 'I went to the bathroom and couldn't control it so people took me away from my family. If I go potty, even though I really need to, it may be the wrong time and I'll get taken away again." (blog post a week or so ago if you a better understanding)

 

BTW, I completely and totally agree with the issue of the school lunch. This child probably has breakfast and lunch at school and that alone will make a kid gain weight. Though we got those free for Victoria, we started feeding her at home for breakfast and sending her lunch because her pants got snug IMMEDIATELY upon starting school. She was eating what WE would consider 3 breakfasts and the lunches are so unhealthy, it isn't funny. For some reason, they give them two milks for each meal and they can get chocolate if they want also. But *we* could easily make this choice. What about a family who can't? And then there is P.E. Our district switches out "specials" so you get it twice per week past Kindergarten. Twice a week isn't enough to maintain, much less lose. And yet, school is where a child spends his time from 7:15 to 3:15 (plus 30-60 min if he needs it) daily!

 

Anyway, I don't know. I really don't. I want to side with everyone because I feel for the parent and the child (remember, *I* was overjoyed to send my babies home at the beginning of the month though it ripped my heart out because I absolutely believe kids should be with mom if at all possible) and yet CPS worked with these people a year (which shouldn't be necessary in and of itself). But we simply don't know where the issue really is. I just hope the kid gets the help he needs on all fronts and he is returned to his mom as quickly as possible. I hope he can be safe and healthy.

 

 

Pam, I really do get this! And you are sooooooo right about the school food. I posted earlier in this thread the lunch menu this week for our district elementary school lunch program and that fact that PE is now down to 30 minutes once per week and no afternoon recess. The lunch menu is published in our local newspaper which is why I know what they are offering. Plus, I also know a lady who works in the lunchroom and her take on it is, "I wouldn't feed it to my own dog. I wouldn't want the Vet bills nor the early death that the poor animal would suffer from it." I think that says a HUGE amount right there.

 

Your littles are right where they need to be. Don't defend what you do. You do a miraculous thing and I for one, am in your corner! I think the issue for me with this case is just the particulars and since you and I have PM'ed, you know that I see the other side...how very, very difficult it could be for me to show legal proof that I do follow the doctor's instructions to the letter when the outcome is not what the medical professionals expect. So this case resonates with a personal fear of mine.

 

Frankly, you are absolutely right, if he takes any meals at the school, this alone is huge, lack of exercise while at school is an issue, and since the school has him for the formative hours of the day and is likely to send homework home in the afternoons to keep him busy until supper time (standard here even in the young grades - first graders must be sent home with an hour's worth of work as per school policy), then the school, by virtue of occupying so much of the boy's day, must be on board with a diet and exercise plan whether they think they should have to or not.

 

Faith

[Just Robyn]

:confused: Even raising my guesstimate of what the shiitakes would cost fresh (I usually buy them dried), I can't make it cost half that much. I am glad I live in a low cost area for food.

 

Well, don't say that! I already have enough bitter complaints about the city I live in!

[AvasMom]

I agree that it is a tragic situation. Seems like a Lose-Lose proposition for the child and the family. So sad.

 

I don't know what the best available option would be in this situation, or in situations like this in general. With 1/3 of kids overweight or obese, it is an epidemic, and one not best served by taking these kids away from their families, as obviously there are many negative consequences to disrupting a family.

 

The gov't could and should do much more to promote healthy lifestyles, but, just as in every other area of child-raising, the parents must take the responsibility for ensuring their child's wellbeing despite adverse circumstances.

 

Yes, fast food places put toys in happy meals. However, as a parent, I long ago decided that MY kids don't get happy meals. Period. I have taught them that food places are to get food, not toys. If we go to a fast food place, we pick what we want to EAT and buy it, eat it, and move on. We NEVER buy happy meals, kids meals, or anything that includes a toy or unwanted food or desserts. We make CHOICES. I also (time and time again) have talked to my kids about exactly WHY we make those choices, why those places put toys in food, etc. I teach them about marketing and about healthy choices. I believe that the problem is not so much knowing what foods are healthy as it is having the self control to make good choices. Don't tell me that most parents of obese kids don't know that french fries are not as healthy as a salad, or that Coke isn't as healthy as skim milk. People know these things, they just don't care.

 

Yes, exercise is neglected in public schools, as it is for many homeschooled children as well. This stinks. It should change. In MY family, we prioritize exercise and fitness. We TAKE the time to run, ski, play, work outside, etc. On vacations and in our routine family fun time, we move constantly -- running, biking, swimming, surfing, hiking, kayaking, skiing, etc are a fundamental aspect of our "leisure" so our kids are learning sports and habits that serve them well now and will do so in the future. Whether it is through organized sports, family runs or hikes, or outdoor play, my kids move all the time, as do we adults.

