Anderson: The Family that Eats Together, Stays Together

7/29/2019 Anderson: The Family that Eats Together, Stays Together

1/27

ANDERSONNOTEPOST5(DONOTDELETE) 1/24/201311:00AM

189

TheFamilyThatEatsTogether,StaysTogether:SettingTableStandardsfor

ChildhoodObesity,Neglect,andtheFamilyUnit

ALAINAANDERSON*

ABSTRACTCoryAndiswasa fouryearoldboy inneedofahelpinghand.Cory

weighed138pounds,almostfourtimestheaverageweightofafouryearold. Doctors at RileyHospital in Indianapolis urged Corys parents toenforce a strict, healthy diet,by providing the familywith a diet plan,nutritionists, and nurses to assist with the weight loss. Corys weightproblemwasaffectinghiminanumberofways:hewasforcedtowearanoxygenmachine tomove around, he suffered from sleep apnea, a lifethreateningcondition,hehadtohavehistonsilandadenoidsremoved.

The reason Cory was morbidly obese was because Corys parents

failed

to

provide

him

with

the

proper

diet

necessary

to

lead

a

healthy

lifestyleandprotect theirson frommorbidobesity.However,oncesocialworkers and doctors began working with the family, Corys parentsbecame resentful and complained to a nurse aboutbeing instructed onnutrition.Failingtounderstandtheseverityofthesituation,Corysparentseven fedhima fastfoodmealwhile in thehospital, indirectviolationofthedoctorsdiet. ThestateremovedCoryfromthehomeandhisparentswerechargedwithfivecountsofcriminalneglect.Infostercare,Corylostmore than fiftypoundsandhishealthproblemssignificantlydiminished.CorysparentswerelaterabletoregaincustodyandprovideCorywiththepropernutritionheneeded.

* Candidate for Juris Doctor, New England Law | Boston (2013). B.A., History, Boston

University(2010).Iwouldliketothankmylovingfamilyfortheirdedicationandsupport.


2/27

ANDERSONFINAL(PRINT)(DONOTDELETE) 1/24/2013 11:00AM

190 New England Law Review v.47|189

Becomingaparent imposesmany rightsaswellasduties.The state,throughitsparenspatriaepowercandetermineunderwhatcircumstancesaparenthasfailedtomeettheseobligationssuchthatthestatemuststepin

toprotect

the

child

from

harm.

This

Note

argues

that

when

parents

facilitate their childs obesity this constitutesneglect and removal of thechildfromthehomeisproperunderestablishedprecedent.Whileremovalandterminationofparentalrightsneednotbeexercised ineveryinstanceofchildhoodobesity,itshouldremainanoptionforjudgeswhodeterminethat,giventhefactsandcircumstancessurroundingtheneglect,reasonableefforts tokeep the family togetherhave failedand removal is in thebestinterestofprotectingthechildfromharm.

INTRODUCTIONoryAndiswasafouryearoldboy inneedofahelpinghand.1Cory weighed 138 poundsalmost four times the averageweight of a four year old.2 Doctors at Riley Hospital in

Indianapolis urged Corys parents to enforce a strict, healthy diet byproviding the familywith adiet plan,nutritionists, and nurses to assistwith the weight loss.3 Corys weight problem was affecting him in anumber of ways: he was forced to wear an oxygen machine to movearound,he suffered from sleep apneaa lifethreatening conditionandhehadtohavehistonsilsandadenoidsremoved.4

Corywasmorbidly obesebecause his parents had failed to providetheir child with the proper diet necessary to lead a healthy lifestyle.5However,oncesocialworkersanddoctorsbeganworkingwiththefamily,Corysparentsbecame resentful and complained to anurse aboutbeinginstructedonnutrition.6Failingtounderstandtheseverityofthesituation,

Corys parents even fed him a fastfoodmealwhile in the hospitalin

1 LauraA.Kelley,WhatShouldBetheStandardsforInterveningBetweenParentandChild?The

ParentalProsecutionforaYoungBoysObesity,9BUFF.WOMENSL.J.7,79(2001).2 Id.at7.3 Id.at8.4 Id.at9.Sleepapnea is the involuntarycessationofbreathing thatoccursduringsleep,

which,ifuntreated,cancausehighbloodpressure,heartdisease,stroke,diabetes,depression,

andotherailments.SleepApnea,AM.SLEEPAPNEAASSOC.,http://sleepapnea.org/learn/sleep

apnea.html (lastvisitedJuly16,2012).Adenoids are tissues in thenasal cavity thatprotect

children fromgetting sickby trappingharmfulbacteriaandviruses thatarebreathed inor

swallowed. All About Adenoids, KIDSHEALTH, http://kidshealth.org/kid/ill_injure/sick/

adenoids.html#(lastvisitedJuly16,2012).5 Kelley,supranote1,at89.6 Id.at8.

C


3/27


2012 The Family That Eats Together , Stays Together 191

directviolationofCorysrequireddiet.7ThestateremovedCoryfromthehomeandhisparentswerechargedwithfivecountsofcriminalneglect.8Infoster care, Cory lostmore than fifty pounds and his health problems

significantlydiminished.

9The

only

way

Corys

parents

would

be

able

to

regain custody is if they could prove that returningCory to theirhomewouldbeinhisbestinterestthattheycouldprovidehimwithastrictdietandahealthylifestyle.10

Becoming aparent imposesmany rights aswell asduties.11A state,throughitsparenspatriaepower,candetermineunderwhatcircumstancesaparenthasfailedtomeettheseobligationssuchthatthestatemuststepinto protect the child from harm.12 Due to the extreme harm caused bychildhoodobesity,severalstateshavedeterminedthatinterventionintothehome iswarrantedwhere the parents have failed to provide sufficientnutritionalneeds in order to allow the child to lead ahealthy lifestyle.13This Note argues thatwhen parents facilitate their childs obesity, this

constitutes

neglect

and

removal

of

the

child

from

the

home

is

proper

under

establishedprecedent.

Part I provides an overview of state intervention into the familysphere,including(1)thehistoricalbasisforintervention;(2)thescopeanddevelopmentofchildneglect;and(3)thestatesparenspatriaepowerwhichjustifiesremoval incertaincircumstances.PartIIwillexamine thecurrentstate of the American obesity crisis, by discussing the scientificunderpinningsandidentifyingthelegalandjudicialresponsetochildhoodobesity. Part IIIwill identify the leading cause of the obesity crisisbyhighlightingthehomeenvironmentandtheparentsroleinthisepidemic.Specifically,PartAwill argue thatparenting choices cause secondhandobesityandconstituteneglect.PartBwillargue thatjudicialapproachestoobesityfocusingonthefamilyandthehome,ratherthansocioeconomicfactors,are thecorrectapplicationofneglect law tothechildhoodobesitycrisis.PartCwillarguethattheincomedisparitiesinaccesstohealthyfoodanddietaryeducation,ifany,canbeovercomethroughreasonableeffortsand do not excuse neglect. Finally, Part IV will illustrate that wherereasonableeffortstoreunifythefamilyhavefailed,removalisinthebestinterest of the child to protect the child from severe physical andemotionalharmcausedbychildhoodobesity.

7 Id.8 Id.at7.9 Id.at9.

10 Seeid.at1011.11 SeeinfraPartI.A.12 SeeinfraPartI.13 SeeinfraPartII.B.


4/27



I. StatesRighttoInterveneintheFamilySphereA. HistoricalBasis

Oneof theoldest fundamental liberty interestsunder theFourteenthAmendmentrecognizedbytheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtistheinterestofparentsinthecare,custody,andcontroloftheirchildren.14TheSupremeCourthasheldthatthereisaconstitutionallyprotectedzoneofprivacythatimpedesthestatefromintrudingintointimaterelationships,marriage,andthe familyunit.15Thisconstitutionalprotectionofthefamily includesonesrighttoraiseachild.16Itprotectsaparentsrighttoestablishahomeandbringupchildren,17includingtherighttodirecttheupbringingandeducationofchildrenundertheircontrol.18Thus,itiswellestablishedthatchild rearing confers adistinct set of legal rights and protections to theautonomousfamilyunit.19

Thisright,althoughsacred,isnotabsolute.20Thefundamentalrightto

14 SeeWisconsinv.Yoder,406U.S.205,232 (1972) (ThehistoryandcultureofWestern

civilization reflect a strong traditionofparental concern for thenurture andupbringingof

their children.Thisprimary role of theparents in theupbringing of their children isnow

establishedbeyonddebateasanenduringAmericantradition.);U.S.CONST.amend.XIV,1.

TheFourteenthAmendmentreads:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the

privileges or immunities of citizens of theUnited States; nor shall any

statedepriveanypersonoflife,liberty,orproperty,withoutdueprocess

oflaw;nordenytoanypersonwithinitsjurisdictiontheequalprotection

ofthelaws.Id.

15 See,e.g.,Griswoldv.Connecticut,381U.S.479,484(1965)(holdingthatalawprohibiting

theuse

and

distribution

of

contraceptives

was

unconstitutional

as

aviolation

of

the

right

to

privacy); Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 448 (1972) (holding that a statute prohibiting

distribution of contraceptives to unmarried persons was unconstitutional under the

Fourteenth Amendment); Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 8 (1967) (holding that a statute

prohibitingwhitepeoplefrommarryingnonwhitepeopleviolatedthefundamentalrightto

marry);Zablockiv.Redhail,434U.S.374,388(1978)(holdingthatastatuterequiringacourt

ordertoobtainamarriagelicensewhereaparenthadapreexistingchildsupportobligation

interferedwiththefundamentalrighttomarry).16 See e.g., Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 658 (1972) (holding that parents are

constitutionally entitled to ahearingonparental fitnessbefore the state takes custodyof a

child);Moorev.CityofEastCleveland,431U.S.494,499502(1977)(holdingthatcityzoning

ordinances that restricts the definition of a family to single families violates a

grandmothersconstitutionalrighttochildrearing).17 Meyerv.Nebraska,262U.S.390,399(1923).

