You Might Not Get to Keep Your Kids But, Hey, You’ll Have Free Health Insurance!
It’s all fun and games with Big Brother telling us what to eat until they come to take our kids away. The Associated Press reports that Harvard pediatrics professor and obesity expert David Ludwig and Harvard public-health researcher Lindsey Murtagh make a startling and outrageous claim in the current issue of JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association: “State intervention may serve the best interests of many children with life-threatening obesity, comprising the only realistic way to control harmful behaviors.”
According to TIME, “States should remove children from their parents’ homes only in the most severe situations and should simultaneously educate parents about the perils of obesity and how to help their child lose weight, he [Ludwig] says.” He continues, “But in the most extreme cases, removal from the home may be a more ethical solution than having a child undergo weight-loss surgery, an option that is becoming increasingly popular in the U.S., but which carries physical risks and can be irreversible.” TIME columnist Bonnie Rochman callas the recommendation “eye-popping” but in the end concludes, “It seems there’s got to be a better way than tearing kids from parents, but in truth, this extreme action might be in the best interests of everyone involved over the long-term.” Really?
Watch for heinous abuses of authority like this to rise in popularity with the liberal elites. The “best interests of everyone involved” will increasingly be cited with the onset of Obamacare. Hey, we’re paying for your kid’s healthcare so we need to intervene here. It’s for the good of the child, the family and society. JAMA says it so it must be true. Soon we’ll be reading about the justifications for taking children away from “religious fundamentalists” for the good of everyone involved.