 

It is my belief that it is a fundamental parental resposibility to raise their children in a healthy manner -- both in diet and exercise. If I see a grossly overweight child, I am convinced that their parents are failing them just as seriously as a parent who refuses to address serious allergies, or a parent who refuses to get their child needed medical care, or a parent who neglects the education of their child.

 

I would argue that it is indeed a governmental responsibility to intervene in the life of a child who is being neglected, including those children who are allowed to become grossly obese. I would argue that removing the child from the home would only be a reasonable option after ALL other options are tried, and that the government should offer and require other options that are not as invasive. Of course, this would likely require universal comprehensive health insurance, which is not on the table.

 

Lose-Lose. Parents must take responsibility for this. I think it is SHAMEFUL for a parent to allow their child to deteriorate into a preventable state of unhealth.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:It is SO tiresome to hear marketing constantly blamed for our choices. Take some responsibility!

[SKL]

It occurred to me that the boy may now be losing weight because he is starving himself in order to get back to his family. And if so, I sure hope they don't use the weight loss "success" as an excuse to delay reunification.

 

Ugh! Horrible situation.

 

We need to have a better approach to weight management for at-risk kids. Jut having fresh greens available is not gonna cut it. Parents need better advice, support, and tools from the time their kids are infants. Doctors need to stop blowing off excess weight in infants and tots. And yes, schools are a big part of the problem! Sitting at a desk all day, being fed crap, and then toting homework home (this kid was an honor student, so he must have been doing all his homework!). Unlike a McD happy meal, these are not lifestyle choices, but government-imposed problems. Unfortunately for families, this isn't likely to change any time soon.

[SKL]

Well, I guess I don't know "how prices are" in my area because I have no point of comparison, but here's what was in the pot:

 

4 x 32 oz. chicken stock

1 pint cream

1 container (whatever the normal size is) button mushrooms

1 container shiitake mushrooms

1 package (I'm guessing it was 1 lb.?) sweet italian sausage

1 pkg spicy italian sausage

1 large white onion

 

No offense, but even if this family could afford to cook like this, I'm not sure this would be considered diet food. ;) Sounds yummy, though.

 

When I think of making good food choices on a limited budget, I'm thinking fresh produce (carrots, apples), frozen or canned veggies (better than chips!), whole grains, lowfat / fat free dairy choices, limited and lowfat meat choices (or no meat), limited/no added butter/sugar, no snack/junk food/drink. These choices are actually quite cost-effective (compared to the junk-food diet they're theoretically replacing) and don't necessarily require cooking.

[MissKNG]

It is my belief that it is a fundamental parental resposibility to raise their children in a healthy manner -- both in diet and exercise. If I see a grossly overweight child, I am convinced that their parents are failing them just as seriously as a parent who refuses to address serious allergies, or a parent who refuses to get their child needed medical care, or a parent who neglects the education of their child.

 

Parents must take responsibility for this. I think it is SHAMEFUL for a parent to allow their child to deteriorate into a preventable state of unhealth.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree::party::thumbup::thumbup1::hurray::hurray:

 

Very single word of this (and then some!).

[SKL]

You keep mentioning Aldis....the one nearest me is chock full of cheap,cr@ppy food. "Rib" meat in bbq sause that tastes like dog food, individually wrapped hamburgers and burritos, etc. Yet the fruit was really expensive, from what I'm used to.(we recently moved from the South) 98 cents for one cucmber? 79 cents for one small grapefruit? I see very little bagged fruit here, the prodeuce section is one short aisle. The frozen vegetables are no better--sliced peppers from China... It's even worse at Save Alot, most of that store consists of processed foods.

I can understand the rationale behind a parent trying to get more food for the money, though I realize it's not a very healthy route.

I think so much depends on location. You should have seen my surprise when I went to get a brisket this summer at Wegmans, and saw it was nearly $10/pound. Food in this part of NY is ridiculously priced, and makes me understand more about the extensive use of food stamps and mobile food pantries in this area.

 

Yes, Aldis has junk food, but so does every other supermarket. The point is that they do offer nutritious foods, and I'm sure that if they were bought out of produce each week, they'd stock more of it. No point supplying in excess of demand, only to have the food rot.