18 Piercev.SocietyofSisters,268U.S.510,53435(1925).19 SeeTroxelv.Granville,530U.S.57,6566(2000)([T]hereisaconstitutionaldimension

totherightofparentstodirecttheupbringingoftheirchildren.).20 SeeShireenArani,Comment,StateInterventioninCasesofObesityRelatedMedicalNeglect,


5/27



raise ones child also carrieswith itdistinct legalduties and obligationsthatparentsmust fulfill.21Whilean individual isnot legallyobligated tobear a child, once the right to do so is exercised and an individual is

deemedthe

legal

parent,

that

individual

has

entered

into

acontract

with the state, whereby their fundamental right to raise the child isconditionedupon the fulfillmentof theirparentalduty toguide,protect,and support the child until emancipated.22 Although the bond formedbetweenparentandchildgenerallyensurestheformersacceptanceofsuchlegal duties and responsibilities as child rearing, failure to protect andprovide for ones childmay result in the termination of ones parentalrights.23

B. DefiningChildNeglectChildneglect isdefinedas[t]he failureofapersonresponsible fora

minor to care for theminors emotional or physical needs.24A child is

neglectedwhen

he

or

she

lacks

proper

parental

care

by

reason

of

the

fault

or habits of the parent, orwhose parent neglects or refuses to provideproperornecessarysubsistence,education,orothercarenecessaryforthehealth,morals,orwellbeingof thechild.25TheChildAbusePreventionandTreatmentActof1996defineschildabuseandneglectunder federallawtoincludeanactorfailuretoactwhichpresentsanimminentriskofseriousharm.26Somecourtsalsolooktocommunitystandardsaswellasifthefamilycircumstancesareharmfultothechildswelfare.27

Childneglect isastandard,andthecourtmust lookatallthefactsto

82B.U.L.REV.875,879(2002)(arguingthatthereareprevailingandcompetingstateinterests

inthe

social

order

and

protection

of

children.);

Mary

Patricia

Byrn

&

Jenni

Vainik

Ives,

WhichCameFirsttheParentortheChild?,62RUTGERSL.REV.305,306(2010)(highlightingthat,

underthelaw,itisclear:thechildcomesfirst,andlegalparentscomesecond.).21 SeePierce,268U.S.at535 (Thechild isnot themerecreatureof thestate; thosewho

nurturehimanddirecthisdestinyhave theright,coupledwith thehighduty, torecognize

andpreparehim foradditionalobligations.);Meyer,262U.S.at400(Correspondingto the

rightofcontrol,itisthenaturaldutyoftheparenttogivehischildreneducationsuitableto

theirstationinlife....).22 See Byrn & Ives, supra note 20, at 321 ([S]tate parentage statutes create amutual

bargain.Inexchange for fulfilling thedutiesofparentage, theparentgains the fundamental

righttoraisethechild.);seealsoVIRGINIAG.WEISZ,CHILDRENANDADOLESCENTSINNEED5

(1995).23 See WEISZ, supra note 22 (The parentchild relationship normally is free from

interferencebythestatepreciselybecausemostparentsdonotharmorfailtheirchildren.).

24 BLACKSLAWDICTIONARY612(9thed.2009).25 SeeInInterestofKinkner,191Neb.367,370(1974).26 SeeChildAbusePreventionandTreatmentAct,42U.S.C.15015116(2011).27 See,e.g.,InreC F B,497S.W.2d831,837(Mo.Ct.App.1973).


6/27



determine whether neglect exists if presented with the question.28 Indeterminingwhether certainbehavior rises to the levelofneglect, courtslook towhetheran incidentorapatternofbehaviorqualifiesasneglect,

itsseriousness

or

duration,

and,

most

importantly,

whether

or

not

the

child

issafe.29Thegravityofanyneglectsituationisdeterminedbyevaluatingboththeharmandriskofharmtothechild,aswellasthehabitualnatureof the neglect.30 For instance, some forms of neglect require only oneinstance, such as leaving an infant unattended in abathtub.31However,most other forms of neglect require a frequent and chronic repeatedbehaviorover time, suchasparentswith substanceabuseproblemswhofailtoprovidethebasicneedsofthechildrenonanongoingbasis.32

Ifthecourtdeterminesthatchildneglectispresent,thenthestatemayintervene to protect the child and alleviate the neglect.33Most cases ofneglect are brought to juvenile court, where the judges focus is onrehabilitative services to protect the child and, if possible, keeping the

family

together.34

However,

if

the

parent

fails

to

work

with

protective

servicesorcomplywithcourtorders,apetitionmaybefiledtoterminatethe parental rights and focus on a disposition thatwillbe in thebestinterestofthechild.35Inthemostextremecasesofchildabuseorneglect,involvingwillfulor intentionalconduct thatresults inseriousphysicalormentalharm,criminalchargesmaybebroughtagainsttheparents.36

Thebasicneedsofachildarethosethatarecriticaltodevelopmentand, if notmet,would likely result in serious harm.37 The endeavor todefineachildsbasicneedsisanormativeonehoweverthereisageneralconsensus that having adequate food, health care, shelter, education,supervision/protection,andemotionalsupportandnurturanceconstitutethe basic needs of a child.38 Failure to provide for these basic needs,

28 See,e.g.,InreSusanM.,53Cal.App.3d300,313(Ct.App.1975).29 See CHILDRENS BUREAU,OFFICE ON CHILD ABUSE ANDNEGLECT, CHILDNEGLECT: A

GUIDE FOR PREVENTION, ASSESSMENT, AND INTERVENTION 9 (2006), available at

http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/neglect/neglect.pdf.30 Seeid.at10.31 Seeid.at11.32 Seeid.33 SeeSantoskyv.Kramer,455U.S.745,75354(1982).34 SeeWEISZ,supranote22,at134.35 Id.at147.36 Seeid.at134(Theprocessincriminalcourtthatcentersonestablishingtheguiltofthe

parenthaspunishmentasitsaim,notrehabilitationfortheoffendingparent.).37 HowardDubowitz,DefiningChildNeglect, inCHILDABUSEANDNEGLECT:DEFINITIONS,

CLASSIFICATIONSANDAFRAMEWORKFORRESEARCH107,110(MargaretM.Feericketal.eds.,

2006).38 Id.


7/27



essentialtosupportthegrowthanddevelopmentofthechild,mayrisetothelevelofneglectandcanresultinterminationofparentalrightsaswellascriminalliability.39

Forinstance,

in

Commonwealth

v.

Cottam,

parents

Larry

and

Leona

Cottamwereprosecuted fora sixweekstarvationperiod resulting in thedeathoftheirfourteenyearoldsonandmalnutritionoftheirtwelveyearold daughter.40 They were subsequently found guilty of thirddegreemurder,twocountsofrecklessendangermentofanotherperson,andtwocountsofendangeringthewelfareofchildren.41Inanothercase,amotherwas convicted for the death of her twoyearold child,who diedwhileweighingjust twelveand threequarterspounds.42 In thatcase, theTexasCourt ofCriminalAppeals held that the parents routine of leaving thebabyaloneforsubstantialperiodsandfailingtofeedthechildcausedandsurmountedto intentionalkillingofthechildbystarvation.43Similarly, inHigbee v. State, parentsDonald andKimberlyHigbeewere sentenced to

seven

years

in

prison

for

child

neglect

because

they

starved

their

son.44

Despiteagency involvementovera considerableperiodandprovisionofservices for trainingand instruction inpropernutrition,when theirchildwas removed from the home, he was just shy of fiveyearsold andweighedonlytwentyninepounds.45

Evolving social norms, aswell as advances in scientific knowledge,haveadirecteffecton the lawsawarenessand response to theneedsofchildren.46Thus,wheretheharmsandbenefitsofcertainactivitiesbecomewellestablishedandaccepted insociety, failure toact inaccordancewiththese harms and benefits may be viewed, under the law, as neglect.47Indeed, data pertaining to thebenefits of using car seat restraints have

39 SeeJohnD.Perovich,Annotation,HomicidebyWithholdingFood,Clothing,orShelter,61

A.L.R.3d 1207, 2[a], at 121112 (1975). Stateswill prosecute parents for child abuse if the

parentswillfullyfailtoprovidethebasicneeds,andthisfailureresultsinseriousharmtothe

child. Seegenerally ChildNeglect andAbandonment State Statutes,NATLDIST.ATTYSASSN

(Mar. 13, 2007), http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/ncpca_statute_child_neglect_abandonment

_3_07.pdf.40 Commonwealthv.Cottam,616A.2d988,993(Pa.Super.Ct.1992).41 Id.For failing to feed their children, theCottams cited religiousbeliefs,however the

courtheldthattheCottamshadanaffirmativedutytoprovidefortheirchildrenregardlessof

thesebeliefs.Id.at1000(internalcitationomitted).42 Harringtonv.State,547S.W.2d616,618(Tex.Crim.App.1977).43 Id.at618,620.44 Higbeev.State,No.03C019808CR00286,1999WL1086865,at *1 (Tenn.Crim.App.

Dec.3,1999).45 Id.at*2.46 Dubowitz,supranote37.47 Id.


