Bad Diet During Pregnacy.. Abuse?

[Sleeppy]

No children of drug addicts and alcoholics are often taken away, and rightly so.

Send in the cameras, microphones, and mandatory therapy and monitering sessions?

 

[Alceste]

Send in the cameras, microphones, and mandatory therapy and monitering sessions?

I think you should just look it up. Sounds like you're kind of confused about the whole subject.

 

[Aquitaine]

I study with a pregnant lady who will only eat "organic" food but she smokes cigarettes.

Seriously?! :cover:

Reminds me of this classic:

 

[Sleeppy]

So far, we draw the line with only certain physical abuse (which doesn't include troubling peer pressures from parents, siblings and otherwise, including infringements on other individuals and their productions - offspring specifically, introductions to cigarettes, or various other pollutants such as health or car pollution) and death, in some cases.

 

[Sleeppy]

I think you should just look it up. Sounds like you're kind of confused about the whole subject.

No. I'm confusing to you. Clarify with me if you want.

 

[Me Myself]

It doesn't sound crazy.. But it is.

You do find it crazy that hildren are not slaves? :areyoucra

Children really have very little control. Their parents and their societal expectations enslave them.

Of children were propertyy, parents would be allowed to do anything they wanted with them and their body. Such is not the case.

 

[Sleeppy]

You do find it crazy that hildren are not slaves? :areyoucra



Of children were propertyy, parents would be allowed to do anything they wanted with them and their body. Such is not the case.

It's the case both physically from conception, and continuing into adulthood. The entire scope of intelligent thought is very closely determined by the parents. Even the choosing to rebel against certain guidlines is a result of the child's physical nature and what and how they are taught - or inadequately prepared, to do things and deal with situations.

 

[Pegg]

I agree. And I'd like to take gas guzzling cars and cigarrettes (among other pollutants) out of use. What rights should I have to make this happen?

I was walking down the street and the lady ahead of me was smoking a cigarette, i was breathing in her second hand smoke... people have the right to smoke and i have the right to not smoke, but sometimes our individual rights impinge on the rights of others.

There are so many things in the world which are opposed to individual rights. Cars are great, but they pollute the air for everyone and they kill many animals and pedestrians... so with everything we've created for the benefit of one person, another is disadvantaged by it.

Whats the answer? We all need to be on the same page and then we need knowledge. We think we are very clever, but in actual fact we are not clever at all....we create things which are killing us and our environment and we have no idea how to change that.


btw, im all for deleting motor vehicles from human existence....they are a destructive tool that we could do without.

 

[Me Myself]

It's the case both physically from conception, and continuing into adulthood. The entire scope of intelligent thought is very closely determined by the parents. Even the choosing to rebel against certain guidlines is a result of the child's physical nature and what and how they are taught - or inadequately prepared, to do things and deal with situations.

People around you will undoubtedly change the way you think, but thats not only with parents.

It has been shown that the having healthy friends will contribute to your health, fitter friends make you fitterhappy friends to your happiness, and the aame on the opposite. Having fat friends will make you fatter, sick friends make you sicker, sad friends make you sadder.

People around you will affect your psychis.

So sure, of course ey will influence you, but they most imortant ways in which they do come not from the rules they impose on you but from the role model they give you. It doesnt matter that an alcoholic parent tell you not to be an alcoholic, you are still more likely toe one given continuous expsure to someone with suxh lifestyle.

Of course, we still there have individual choices. Then of course we have the genetica, similarities.

 

[Twilight Hue]

As crazy as it sounds, children are not slaves.

Mow the lawn Jr.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Seriously?! :cover:

Reminds me of this classic:

Is she smoking a cig? ?????!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ChristineES]

Individual privacy supersedes prevention of child abuse by law vigilantes?

No, not at all. Social workers are overburdened now with child abuse of babies and children already born. Just to go after women who are abusing drugs (medicines or narcotics) or drinking alcohol would be burden enough for them-( if someone sees it, it should be reported).

