Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Obese children, compulsory attendance at weight-loss camps
Section H. Health, science and technology

This debate draws on the presence and growing use of voluntary ’fat camps’, or weightloss camps, in the USA, the UK and Canada to deal with the problem of obesity, especially childhood obesity. They involve people voluntarily checking into residential camps where they eat carefully prescribed diets, away from temptation, and exercise heavily. They can also involve nutrition classes and cognitive behavioural therapy designed to achieve positive long-term outcomes. This policy obviously varies in making them compulsory.

Pros

[1] Children who are severely overweight are in urgent need of intervention. Their weight exposes them to the risk of longterm health damage, such as the development of diabetes and heart damage, as well as significant short-term problems, including chronic fatigue. The state must step in immediately to protect them.

[2] The reason for serious obesity is often bad habits and/or psychological disorders. Weight-loss camps help to fix these by offering participants counselling, and educating them about ways to eat and live more healthily. Often weight loss is about developing alternative diversionary activities when stressed, or learning how to cook with fresh ingredients. This policy makes weight loss durable.

[3] Rather than stigmatising them, a trip to a ’weight-loss camp’ will be beneficial to children’s self-esteem. As they lose weight, they will be able to be more active, and so go out more and play with their friends. They will no longer be labelled as ’the fat kid’, and so will in fact thrive socially.

[4] Parents who allow their children to get severely obese are so irresponsible as to lose their absolute right to control their children. When their children are so in danger, and at risk of such severe harm, the state has a solemn obligation to step in to protect them. Moreover, often their parents need a shock to make them realise that their attitude to their children’s weight is unacceptable; once they receive it, they will become more supportive.

Cons

[1] Although the harms of obesity are undeniably great, they are rarely so urgent as to warrant immediate intervention. Slow but steady weight loss is healthier, more durable and more appropriate to the problem at hand.

[2] This policy is simply a short-term fix, which will quickly spring back as children do not understand how to cope outside their controlled environment. We must teach children how to lose weight and exercise while facing their normal daily circumstances, which this will not assist with.

[3] The stigma of having been sent away to ’fat camp’ will be significant. When children are released from such camps, they could become pariahs within their social networks, and be unable to lead normal lives. This would only increase the stresses that made them overweight in the first place.

[4] This is a violation of parents’ rights to parent as they see fit. Moreover, this is an area in which parents need to be ’on side’ with the government’s efforts to reduce their children’s obesity. This will make them angry and resentful, and is thus ultimately counterproductive.

Possible motions

This House would force obese children to attend weight-loss camps.

Related topics

Protective legislation v. individual freedom

School sport, compulsory

Child curfews