8/27



resulted in lawsrequiringparentstobe legallyresponsibleforusingsuchrestraints.48 Similarly,secondhandsmokehasbeguntoplayanimportantroleinchildcustody49aswellasabuseandneglectproceedings.50Although

smokingtobacco

is

aparents

legal,

lifestyle

choice,

courts

have

begun

to

recognize the irrefutable proof of the health dangers of secondhandsmoketochildren51inissuingbothprotectiveordersaswellasremovingchildrenfromthecustodyofasmokingparent.52Evenforchildrenwhoarenotpredisposedtorespiratoryillnesses,53chronicexposuretosecondhandsmoke in thehome can rise to the levelofneglect, as theparent fails toprotectthechildfromtherisksofthehazard.54

C. ParensPatriaeandRemovaloftheChildTheconceptofparenspatriae,orultimateparent,referstotheEnglish

common law concept of the states obligation to ensure the safety andwelfare of the child in protecting the overall interests of society.55 The

commonlyaccepted

view

in

society

and

law

is

that

families

should

enjoy

freedom from government intrusion in exercising their right to childrearing.56However,iftheparentsfailtoactinthechildsbestinterest,orifthere isa findingofabuseorneglect, theparenspatriaepowergrants thestate thepower,aswellas theobligation, to intervene inorder toprotect

48 Seeid.;MASS.GEN.LAWSch.90,13A(2001).49 See, e.g., Badeaux v. Badeaux, 541 So. 2d 301, 30203 (La.Ct.App. 1989); Roofeh v.

Roofeh,525N.Y.S.2d765,769(N.Y.S.Sup.Ct.1988);Pizzitolav.Pizzitola,748S.W.2d568,570

(Tex. App.1988).50 See,e.g.,RalphH.v.Dept.ofHealth&Soc.Serv.,255P.3d1003,1006(Alaska2011);Inre

JulieAnne,780N.E.2d635,654(OhioCom.Pl.2002).

51 Inre

Julie

Anne,

780

N.E.2d

at

654.

52 See Ralph H., 255 P.3d at 1006 (holding that termination of parental rights was

appropriatewherethefatherfailedtoremedytheconditionsinthehomethatplacedthechild

atriskfromharmofsecondhandsmoke).53 InreJulieAnne,780N.E.2dat654(TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasruledthatthe

harm tobe considered from secondhand smoke includesboth present harm and possible

futureharm,andaccordinglyfamilycourtshaveanunqualifieddutytoconsiderthedangers

of secondhand smoke to all children, regardlessof the conditionof theirhealth.) (original

emphasisomitted).54 Seeid.at659([A]familycourtthatfailstoissuecourtordersrestrainingpersonsfrom

smokinginthepresenceofchildrenwithinitscare isfailingthechildrenwhom the lawhas

entrustedtoitscare.);CHILDRENSBUREAU,supranote29,at1314(citingsecondhandsmoke

asaformofinadequatesupervisionorneglect).55 SeeWEISZ,supranote22,at89;KayP.Kindred,GodBlesstheChild:PoorChildren,Parens

Patriae,andaStateObligationtoProvideAssistance,57OHIOST.L.J.519,521(1996).56 See Marsha Garrison, Child Welfare Decisionmaking: In Search of the Least Drastic

Alternative, 75GEO.L.J. 1745, 1747 (discussing thewidespread acceptanceofminimal state

intervention).


9/27



thechildfromharm.57

Until about themiddle of the twentieth century, theAmerican childwelfare system granted vast discretionary power to courts and child

welfareworkers

in

determining

whether

state

intervention

was

appropriate, often resulting in significant harm from prematureintervention.58Asa resultof thepassageof theAdoptionAssistanceandChild Welfare Act of 1980, states are required to employ reasonableefforts torestrictremovalof thechild from thehome,and toworkwiththe family to achieve reunification if removal is necessary.59 In a typicalinvestigation intoareportofabuseorneglect,asocialworker isassignedto the family to supervise the childwithin the home environment andprovidewelfareservicesinanefforttomitigateissuescausingtheabuseorneglect.60Thesocialworkermayalsoofferparentingeducationprogramsfocusing on nutrition, homemaking, child care, individual therapy ortraining.61

Whenthe

parent

does

not

consent

to

such

in

home

intervention,

social

workersmay turn to the courts to obtain a court order for the inhomedelivery of service and the development of a treatment plan.62Alternatively,undercertaincircumstances,statelawauthorizesadoctororsocialworker to takeemergency, temporarycustodyofaneglectedchildwhere the child is in immediate need ofmedical care or in a physicalenvironmentthatposesanimminentthreattothechildslifeorsafety.63Ifthe family refuses to cooperate,or theneglect issues arenot solved to asatisfactory level despite reasonable efforts made, the child protectiveservicesworkermustresorttofilingapetition incourtfortheremovalofthe child and the criminal prosecution of the parents.64 A preliminary

57 InreMarilynH.,851P.2d826,833(Cal.1993)(Althoughaparentsinterestinthecare,

custodyandcompanionshipofachildisalibertyinterestthatmaynotbeinterferedwithin

theabsenceofacompellingstateinterest,thewelfareofachildisacompellingstateinterest

thatastatehasnotonlyaright,butadutytoprotect.).58 SeeGarrison,supranote56,at1758.59 SeeYOUTHLAWCENTER,MAKINGREASONABLEEFFORTS:APERMANENTHOMEFOREVERY

CHILD 1 (2000), available at http://familyrightsassociation.com/bin/white_papers

articles/reasonable_efforts/making_reasonable_effort.pdf.60 WEISZ,supranote22,at116.61 Id.at11718.62 Id.at121.63 Id. at 122 (Before taking a child into [emergency] custody,however, the . . . [social]

workermust considerwhether reasonable services canbeprovided to the family thatmay

eliminatetheneedtoremovethechildfromthehome.).64 TheConstitution requires clear and convincing evidence of actual harm to the child

beforethestatemayintervenetoterminateaparentsrightsinthecare,custody,andcontrol

ofthechild.SeeSantoskyv.Kramer,455U.S.745,74748(1982).


10/27



hearingisscheduledtodeterminewhetherthechildshouldremaininthehome pending a full hearing, called an adjudication.65 At theadjudicationhearing,evidenceisheardastotheallegationsofneglectand

whetherthe

child

should

be

placed

in

state

custody.

66

Onceitisdeterminedthatthechildhasbeenabusedorneglected,thecourtmustdetermine theproperdispositionof the child.67Judgeswilloftenlooktothebestinterestofthechild,specificallythechildssocialanddevelopmental needs, as well as the least detrimental alternative toremoval.68Thejudgemayorderavarietyofdifferentplacementoptions,including: (1) release back to the parent; (2) release to the parent oncondition that the parent participate in inhome services and othertreatment; (3) placement in foster carewith visitation; or (4) permanentplacementinkinshiporfostercare.69Evidenceoftheparentsparticipationin courtordered services, their physical and emotional abilities, andawarenessandacknowledgementoftheproblemmaywarrantafinding

that

the

child

should

not

be

permanently

removed.70

II. TheCurrentStateoftheObesityCrisisA. TheScientificUnderpinnings

Theharmsofobesity,particularlychildhoodobesity,havebecomeanacceptedandestablishedfactinsocietytoday.71Asearlyas1950,nutritionscientistsbegan to see the first signs of the ill effects associatedwithdietaryexcess.72Anumberofgroups,suchastheAmericanSocietyfortheStudyofArteriosclerosis and theAmericanHeartAssociation, called forthe reduction and control of fat consumption and highlighted the link

65 At

this

hearing,

the

department

of

social

services

must

show

that

reasonable

efforts

were

madetopreventtheplacementofthechildoutsidethehome.WEISZ,supranote22,at14041.

If thejudgedetermines that thechildshouldremainoutof thehomependingadjudication,

thechildmaybeorderedtostaywithrelativesortobeplacedinfostercare.Seeid.at140,142.66 Id.at141.67 Id.at142.68 Id.at911.69 Id. at 144. Kinship care refers to placement with close family relatives. HARVEY

SCHWEITZER&JUDITHLARSEN,FOSTERCARELAW:APRIMER8(2005).70 WEISZ,supranote22,at143.71 See Understanding Obesity, OBESITY IN AMERICA (last visited Nov. 20, 2012),

http://www.obesityinamerica.org/understandingObesity/index.cfm (explaining that, in 2004,

theUnitedStatesCenters forDiseaseControlandPreventionrankedobesityas thenumber

onehealthriskfacingAmericans).72 SeeEmilyJ.Schaffer,IstheFoxGuardingtheHenhouse?WhoMakestheRulesinAmerican

NutritionPolicy?,57FOOD&DRUGL.J.371,384 (2002).The firstsignsof thepoorAmerican

dietwerediscoveredduringtheKoreanWar,where77%ofsoldierswerefoundtohavehigh

bloodpressureasaresultoftheU.S.Armydiet.Id.


11/27



betweenhigh fatdietsand the riskofheart attacksor strokes.73 In 1977,former Surgeon General and Assistant Secretary of Health, Dr. JuliusRichmond,declaredbeforeCongress anew era innutrition, focusingon

reducingcaloric

intake

and

eating

less

fat,

sugar,

and

salt.