But to go after pregnant women who are having a little treat at McDonald's or drinking a large latte at Starbucks would be incredibly hard to go after- and it would be useless if the woman other than that eats wonderfully healthy the rest of the time. This is incredibly murky. We just don't have enough man power to police what women eat or drink while they are pregnant. On any given day, I might 10 or pregnant women walking around- just those who are far enough along to know and there are some who you can't even tell if they are pregnant.

For the most part, most people are smart enough to listen to their physician about health and the food they intake.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Guardian is an oversimplification. The parents oversee everything, from the genes outward.

Ok. We know what bad diet does to both mother and child alike. At what point is it child abuse and acceptable for outside parties to step in?

I think when a pregnant woman is knowingly ingesting poisonous toxins into her system (the kind that warrants a call to poison control center) is when she needs help and somebody to step in to keep her under control.

If she is trying to terminate the pregnancy, there are far safer methods. If she is suffering from psychosis, she will need appropriate care and oversight.

But a bad diet? We would have to determine what makes a criminally bad diet for law enforcement to step in and intervene. What kind of diet would that be?

 

[averageJOE]

I think the gate is much wider than some people think..

Here's another question:
Why are children, pets, and other custodies and possessions so much a concern of outside parties? Especially if they have no initial relation to those parties?

Abuse on children and animals is everyone's business. However, people have different definitions for the word "abuse".

 

[Kilgore Trout]

To be fair, eating a bad diet during pregnancy is probably one of the least damaging things most mothers will end up doing to their chidlren.

 

[Sleeppy]

Abuse on children and animals is everyone's business. However, people have different definitions for the word "abuse".

When did we decide what is to be private and what isn't? And why?

 

[Sleeppy]

To be fair, eating a bad diet during pregnancy is probably one of the least damaging things most mothers will end up doing to their chidlren.

I like to test logical consistency. So, I dramatized this issue somewhat. Abuse begins even before birth. Even before conception, with the potential parent's relationship and their overall know-how. When, where, and why did outside intervention become a right? Or even an accepted public intelligence?

 

[Sleeppy]

I think when a pregnant woman is knowingly ingesting poisonous toxins into her system (the kind that warrants a call to poison control center) is when she needs help and somebody to step in to keep her under control.

If she is trying to terminate the pregnancy, there are far safer methods. If she is suffering from psychosis, she will need appropriate care and oversight.

But a bad diet? We would have to determine what makes a criminally bad diet for law enforcement to step in and intervene. What kind of diet would that be?

I don't care to even speculate ar this point. Humans and their diets are both complex. But, is it no longer a public concern because of it's complexity?

 

[Rakhel]

After seeing children with FAS and crack babies, I don't think I can answer any other way but yes. A child may still have special needs, even if the mother ate perfectly well, didn't smoke or drink or do drugs, etc. while pregnant- But some special needs can be prevented.

*Raises hand*
My 5th child was born with (S)mall for (G)estational (A)ge. I was 38 weeks pregnant and he was 3 lbs 11oz at birth. I went to all doctor's visits. Ate well. No drugs or alcohol or tobacco. He is still small and has been diagnosed with Failure to Thrive. And no matter how many calories I try to shove down his throat, he has only gained 1 lb in the last 6 months(he's a whopping 24 lbs at 3 years old.)

 

[ChristineES]

*Raises hand*
My 5th child was born with (S)mall for (G)estational (A)ge. I was 38 weeks pregnant and he was 3 lbs 11oz at birth. I went to all doctor's visits. Ate well. No drugs or alcohol or tobacco. He is still small and has been diagnosed with Failure to Thrive. And no matter how many calories I try to shove down his throat, he has only gained 1 lb in the last 6 months(he's a whopping 24 lbs at 3 years old.)

Sometimes these kinds of things with no fault of the mother. I have two sons on the Autism scale and ate very healthy with both of them and took no medications, even.