 

As for prices, that certainly varies a lot regionally. Cleveland is a relatively low-cost city. I spend less than $50 per week to feed my family at an organic food store. Definitely less than it would cost us to eat at McDs all the time. Aldis is cheaper, but yeah, it has a different selection reflecting its different clientele.

 

 

I used to date a very cheap but highly-paid professional who lived on the East side of Cleveland. He would only shop at Aldis. He bought too much stuff from the "unhealthy" aisle, but that was his free choice. He also found plenty of healthy choices including milk, lean meat, and produce.

Edited November 29, 2011 by SKL

[SKL]

It's also no secret that these same companies know that if they can hook a toddler, they'll most likely have a life long customer.

 

I don't know - do you still eat the way you ate as a toddler?

[Impish]

Parents need to take responsibility, of course. But it's obvious that our society is very susceptible to marketing ploys based on the hundreds of millions spent to sway our buying habits. It's also no secret that these same companies know that if they can hook a toddler, they'll most likely have a life long customer.

It's not the toddler that's getting hooked, it's the parent. Toddlers and kids do not have money, the transportation, the power to make such choices.

 

It's the parents making the choices.

 

My kids love McDs. I loathe it. Wolf likes their coffee. *gack* The kids get to go probably 4x a year for an actual meal. Wolf's been known to take them there when it's bitterly cold outside for a muffin and a juice so that they can use the indoor playground. Do the kids ask to go more than that? Of course, esp if we're driving and they spot one. But, as parents, we are responsible to not give in to their every whim.

 

I keep going back to the fact CPS was involved for a year before apprehension. I still think that if Mom had been making effort to comply, this could have/would have been avoided. I seriously wonder if she was attending all appts, etc.

 

As to the comments about services being offered to foster parents that weren't to the Mom, I wonder about that too. Many times, services are in a domino sort of set up. Try x, y, z, and if *those* don't work, we'll look at a, b, c. If xyz weren't attempted, then the cost for abc isn't justified.

 

With the little bit of info available, and Mom's lawyer being the source of many of the quotes, there's just no way to get a balanced pov on this situation. Too much unknown.

 

I just hope that the child gets whatever help he needs to be healthy.

[beaners]

Well, don't say that! I already have enough bitter complaints about the city I live in!

 

I live in the same region as the other poster, and my price would have been about the same as hers. It would have been a little higher if I still lived in Upstate NY, but not more than a few extra dollars compared to here. Most of the places I've lived have been good for cost of living, but the other side of that is the lower average salary my husband receives.

 

If you left out the mushrooms, and added in a bag of potatoes and a few pounds of kale, you would have the recipe for my favorite winter soup!

 

You keep mentioning Aldis....the one nearest me is chock full of cheap,cr@ppy food. "Rib" meat in bbq sause that tastes like dog food, individually wrapped hamburgers and burritos, etc. Yet the fruit was really expensive, from what I'm used to.(we recently moved from the South) 98 cents for one cucmber? 79 cents for one small grapefruit? I see very little bagged fruit here, the prodeuce section is one short aisle. The frozen vegetables are no better--sliced peppers from China... It's even worse at Save Alot, most of that store consists of processed foods.

I can understand the rationale behind a parent trying to get more food for the money, though I realize it's not a very healthy route.

 

I think so much depends on location. You should have seen my surprise when I went to get a brisket this summer at Wegmans, and saw it was nearly $10/pound. Food in this part of NY is ridiculously priced, and makes me understand more about the extensive use of food stamps and mobile food pantries in this area.

 

I went to Aldis yesterday. Bagged apples are less than $1/lb. Carrots were $1/lb. Celery was 4 stalks for $1, but that was a special sale because they ordered too much. Pineapples were $1. Potatoes were less than $2 for a 10 lb bag. Frozen vegetables are less than $1 for a 16 oz bag. (Origins on the bags in my freezer: USA, Canada, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia) I only know those prices because those were things we bought. Except for the potatoes, none of those have tons of calories, but I don't think calories were a concern here. We do buy salsa and chips there once a month, and occasionally a box of shark crackers or graham crackers for the kids. We buy brown rice, dry beans, and whole grain pasta for my husband. You can buy real food there, and I have had no problem with any of the meat we buy. It's decent food, especially compared to the true food deserts where gas stations are the only place to buy food.

 

Our SavALot here always had good prices on frozen chicken and fresh produce. We don't go there too often, but I've been in and it's fine. Giant Eagle is very similar to what Wegmans was 5 or 10 years ago. You can get really nice produce for decent prices on stuff that is in season. You can find out of season produce but it is expensive.

 

You can find plenty of garbage at the low-end stores, but I have had no problem feeding my family healthy meals.