Obese Children Should Not Be Allowed to Trick-or-Treat

Ineffectiveness? While the particular instance of "fat-shaming" in Fargo may have been ineffective on a micro level, I assure you, it was far from ineffective. The point of the letters was to raise awareness among parents about childhood obesity; a topic that is as touchy as any other whether you are dealing with abortion or euthanasia. What she has done is bring media attention to the issue, and this is exactly how changes are made in society. Media attention brings heavy scrutiny by [i]both[/i] sides of an argument, prompts new scientific studies to be undertaken, and brings attention to people who may have otherwise been oblivious to the gravity of an issue. When stating that "it takes a village to raise a child," she was quite right. These days the media is that village, whether by the news that parents tune in to or the messages kids get through cartoons in the morning. Even something that seems as obvious as "my child is fat" can often be missed by loving parents. When more information surfaces, parents are better equipped to set up healthier food habits for their children, which in turn, can be passed on to their children's children, and so forth. Emotional Consequences? You were right to point out that adolescence is the most tumultuous and fragile time that a person experiences on their road to adulthood. In fact, the suicide rates of teens are a whopping 6:1 compared to that of TWEENS (10-14) alone. Not surprisingly, a majority of them are due to low self-esteem caused by poor body image, ESPECIALLY among young girls. So why not nip it in the bud? Have your own little Halloween party at home sans candy, or plan some other family activity instead of trick-or-treating with your obese child. The child need not know why they are not trick or treating, so in what way must it cause emotional harm? It is the parents in a position to mold the experience their child will have in adolescence; it is their job to equip them with the tools they need to be confident and make good decisions. This includes giving them the information they need to make not only physically healthy choices about food, but mentally healthy ones too. http://www.statcan.gc.ca... None of Your Business? Why not? We legislate paternal laws all the time. Seatbelts, ages limits for vice, and prostitution. And we do it not because the government or courts are particularly warm and fuzzy and want you to live a long and happy life so you can kiss puppies and unicorns. In the end, it always comes down to money. We spend billions of dollars on healthcare (I'm from Canada where these figures are even higher), even in places where healthcare is not subsidized. It is still one of the largest costs a government is forced to funnel tax payer dollars into. And while you may be content with spending your hard earned money to allow a fat kid to eat a Snickers, I, and many other citizens are not. This is why these laws are crucial. They are the balance between a free society that allows a smoker to take a puff or an obese child to have another serving of Kraft Dinner, but also try to mitigate the impact that these choices make on the rest of society. Thank our ancestors for utilitarianism. Alternatives? Certainly, I agree with you here. Sending healthy alternatives home with children is a better solution. But we are debating whether or not obese children should be allowed to trick-or-treat, not whether "fat letters" are a better solution than healthy treats. Unfortunately, we do not live in a society that gives out healthy snacks at this time of year, and, until we are, a night of frolic and fun is (from both a micro and macro level) not worth exacerbating their poor health, draining the resources of society, and further contributing to the "fat" epidemic that's plagued North America for decades. Unpopular? I feel like simply including this section in your argumentation has decimated any grounds for your position. Unpopularity should NEVER be a motive to maintain a status-quo. New and groundbreaking scientific discoveries that are made popular are almost always unpopular at the time because they go against the values and beliefs that people currently hold. This is the necessity behind change. The abolition of slavery and segregation, interracial marriage, women's rights: all things that at the time, (and still in some pockets of society) were wildly unpopular. I think most of us in hindsight can now agree that these changes were for the better, no?