74The

growing

responseofadvocatestodetect[the]crisis,define[the]problem,andseeka solution has resulted in educating the public about the harms ofobesity.75

Childhoodobesityhasmorethantripledinthepastthirtyyears.76Theprevalenceofchildhoodobesityisthisgenerationsparanoia,describedasa worldwide epidemic.77According to the Center forDiseaseControland Prevention, in 2008, one third of children and adolescents wereoverweight or obese.78 [M]ore than one in four young people areunqualified formilitary servicebecause of [being overweight],79whichaccording to highrankingmilitary leaders, hasbecome a threat to ournational security, similar to the national security problem faced by

President

Truman

during

World

War

II.80

First

Lady

Michelle

Obama

implemented thenational LetsMoveprogram, aimed at reducing theoverwhelmingobesityratesinchildren.81

ExpertsusetheBodyMassIndex(BMI)testtocalculateidealweightinboth children and young adultsbased on the persons age, gender,weight, and height.82 Once the BMI is calculated, the BMI number is

73 Id.at38586.74 Id.at387.75 RoganKersh&JamesA.Morone,Obesity,Courts,andtheNewPoliticsofPublicHealth,30

J. HEALTH POL. POLY & L. 839, 864 (2005), available at http://www.ostina.org/downloads

/pdfs/EUPres_Mtg2_KershArticle2.pdf.76

ChildhoodObesity

Facts,

CTR.

FOR

DISEASE

CONTROL

&

PREVENTION,

http://www.cdc.gov

/healthyyouth/obesity/facts.htm (last updated June 7, 2012) [hereinafter CDC CHILDHOOD

OBESITYFACTS]77 EbeDAdamoetal.,MetabolicSyndromeinPediatrics:OldConceptsRevised,NewConcepts

Discussed,38ENDOCRINOLOGY&METABOLISMCLINICSN.AM.549,549(2009).78 CDCCHILDHOODOBESITYFACTS,supranote76.79 Mike Allen, Michelle Obama Has New Warning on Obesity, POLITICO (Dec. 13, 2010,

8:52AM),http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46303.html.80 SeeChristopherGoins,FormerSenateMajorityLeader:ObesityThreatensOurSecurityasa

Nation,CNSNEWS (Nov.29,2011),http://cnsnews.com/news/article/formersenatemajority

leaderobesitythreatensoursecuritynation.81 PressRelease,OfficeoftheFirstLady,FirstLadyMichelleObamaLaunchesLetsMove:

Americas Move to Raise a Healthier Generation of Kids (Feb. 9, 2010), available at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/thepressoffice/firstladymichelleobamalaunchesletsmove

americasmoveraiseahealthiergenera.82 See About BMI for Children and Teens, CTR. FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION,

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/assessing/bmi/childrens_bmi/about_childrens_bmi.html

(lastupdatedSept.13,2011).


12/27



chartedonaBMIforagegrowthcharttodetermineapercentilelevel.83AnyBMInumberabovetheidealBMIforthatchildcategorizeshimorheras overweight, obese, ormorbidly obese depending on the percentile.84

Obesitydiagnosis

begins

with

apercentile

variance

equal

to

or

greater

than the95thpercentile.85While further testsaregenerallynecessary,asBMI fails to take into account variables such asmusclemass andbonestructure,itdoesprovideabaselinefordoctorstodiagnoseobesity.86

The risksofobesity are serious and life threateningshort and longterm.87 Immediate health risks include: high blood pressure andcardiovasculardisease; insulin resistance and type IIdiabetes;breathingproblemssuchassleepapneaandasthma;jointproblems;andavarietyofsocialandpsychologicalissues.88Inaddition,80%ofobeseadolescentswillbecomeobeseadults,89andlikelytodevelopserioushealthconditionssuchasheartdisease,diabetes,andsomecancers.90

B. TheLawsResponsetoChildhoodObesity

Despitewidespread state legislative efforts to combat obesity,91 andcallsforamoreuniformnationalapproach,92courtshavebecomeboththefocusaswellas theeasiestvenue inwhich topursue sucha systematicpolicy foraddressing childhoodobesity.93Courts inCalifornia, Indiana,Iowa,NewMexico,Pennsylvania,Texas,Michigan, andNewYorkhave

83 Id.84 Id.85 Id.86 See National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Aim for a Healthy Weight, NHLBI,

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/obesity/lose_wt/risk.htm#limitations (last

visitedNov.

20,

2012);

cf.

Jason

Koebler,

Study:

American

Obesity

Epidemic

Much

Worse

Than

CDC Believes, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REP. (Apr. 2, 2012), http://www.usnews.com/news/

articles/2012/04/02/studyamericanobesityepidemicmuchworsethancdcbelieves.87 Basics About Childhood Obesity, CTR. FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION,

http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/childhood/basics.html (last updated Apr. 27, 2012) [hereinafter

CDCCHILDHOODOBESITYBASICS].88 Id.89 SeeCherylL.Hayneetal.,RegulatingEnvironmentstoReduceObesity,25J.PUB.HEALTH

POLY391,395(2004).90 SeeNATLINSTS.OFHEALTH,CLINICALGUIDELINESONTHEIDENTIFICATION,EVALUATION,

AND TREATMENTOFOVERWEIGHTANDOBESITY INADULTS: THE EVIDENCEREPORT 1 (1998),

availableathttp://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/obesity/ob_gdlns.pdf.91 SeeKersh&Morone, supranote75, at 853 (citing that, in2004, state lawmakers filed

morethan350billstocombatobesity).92 See,e.g.,LaurenKaplin,ANationalStrategytoCombattheChildhoodObesityEpidemic,15

U.C.DAVISJ.JUV.L.&POLY347,34748(2011);CoylaJ.OConnor,Note,ChildhoodObesityand

StateIntervention:ACalltoOrder!,38STETSONL.REV.131,15859(2008).93 Kersh&Morone,supranote75,at854.


13/27



recognized childhood obesity as a justification warranting stateinterventionintothefamilyunittopreventserioushealthcomplicationsordeath.94Aside fromCalifornia, these states have interpreted their child

neglectstatutes

to

include:

morbid

childhood

obesity,

recognizing

that

the

obesityputsthechildinimminentdangersuchthatthechildisunabletoleadanormallife.95

IntheNewYorkcaseofBrittanyT,a261poundyoungadolescentgirlwhoweighed into the 99th percentile of theBMI for children, the courtfound that the girl suffered from a variety of health issues, includinggallstones,excessivefatinherliver... intermittenthighbloodpressure,pain inher kneejoints, insulin resistance...AcanthosisNigricans, andpsychosocial complications associatedwith obesity.96 The court orderedBrittany tobe removed from the homebased on her parents failure tocomply with court orders requiring them to take her to the gym andparticipateinanutritionandeducationprograms.97

InaNew

Mexico

case,

three

year

old

Anamarie

Martinez

Regio

had

reached aweight of 131 poundswhen the state intervened.98Anamariesuffered from irregularbreathing, a condition that her doctors and theNewMexicoChildren,YouthandFamiliesDepartmentagreedwaslifethreatening and therefore found removalnecessary.99 In Iowa, tenyearoldLizaweighed270pounds,andwasremovedafterthecourtdeterminedthat her obesitywas not only lifethreatening,but also that it interferedwith the childs socialization.100 D.K., a sixteenyearold 451 poundboyfrom Pennsylvaniawith a family history of heart disease,was orderedremoved from his homewhen a physician determined that he sufferedfrom lifethreatening morbid obesity as well as depression and social

94 SeeLindseyMurtagh,RecentDevelopmentsinHealthLaw:JudicialInterventionsforMorbidly

ObeseChildren,35J.L.MED.&ETHICS495,497(2007).95 SeeStephanieSciarani,MorbidChildhoodObesity:ThePressingNeed toExpandStatutory

DefinitionsofChildNeglect,32T.JEFFERSONL.REV.313,314(2010).96 In reBrittanyT., 835N.Y.S.2d 829, 837, 83334 (N.Y.Fam.Ct. 2007) (highlighting the

states interpretation ofmorbid obesity as a form ofneglect).The casewas overturned on

appealdue to thecourts findingthattheparentsdidnotexhibitacontinuous,willfuland

unjustifiable refusal to accept the states recommendations. In reBrittanyT., 852N.Y.S.2d

475,480(N.Y.App.Div.2008)(internalquotationsomitted).97 InreBrittanyT.,835N.Y.S.2dat839.98 Arani,supranote20,at877.99 NickCharles,DesperateMeasure:NewMexicoOfficialsTakeCustodyofa117Pound3Year

Old, ClaimingHer ParentsHave Put TheirDaughtersHealth atRisk, PEOPLE (Sept. 11, 2000)

http://www.people/com/people/archive/article/0,,20132254,00.html.100 InreL.T.,494N.W.2d450,45152(IowaCt.App.1992).Lizasmotherencouragedher

to continue eating as away of copingwith her emotional distress causedbyherparents

divorce. Id.at452.


