The government should have the right to remove severely obese children from their parents' home and place them in foster care, two US doctors argued in a controversial editorial published Wednesday.
"State intervention may serve the best interests of many children with life-threatening obesity, comprising the only realistic way to control harmful behaviors," wrote Lindsey Murtagh of the Harvard School of Public Health and David Ludwig of Children's Hospital in Boston.
"In severe instances of childhood obesity, removal from the home may be justifiable from a legal standpoint because of imminent health risks and the parents' chronic failure to address medical problems."
Some two million children in the United States are considered severely obese with a body mass index at or above the 99th percentile, the doctors wrote.
"Obesity of this magnitude can cause immediate and potentially irreversible consequences, most notably type 2 diabetes," they said.
Child abuse laws have long addressed situations in which children are starved or neglected, but "only a handful of states, including California, Indiana, Iowa, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas, have legal precedent for applying this framework to overnourishment and severe obesity."
Murtagh, who is also a lawyer by training, and Ludwig said that while it may be an undesirable option, placing a child in temporary foster care could allow better habits to take root and avoid the risks of weight loss surgery.
"Although removal of the child from the home can cause families great emotional pain, this option lacks the physical risks of bariatric surgery."
The opinion piece in the Journal of the American Medical Association made waves in the medical community and US media, and JAMA issued a statement pointing out that the piece did not reflect the institution's view.
"This commentary does not reflect policy or opinion of the American Medical Association (AMA) or JAMA. The content of this commentary is solely the responsibility of the authors," it said.

Mauricio
5 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2011no causes pain, it destroys the family.... good idea coming from "doctors" as they seek profit in every corner. They are probably thinking on how that removal of the children from their family will create severe distress and they will be psychiatric patients forever and ever, good business right there....
Mauricio
5 / 5 (1) Jul 13, 2011Is not more HUMANE to change the content of TV than to destroy families? people spend 7 hours everyday watching TV!!!! and what they see? fast food commercials all the time! And TV programs that promote unhealthy and dysfunctional behavior.
Oh, yes, I know what they would have to say, because it has been said to me in many contexts: "that is too difficult to change". It is easier to go and harm the few working families in the entire country!
These doctors are probably the children of the doctors of few decades back that proposed brain lobotomies and electric-convulsive therapies to have good law abiding citizens (i.e., lambs).
what can of people provide that advice? I am VERY glad I don't know those "doctors"
ROBTHEGOB
1 / 5 (1) Jul 13, 2011eachus
not rated yet Jul 13, 2011If the doctors need a clue, there is obviously some infection they are not seeing, that encourages the patient to add weight so that the body can support more viral (or whatever) load.
Yes, sometimes there are other causes. I put on 150 lbs a few years ago taking Vioxx. I'm slowly getting back to that weight but it is hard.
ShotmanMaslo
3 / 5 (2) Jul 14, 2011ArtflDgr
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2011zafouf
not rated yet Jul 18, 2011But they'd better have a really good way of screening for other causes of obesity. Other causes may not be very common but it would be awful to split up a family if a child has a rare leptin deficiency, say.
Shootist
1 / 5 (1) Jul 18, 2011