14/27



isolation.101

Under the legal standard ofmorbid childhood obesity as a form ofneglect,asamatterofbasicneeds,parentsarerequiredtoprovidehealthy

nutritionand

maintain

ahealthy

lifestyle

for

[the]

child

to

protect

that

child

fromthedangersofobesity.102Instatesrecognizingthisformofneglect,aparentwhofailstomeetthesestandardsmaywarrantjudicialinterventioninboth removalof the child from thehome aswell as custodydisputesbetweenparents.103Somecases,includingCorys,involvecriminalchargesbeing filedasa resultof theparents refusal toplace their childrenonastrictdietorwillfulviolationofcourtorderedexerciseornutritionplansresultinginsevereharmtothechild.104

Thus far, judicial intervention in childhood obesity matters hasexplicitly rejected any arguments relating to external factorsbeyond thefamily unit, such as school or social environment, socioeconomic status,andgenetics.105 Instead,courtshave focusedon theparentalobligation to

provideproper

nutrition

and

medical

care,

and

the

willful

disregard

of

both the dangers of obesity and the effortsby community services andsocialworkers toassist the family innutritioneducation.106Thus, severalcourtsdeemedthatremovalwasproperwheretheparentsnotonlyfailedtotakeanactiveroleinthehealthoftheirchild,butfurthermore,willfullyor deliberately disregarded the educational and therapeutic courtintervention.107

These courts approach to parental responsibility was furtheremphasized in a wellpublicized lawsuit against McDonaldsCorporation.108InPelmanv.McDonaldsCorp.,aU.S.FederalDistrictCourtjudgedismissedallclaimsagainstthefastfoodchaininalawsuitbroughtonbehalfofoverweightminors inNewYork.109 In theopinion, thecourtdistinguishedbetweenan individualsownresponsibility to takecareofherself,andsocietysresponsibility toensure thatothersshieldher[]by

101 InreD.K.,58Pa.D.&C.4th353,355(C.P.NorthumberlandCnty.2002).102 GaiaBernstein&ZviTriger,OverParenting,44U.C.DAVISL.REV.1221,126061(2011).103 See,e.g.,AshbyJones&ShirleyWang,ObesityFuelsCustodyFights,THEWALLSTREET

JOURNAL (Oct. 29, 2011),

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204294504576613100908629810.html.104 See,e.g.,InreG.C.,66S.W.3d517,520(Tex.App.2002);Kelley,supranote1,at78.105 See Abigail Darwin, Childhood Obesity: Is it Abuse?, CHILDRENS VOICE,

http://www.cwla.org/voice/0807obesity.htm(lastvisitedJuly20,2012).106 Seee.g.,InreL.T.,494N.W.2d450,452(IowaCt.App.1992);Kelley,supranote1;Deena

Patel,Note,SuperSizedKids:Using theLaw toCombatMorbidObesity inChildren,43FAM.CT.

REV.164,171(2005).107 Seesupranotes96101.108 Pelmanv.McDonaldsCorp.,237F.Supp.2d512(S.D.N.Y.2003).109 Id.at543.


15/27



stating thatit isnot theplaceof the law toprotect [an individual] fromtheirownexcesses.110Thus,despitethefactthatMcDonaldsspendssome$627.2millionondirectmediaadvertising,often targetingchildren,111 the

courtconcluded

that

the

parents

decision

to

eat

and

to

feed

their

children

thefastfoodwasachoicefreelymadeandwhich...maynotbepinnedonMcDonalds.112

ANALYSIS

III.BringingtheObesityProblemHome:ItsaParentingProblemA. SecondhandObesityStemsfromParentingChoicesandConstitutes

Neglect

Given thewidespreadawarenessabout theharmsofobesityand theincreaseincommunityeffortstoassistineducationandweightlossefforts,thecausesofobesityhavebegun to turn inwardon the familyunit,evenfor themostvulnerablemembersof society.113 This isbecauseobesity ispreventable114the fundamentalcauseofobesity is the imbalancebetweencaloricintakeandcaloricexpenditure.115Whilemanyenvironmentalfactorsmay contribute to obesity, the single most compelling and destructiveinfluence on the rate of childhood obesity is the home environment.116Studiesshowthatparentalrolemodelingaroundfoodchoicesandlifestyle

110 Id.at533(Evenmorepertinent,nobodyisforcedtosupersizetheirmealorchooseless

healthyoptionsonthemenu.).111 AshleyB.Antler,TheRoleofLitigationinCombatingObesityAmongPoorUrbanMinority

Youth:ACriticalAnalysisofPelmanv.McDonaldsCorp.,15CARDOZOJ.L.&GENDER275,284

85(2009).

112 Pelman,237F.Supp.2dat533.113 SeeBernstein&Triger,supranote102(arguingthatlawsresponse,bytreatingobesity

asaformofmedicalneglect,isanacknowledgementthatthescopeanddireconsequencesof

childhoodobesityareamatterofcommonknowledge,andtherefore,responsibility);Lindsey

Murtagh&DavidS.Ludwig,StateInterventioninLifeThreateningObesity,306JAMA206,207

(2011) (Insevere instancesofchildhoodobesity,removal from thehomemaybejustifiable

froma legalstandpointbecauseof imminenthealthrisksand theparentschronic failure to

addressmedicalproblems.).114 WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, OBESITY AND OVERWEIGHT (2012), available at

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/.115 Id.116 See,e.g.,CherylGeorge,ParentsSuperSizingTheirChildren:CriminalizingandProsecuting

theRisingIncidenceofChildhoodObesityAsChildAbuse,13DEPAULJ.HEALTHCAREL.273,290

(2010)(Parentshaveacriticalroleinpreventionbecausechildhoodobesitystartsathome.);

ChristieWilcox, Is ChildhoodObesity the Parents Fault?,NUTRITIONWONDERLAND (Jan. 14,

2010), http://nutritionwonderland.com/2010/01/childhoodobesitylunchparents (Any

nutritionistwill tell you that healthy eating starts at home, and that is exactlywhere the

problemnowliesfortheworldschildren.).


16/27



habits have the greatest influence on childhood obesity.117 Children aredependent on their parents for basic nutritional needs, and, especiallychildren likeCorywho faceobesity issuesas toddlers,havenochoiceor

controlover

their

own

food

choices.

118

New studies suggest that despite the clear societal shift andcommunityefforts,amajorityofparentsunderestimatetheirchildsweightand do not believe their child is obese.119 As a result, family patternsaround eating, snacking, and exercising create a miniculture in thefamily,wherethechildlivesandlearnstoemulatethepooreatinghabitsoftheirparents.120Despitemisplacedblameonschools,childrengainmoreweightduring the summer than the school year, and in addition,manyyoungchildrenarenotyetexposedtotheschoolenvironmentbeforetheirobesityissuesbegin.121

This phenomenon, Secondhand obesity, recognizes the strongcorrelationbetweenparentalfailuretonotonlyaddressonesownobesity

issues,but

further,

they

neglect

the

health

and

obesity

issues

of

the

child

as

well,settingthechildupforalifetimeofhealthcomplications.122Childrenarenotbornwithpooreatinghabits;rather,theyacquire them fromtheirparents.123Eightypercentofchildrenareobesewhenatleastoneparentisobese,whileonlytenpercentofchildrenareobesewhenneitherparentisobese.124Parentslosingweightthemselvesisthemostimportantpredictorofchildweight loss.125Whereaparent isunwillingorunable toaddress

117 George,supranote116.118 SeeKelley,supranote1,at89.119 SeeDe LaOA et al.,Do ParentsActually Perceive TheirChildsWeight Status?, 23J.

PEDIACTRICHEALTHCARE216,216 (2008) (finding that75%ofchildrenwithaBMIbetween

the85th

and

95th

percentile

where

thought

by

parents

to

be

about

right

or

underweight).

120 George,supranote116,at290,31011;Patel,supranote106,at166.121 PaulTvonHippeletal.,TheEffect ofSchool onOverweight inChildhood:Gain inBody

MassIndexDuringtheSchoolYearandDuringSummerVacation,97AM.J.PUB.HEALTH696,698

(2007).122 See NAAO MISSION STATEMENT, NATIONAL ACTION AGAINST OBESITY,

http://www.actionagainstobesity.com/NationalActionAgainstObesity/NAAO.html (last

visitedJuly20,2012)(Letsfinallyrecognizeobesityasabuseabuseofourchildren,abuse

ofourselves....)(internalquotationsomitted).123 SeeGeorge,supranote116,at290,31011.124 Darwin,supranote105.125 SeeHealthDay,ParentsShouldLeadByExample inWeightLoss,StudyFinds,USNEWS

(Mar. 22, 2012), http://health.usnews.com/healthnews/news/articles/2012/03/22/parents

shouldleadbyexampleinweightlossstudyfinds (Parentsare themostsignificantpeople

in a childs environment, serving as the first and most important teachers.) (internal

quotationsomitted);UCSanDiegoHealthSystem,How toBestHelpYourChildLoseWeight:

LoseWeightYourself (March14,2012),http://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/Pages/20120314

parentsweightlossandchildhoodobesity.aspx (citing a recent study finding that parents


17/27



theirownnutritionalneeds,theyareinessencedeprivingthechildofthosenutritionalneedsaswell,whichistheverydefinitionofneglect.126

While genetics may contribute to childhood obesity, only a small

percentageof

childhood

obesity

cases

are

associated

with

genetic

or

hormonaldefect.127Furthermore,aphysicalexaminationorbloodtestscanusually rule out the likelihood that being overweight is caused by amedicalcondition.128Inthecasesofstate interventionforobesitythusfar,allchildrenwereunderclosesupervisionofadoctorpriortoremoval,andin at leastone case, the court specifically refers to the fact that the childunderwenta thoroughmedicalexaminationwhich revealednophysicalcauseforherobesity.129Forthevastmajorityofchildren,properdietandexercise can usually temper genetics and help themmaintain a healthyweight.130

Since childhood obesity stems from parenting choices it constitutesneglect.131As dangerous as starving a child to near death or repeatedly

exposingachild

to

your

secondhand

smoke,

the

toxic

effects

of

overfeeding a child to the point of lifethreatening ailments and poorsocializationrequiresstateintervention.132Thestatehasthedutytoprotectthe childwhen such severe harm occurs as a result of the chronic andrepeatedbehavioroftheparentsinfailingtoappreciateboththegravityoftheimmediatesituationaswellasthelifetimeofhealthproblemstheyaresettingtheirchildrenupfor.133

B. AParentingProblem,NotaPovertyProblem

Poverty isnoexcusetophysicallyabuseachild134orsexuallyabusea

losingweight themselves is themost importantpredicatorof childweight loss) (internal

quotationsomitted).126 SeeInreD.K.,58Pa.D.&C.4th353,360(C.P.NorthumberlandCnty.2002).(Shehas

been unable to maintain her own health by addressing her own obesity problem, and

therefore it ishighlyunlikely that shewillnowbe able todo sowith regard toher sons

identical problem.); See George, supra note 116, at 290, 31011 (arguing that parental

participationinnutritionisthekeytochildhoodnutrition).127 RebeccaMoran,EvaluationandTreatmentofChildhoodObesity,59AM.FAM.PHYSICIAN

861 (1999), available athttp://www.aafp.org/afp/1999/0215/p861.html (showing that less than

10%ofthecasesofchildhoodobesityarecausedbygeneticpredispositions).128 Patel,supranote106,at166.129 See,e.g.,InreL.T.,494N.W.2d450,452(IowaCt.App.1992).130 Darwin,supranote105.131 Seesupranotes113120.

132 Seesupranotes4654.133 SeesupraPartI.134 Cf.P.R.v.Com.,Dept. ofPub.Welfare, 801A.2d 478, 479 (Pa. 2002) (Child abuse

occurs where the child suffers a serious injury that cannotbe explained as accidental.)


18/27



child.135Itismorethanjust...povertywhenaparentallowstheirchildtobehungryandunclothed,torunaroundwithinfectedwounds,andtohaveobviousseriousphysicalconditionssuchasdeafnesstogoundetected

anduntreated.

136Poverty

is

no

defense

to

just

not

caring

how

your

childrenarebeingraisedorwhattheyarebeingexposedto.137

Althoughneglect isevidencedby failure toprovidepropernutrition,shelter,clothing,ormedicalcare,povertyalone isaninsufficientbasisforadjudicatingneglect.138Familiesevenwithminimalincomearestillcapableofprovidinglove,affection,andemotionalconsistency,andcourtsseektorecognize[] the distinction between economic and emotionalimpoverishment.139 Thus, state intervention focuses strictly on parentalomissionsincare;circumstancesthatareattributablesolelytopovertyareexcluded.140On theotherhand,where theparenthas theability, throughreasonableeffort,toovercometheeffectsofpoverty,courtswillrecognizethatthedeprivation isnotdueto theparentspoverty.141Thus,because

lack

of

financial

resources

is

not

considered

as

the

cause

of

deprivation,

families at all income levels are legally responsible for providing therequisiteeconomicandmaterialneedsofthechild.142

Whilechildhoodobesityisanepidemicthatplaguesallsocioeconomiclevels, theproblem ismoreprevalentamongstminority and lowincome

(internalcitationomitted).135 SeeJeffreyJ.Haugaard,CharacteristicsofChildMaltreatmentDefinitions:The Influenceof

ProfessionalandSocialValues,inCHILDABUSEANDNEGLECT49,58(MargaretM.Feericketal.

eds.,2006) ([I]fabehaviorbetweenachildandanolder individual isconsideredsexual, it

canbeconsideredabusive.).136 SeeV.S.v.Com.,CabinetforHumanRes.,706S.W.2d420,424(Ky.Ct.App.1986).

137 Div.of

Youth

&

Family

Services

v.

K.C.,

2006

WL

3328348

at

*3

(N.J.

Super.

Ct.

App.

Div.Nov.17,2006).138 SeeStateexrelJohnson,175P.2d486,489(Utah1946);InreRaya,63Cal.Rptr.252,256

57(Cal.App.1967).139 See Donald C. Bross, Defining Child Abuse and Neglect From A Legal Perspective, in

FOUNDATIONSOFCHILDADVOCACY71,78(DonaldC.Bross&LauraFreemanMichaels,eds.,

1987);T.S.v.State,Dept.ofHealth&Rehab.Servs.,464So.2d677,684 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.

1985)(Parentalrightstochildrenshouldnotbeforfeitedmerelybecauseoftheindigencyof

theparent.);InreT.G.,684A.2d786,789(D.C.1996)([T]herelevantfocusforthecourtin

neglectproceedings is the childrens condition,notparentalculpability.) (internalcitations

omitted).140 SeeDubowitz,supranote37,at108.141 See,e.g.,InreA.H.,842A.2d674,687(D.C.2004).142 SeeKindred, supra note 55, at 520 (As amatter of social and economic policy, the

family is regarded not only as the appropriate institution for provision of the love and

affection necessary for the proper development of the child, but also as the institution

responsibleforprovisionoftheeconomicandmaterialneedsofthechild.)(internalcitations

omitted).


19/27



children.143As a result,many theories on unfavorable influences havebeen developed to explain why lowincome and minority populationssufferfromchildhoodobesity,andthus,whypolicyeffortsshoulddisplace

judicialintervention

in

cases

of

childhood

obesity.

144For

instance,

communityenvironments, suchaszoning, recreation facilitiesandparks,transportationoptions,andcrimerates,havebeencitedasacontributortochildhoodobesity.145

Thedecision tobear childrenand theobligation toprovide thebasicneedsof the child isamatterofpersonaland legal responsibility, ratherthan a social entitlement.146 Placing blame on external environmentalfactorsfurtherperpetuatestheobesitycrisisbyignoringthetruerootoftheproblemchildhoodobesity is a resultofpoorparenting in thehome.147Consistentwithcourtrulingsonchildhoodobesityasneglect,due to theinhome parental omission in care causing the obesity, environmentalinfluences attributable to poverty are properly excluded.148 While

government

should

be

encouraged

to

continue

to

improve

the

social

responsetotheobesitycrisis,sucheffortsdonotdisplacetheobligationofallparentstocareandprotecttheirchildrenfromharm.149

143 ShirikiKumanyikia&SonyaGrier,TargetingInterventionsforEthnicMinorityandLow

Income Populations, 16 THE FUTURE OF CHILD. 187, 188 (2006), available at

http://www.futureofchildren.org/futureofchildren/publications/docs/16_01_09.pdf.144 SeeErikaB.Navarro,Note,NoSuchThingasFreeLunch:SupplementingFederalNutrition

Laws toEffectivelyCombatObesity inMinorityandLowIncomeChildren,9RUTGERSRACE&L.

REV. 365, 402 (2008) (Regulating advertisements, enacting zoning ordinances, and

revitalizingneighborhoods

offer

additional,

targeted

approaches

for

dealing

with

childhood

obesity....).145 Seeid.146 SeeMaherv.Roe,432U.S.464,47274 (1977) (holding thatalthough the statecannot

createobstaclesthatpreventawomanfromobtaininganabortion,thereisnoobligationonthe

state toprovide the funds forindigentchildbirthsorabortions) (emphasisadded);Troxelv.

Granville,530U.S.57,6566(2000)(Itiscardinalwithusthatthecustody,careandnurtureof

thechildresidefirstintheparents,whoseprimaryfunctionandfreedomincludepreparation

forobligationsthestatecanneithersupplynorhinder.(quotingPrincev.Massachusetts,321

U.S.158,166(1994))(internalquotationsomitted).147 SeeDebraGoldman,ConsumerRepublic:CommonSenseMayNotBeMcDonaldsAllyfor

Long, ADWEEK (Dec. 2, 2002), available at http://www.cengage.com/custom

/enrichment_modules/data/Fast_Food_0495489662_Gale_watermark.pdf (citing parents

failuretotakeresponsibilityforalifetimeofchowingdownHappyMealsasyetanother

symptomofthedeclineofpersonalresponsibilityandtheriseofthecultofvictimhood).148 SeeDubowitz,supranote37,at108.149 SeeMurtagh&Ludwig,supranote113,at20607.


20/27



C. LimitedAccesstoHealthyFoodandDietaryInstructioncanbeOvercomeThroughReasonableEfforts

While a fastfood meal is less expensive than many other diningexperiences, there are similarlypriced alternatives available for parentsfromwhichtochoose.150Indeed,recentstudiesshowthatexpensemaynotbethecaseitismoreamatteroftakingthetimetoparentandprepareahomecookedmealrather than settling for thequickandeasyalternativethat the children wont complain about.151 Feeding a family of four atMcDonaldscostsabout$28:[T]woBigMacs,acheeseburger,sixchickenMcNuggets, twomediumand twosmall fries,and twomediumand twosmall sodas.152Compare this to thecostofpurchasinga roastedchickenwithwith vegetables andmilk, feeding a family of four to six people:About $14.153 Given the adverse nutritional effects of fast food onchildhoodobesity,parentswhocitelackoftimeandaccesstoresourcesasthe excuse to repeatedly overfeeding their children fast foodmeals are

neglectingboth thebasicnutritionalneedsof their child aswell as theircontractual obligation to the state to guide, protect, and support thechild.154

Thus, while some argue that families shouldbe entitled to greaterbenefitsinordertofeedtheirchildrenhealthyfood,claimingthatfastfoodisall that theycanafford, this isnot thecase.155Further, implementingasystem that imposes on the government the obligation to fund greaterbenefitstosomeinordertoexercisetheirparentingrightswouldopenthedoor for amultitude of system abuseswithoutprotecting children fromharm.156Even if extremepoverty is thegenuine reason contributing to a

150 E.g.,

Stepfanie

Romine,

$20

Food

Showdown:

Fast

Food

v.

Healthy

Food,

DAILYSPARK

(Jan.

3, 2011, 10:42 AM),

http://www.dailyspark.com/blog.asp?post=what_20_will_buy_at_the_drivethru_and_at_the_s

upermarket.151 SeeMarkBittman, IsJunkFoodReallyCheaper?,N.Y.TIMES (Sept.24,2011),availableat

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/opinion/sunday/isjunkfoodreally

cheaper.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all.The food thatparentspurchaseand that childrenhave

access towillalsoaffect theeatinghabitsofchildren, includingportioncontrol.SeeCaraB.

Ebbeling et al., Compensationfor Energy Intake from Fast FoodAmong Overweight and Lean

Adolescents,291JAMA2828,2833(2004);George,supranote116,at290.152 Bittman,supranote151.153 Id.154 Seesupranote22andaccompanyingtext.155 SeeKindred,supranote55,at53536;Cf.OConnor,supranote92,at140;156 See Kindred, supra note 55, at 521 ([P]revailing constitutional doctrine does not

recognize a right of families to state assistance, evenwhen such assistance is necessary to

protectandmaintain family integrity.);V.S.v.Com.,Cabinet forHumanRes.,706S.W.2d

420, 424 (Ky.Ct.App. 1986) ([T]he childrenwereexploited.Hundredsofdollars came to


21/27



childs obesity, this is theminority of situations.157Reasonable efforts toovercometheeffectsofpovertytakingthetimetopurchaseandcookthehealthy alternatives and resisting quick and unhealthy temptations158

shouldbe

employed

before

government

funding

is

further

invoked.

159

The law of neglect is meant to distinguish between emotionalconsistencyandparentaldutieson theonehandandparentalculpabilityontheother;courtinterventionisfocusedonrehabilitatingandeducatingboth thechildand the family,rather thansimplypunishing theparent.160Thus,where any case of neglect is suspected, socialworkers assist thefamily through therapeuticmeasures to remedy the issues thatcause theomissionincarebeforeseekingtoremovethechild.161Childhoodobesityisno differentcases show that early intervention has involved thedevelopment of inhome delivery of service, including nutritionists andhomemakers,162 and individualized diet and exercise plans under thedirection of a nurse.163 These effortsminimize the effects of poverty,by

reducing

the

overwhelming

demands

on

the

family

and

providing

supportivecasework.164

themintheformoffoodstampsalone;yetthechildrenwerenotfedandwenthungry.).157 Onesuchinstancemaybeifasupermarketislocatedatsuchadistancethattravelingto

itrequiresincurringsubstantialtransportationcosts.SeeAntler,supranote111,at283.158 The trendsofeatingoutandgreateraccess to televisionhaveaffected thegrowth in

obesity,whereas familieswhoeatdinner togetherdecrease televisionviewingand improve

diet quality. SeeMatthewW. Gillman et al., Family Dinner and Diet QualityAmong Older

ChildrenandAdolescents,9ARCHFAM.MED.235,235(2000).159 Access to healthy food markets in lowincome communities is more limited than

affluentcommunities.SeeEditorial,Obesity:ChildrenObeseDuetoaHostofUnhealthyPressures,

OBESITY

&

DIABETES

WEEK,

Oct.

8,

2007,

at

7

(highlighting

a

statistically

significant

associationbetween the availability of supermarkets and lower adolescent and overweight

status).Althoughputting in the timeandeffort toput foodon the tablemaybeeasier for

someparents than forothers, foralmostallparents itstillremainsachoice,andone that is

legallyrequiredtoprotectthechildfromneglect.SeegenerallyBittman,supranote151.160 InreT.G.,684A.2d786,789(D.C.1996)([T]herelevantfocusforthecourtinneglect

proceedingsisthechildrenscondition,notparentalculpability.).161 SeeDarwin,supranote105.162 See,e.g.,InreG.C.,66S.W.3d517,521(Tex.App.2002).163 SeeJennaT.Hayes&LorieL.Sicafuse,IsChildhoodObesityaFormofChildAbuse?Factors

toConsiderinJudicialRulings,94JUDICATURE20,20(2010).164 See Cynthia R.Mabry, Second Chances: Insuring That Poor Families Remain Intact by

MinimizingSocioeconomicRamificationsofPoverty,102W.VA.L.REV.607,63334(2000)

Inadditiontotheusualsupportservicesintheareasofhousing,daycare,

transportation, education, and job training, poor parents may need

assistance to address certain social problems . . . . Several basic

approachescanbeused to improve (their)parenting function:eliminate

or diminish social or environmental stresses, reduce demands on the


22/27



Where these voluntary efforts fail or the neglect does not improve,caseworkers turn to thecourts toobtainacourtorder,which imposesonthe family theobligation toattend certainprogramsorengage in certain

activities.165In

cases

of

childhood

obesity,

the

court

may

order

the

parent

and child to attend nutrition classes,166 weekly counseling,167 parentingclasses,168 and local fitness centers.169While attendance and compliancewith these orders aremandatory, [a] parents successful rehabilitationefforts will strongly support a defense against termination of parentalrights.170Furthermore,manyof theseparentingprograms areofferedatnocost.171Wherea fee is involved, thosewho fallbelow thepoverty linequalify forMedicaid coverage172andmayalsoapply fora feewaiver forcourtorderedservices.173

Giventhegravehealthrisksthatanobesechildfaces,theycannotbekept in suspense indefinitely.174 When it becomes apparent that theparent cannot or will not discharge parental responsibilities,...

termination

proceedings

should

be

commenced.175

Where

parental

rights

havebeenterminatedincasesofobesity,ithasbeentheresultofawillfulfailureor inability to correct theproblemviolatingadietplan indirect

mothertoalevelwithinhercapacity(throughchilddaycareplacements,

homemakers, baby sitters), provide emotional support, sympathy,

parentingeducation, supportive casework,andresolveordiminish the

innerpsychicconflict.

Id.

165 SeeWEISZ, supranote 22,at121. In casesof secondhand smoke, for instance, a court

ordermayobligatethe family tostopsmoking in thechildspresence.SeeRalphH.v.State

Dept.ofHealth&Soc.Servs.,255P.3d1003,1006(Alaska2011).166 See,e.g.,InreL.T.,494N.W.2d450,452(IowaCt.App.1992).167 Seeid.at451.168 See,e.g.,InreBrittanyT.,835N.Y.S.2d829,83132(N.Y.Fam.Ct.2007).169 See,e.g.,idat831.170 Mabry,supranote164,at649.171 See,e.g.,U.S.DEPARTMENTOFJUSTICE,PRENATALANDEARLYCHILDHOODNURSEHOME

VISITATION 2, 5, available at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/172875.pdf. This program also

offersfreetransportationservices.Id.172 SeeMabry,supranote164,at642(TheMedicaidsystemcoversarangeofphysicaland

mentalmedicalservicesthatany[lowincome]family[]wouldneed.).173 Inmost states, familiesmay also file a Motion for FeeWaiver of Family Services

requestingthatthestatepayforthoseservicesthatrequireafeeduetotheparentsindigency.

See, e.g., Circuit Court for Calvert County, Family Services,

http://www.courts.state.md.us/clerks/calvert/familyservices.html(lastvisitedJuly20,2012).174 Champagnev.WelfareDiv.oftheNev.StateDeptofHumanRes.,691P.2d849,857

(Nev.1984).175 Mabry,supranote164,at650(internalquotationsomitted).


23/27



disregardofdoctorsorders,176choosingnottoscheduleanynutritionalorlifestyle therapy requirements,177 or hostility towards nutritionist andhomemaker involvement.178Through reasonableefforts,mostparentsare

capableof

making

the

commitment

to

get

the

help

that

they

need

to

remedytheobesityand,therefore,neglect.179 Evenpoorparentshaveanobligation to take responsibility foraccessing servicesand resources thatareavailableforsatisfyingtheirchildrensneeds.180

IV.TheBestInterestsoftheChildStandardJustifiesRemovalWhereReasonableEffortsFailWhendeterminingwhetherornotremovalisinthebestinterestofthe

child, considerationmustbe given towhether removal from theparentscarehabituallyputsthechildatgreaterriskofharm.181Ifremovalofthechild from thehomedoesnot further itspurposeofprotecting thesafetyandwelfareofthechild,thenthestateisneitheractinginthechildsbest

interest,nor.

..properly

fulfilling

its

parens

patraie

role.

182The

preferred

andleast intrusiveformofintervention isusuallytoprovideassistancetothe child within the family.183 However, where reasonable efforts areemployed toprevent removal,and thechild isstillatgreatriskofharm,removalmaybe theonlyoption toensure theprotectionof thechildandfulfillthestatesobligationtoprotectthatchild.184

The advantages of state intervention and removal on the physicalhealth of the child are vast.185When the child is taken out of the toxic

176 See,e.g.,Kelley,supranote1,at8(showingthatCorysparentsfedthechildfastfoodin

thehospital,indirectviolationofthedietplan).177

See,e.g.,

Inre

L.T.,

494

N.W.2d

450,

452

(Iowa

Ct.

App.

1992)

(Under

her

mothers

care,

Lizahasfailedtoloseweightandhasfailedtoattenddietaryclasses.).178 See,e.g.,InreG.C.,66S.W.3d517,521(Tex.App.2002)(Initially,[protectiveservices]

attempted tohelpAppellantbybringing ina homemaker tobearolemodel toAppellant,

referringAppellanttoFamilyServicesforparentingclasses,andprovidingAppellantwitha

service plan.However, after Appellantbecame noncompliant, [family services]moved to

terminateAppellantsparentalrights.);Kelley,supranote1,at8(showingthatCorysparents

deliberatelydisregardeddoctorsorders and also complained aboutanurse assisting them

withnutrition).179 See,e.g.,Mabry,supranote164,at650.180 Id.at649;seeInreJamieM.,472N.E.2d311,313(N.Y.1984).181 SeeKindred,supranote55,at535.182 Id.183 Id.at53536.184 SeeGeorge,supranote116,at6566(Manycourtcasesareknownforsettingprecedent

in establishingguidelines forotheronlookers andmembersofour community as towhat

behaviorsocietywillnottolerate.).185 SeePatel,supranote106,at169(explainingthattheresultoftheremovaliscommonly


24/27



environmentandplacedona strictexerciseanddietregimen, the resultshave been very positive.186 Even temporary removal from the homeenvironmenthas resulted in significantweight lossanddiminishmentof

thelife

threatening

conditions

caused

by

the

obesity.

187Intervention

at

an

early age into the physical activity of the child results in less fat celldevelopmentandfuturepositivebenefitsofexercising.188Theresultsonthescalealoneweight that theywouldnothave losthad theybeenkept intheir normal householdsprotects the dangerously obese child fromfurtherphysicalharm.189

Bybreakingthecycleofpoorhabits,removalmayalsohelptoaddresstheminiculturewithinthehome.190 Inissuingadispositionthatisinthebest interest of the child, ajudgemay condition the release of the childback to the family on the familys improvement of the homeenvironment.191Removalwouldhelpparentstonotonlyaddresstheirownnutritional needs,but also to take seriously the nutritional needs of the

child.192

Furthermore,

services

provided

to

the

child

in

foster

care

help

them to learn a new lifestyle and develop healthy eating and exercisehabits that can be integrated with their own family environment orcontinuedwiththeirfosterfamily.193

There are alsomanymental and emotional health improvementsbyremoving the child from parental control.194 Indeed, the psychologicaleffects of childhood and lifelong obesity are alsowell documented and

favorable).186 SeeMurtagh, supranote 94, at 498 (citing immediateweight loss as an advantageof

court intervention). For example, D.K., the sixteenyearold, 451 pound boy from

Pennsylvania,lostoverfiftypounds in less than threemonths. InreD.K.,58Pa.D.&C.4th

353,

355

(2002).

187 See,e.g.,Kelley,supranote1,at78(explainingthatCorylostalmostathirdofhisbody

weightinfostercareandhishealthissuesdiminished).188 SeeGeorge,supranote116,at307.189 Patel,supranote106,at169.190 Moran,supranote127;George,supranote116,at31011.191 SeePatel,supranote106,at169(explainingthatinonecase,thefamilywasrequiredto

createahomeenvironmentwherethechildexerciseddailyandlimitedhercaloricintake to

800caloriesperday);Kelley,supranote1,at9.192 SeePatel,supranote106,at173(Ifmorbidchildobesity istakenseriously,andthere

are severe consequences, such as education, removal, or prosecution, then parentswillbe

morelikelytoproactivelyhelptheirchildrenloseweight.).193 See,e.g., InreD.K.,58Pa.D.&C.4th353,355 (2002) (explaining thatD.K. learned in

fostercaretoexercise30minutesperday,ahabitheplannedtocontinuewithhisfamily).194 See,e.g., InreL.T.,494N.W.2d450,452 (IowaCt.App.1992) (Thecourtdetermined

Lizarequiredimmediatetreatmenttocureoralleviateherseriousmentalillnessoremotional

damage as evidencedby her depression andwithdrawal. . . . [I]f Liza receives longterm

residentialtreatment,[herpsychiatrist]hasstatedLizasprognosisisexcellent.).


25/27



longlastingforthechild.195Obesechildrenaremorelikelytohavelowselfesteem and suffer from depression; as a result these children are oftenlinked to lower academic achievement and social functioning.196 Social

stigmaassociated

with

the

obesity

is

also

extremely

prevalentchildren

ages three to eleven associateunhappiness, laziness, and lacking friendswith obesity.197 The psychological stress of low selfesteem and socialstigma in childhood can persist into adulthood, hindering social andeconomicsuccess.Ultimately,personswhoareobeseinchildhoodreceivelesseducation,arelesslikelytomarry,andhavehigherpovertyrates.198

While thedetrimentalpsychologicaleffectsofplacingachild instatecustodyrarelyjustifies theremoval,achildfacingashortened lifespanoreven death due to the neglect of his parents warrants judicialintervention.199Inbalancingthephysiologicaleffectsofchildremovalfromthe home against the psychological effects of lifelong obesity and thephysical dangers associated with obesity, state interventionalthough

harmfulis

necessary

to

protect

the

best

interests

of

the

child.200

Removal

mayresult in increasedanxiety201andfamilystigmatization,202which leadsometotheconclusionthattheremustbeabetterwaytotreattheobesityand prevent removal.203 However, alternatives to removal, such asincreased funding or legislative efforts, do not prevent the cause of theremovaltheparentswillfulchoicenottoparticipateinparentingservicesoraddressthenutritionalneedsoftheirchild.204

195 SeeCDCCHILDHOODOBESITYBASICS, supranote87 (Obesechildrenandadolescents

haveagreaterriskofsocialandpsychologicalproblems,suchasdiscriminationandpoorself

esteem,whichcancontinueintoadulthood.).196 Hayes&Sicafuse,supranote163,at22.197

SeeJody

A.

Brylinskey

&

James

C.

Moore,

The

Identification

of

Body

Build

Stereotypes

in

YoungChildren,28J.RES.PERSONALITY170,175(1994).198 Hayes&Sicafuse,supranote163,at22(internalcitationomitted).199 See, e.g.,LoriLeibovich,Death of aFatGirl: IsChristinaCorrigansMother onTrialfor

Neglect or for Having an Obese Child, SALON, Sept. 22, 1997,

http://www.salon.com/1997/09/22/obese970922/(describingthetragicstoryof ChristinaAnn

Corrigan,athirteenyearoldgirlwhoweighed685poundswhenshediedasaresultofhealth

complications); Patel, supranote 106, at 166 (citing the storyofDannyHickey, amorbidly

obesesevenyearoldboywhoweighed155poundswhenhedied fromheart failurecaused

byhisobesity).200 SeeKelley,supranote1,at8,9.201 SeeOConnor,supranote92,at132.202 Id.at15253([O]urlegalsystempurportstocareaboutchildren....Yet,inourefforts

tohelpchildren,weoftencondemntheirparents....Whatwefailtorecognizeisthatbythese

same actions, we deprive children of something that they also cherish and need their

families.).203 Id.at132;Kindred,supranote55,at535.204 SeesupraPartII.B.


26/27



Treating childhood obesity as a form of neglect allows the court toaddresstheindividualneedsofeachfamilyunitinrelationtothecausesoftheneglectif theneglectcanbe remediedbyproviding the familywith

parenting,therapy,

or

nutrition

services,

then

early

court

intervention

and

parentalparticipationwillpreventremoval.205However,iftheneglectisaresultoftheparentswillfulfailuretocorrecttheproblem,thestatehasadutytoensurethatthechildreceivesthenecessaryservices,fromhealthydietandexercise206 tooutpatientpsychotherapy,207 inorder toprotect thechildfromchronicphysicalandemotionalriskordeath.208Sincechildhoodobesitystemsfromparentingchoices,courtinterventionsendsthemessagetoallparentsandpotentialparents that theywillbeheldaccountable forthe nutritional needs of the child.209While removal and termination ofparental rights need not be exercised in every instance of childhoodobesity, it shouldremainanoption forjudgeswhodetermine that,giventhe factsandcircumstancessurrounding theneglect,reasonableefforts tokeepthe familytogetherhavefailedandremoval is inthebest interestofprotectingthechildfromharm.210

CONCLUSION

Childhood obesity is a serious and lifethreatening condition thataffects thephysicalandemotionalwellbeingof thechild,andplaces thechild at risk of significant harm. However, childhood obesity ispreventable, and the cure starts at the home. Parents must takeresponsibility for the nutritional needs of their children to prevent theonset of childhood obesity. Over time, government can reduce stateintervention into cases of childhood obesity by raising awareness andaddressing thesocietal influencesonobesity.However,where theparentfailstoprotectthechildfromtheharmsofobesity,itconstitutesneglect.

Thestatehasthedutytoprotectthechildfromsignificantharmwherethe parent is unwilling or unable to do so. Given that obesity stemspredominately from the home environment, the statemust ensure thatchildren are being protected from the harm by early intervention andworkingwith the families to solve the neglect.Where a parent, at anysocioeconomiclevel,willfullydisregardstheirchildsobesityproblemsand

205 SeesupraPartI.C.206 SeesupraPartI.C.207 SeesupraPartII.C.208 SeesupraPartI.B.209 George,supranote116,at307.210 SeeKelley,supranote1,at10(Thestatesinterestwillbecomecompellingenoughto

severtheparentchildrelationshiponlywhenthechildissubjectedtorealphysicalemotional

harmandlessdrasticmeasureswouldbeunavailing.).


27/27



thestatesefforts,thestatemayproperlystep inunderestablishedneglectprecedenttoensurethatthechilddoesnotfacefurtherharmorevendeath.Havingachildimposesnotonlymanyrightsbutalsoduties.Byenforcing

thechildhood

obesity

standard

of

neglect

requires

parents

to

step

up

to

the

plateandloveandnurturetheirchildbyprovidingthesebasicnutritionalneeds.

Documents

Anderson: The Family that Eats Together, Stays Together