Parents of fat children to get warning letters

Today, we have gone to the other end of the scale, not looking for malnutrition but for obesity instead. Children are to be weighed when they start primary school, and again when they leave it at about the age of ten. And if they are too fat, their parents will be sent warning letters by the Government. This school screening regime is aimed at fighting the obesity epidemic which threatens a generation of youngsters with a lifetime of ill-health. But the plan has triggered angry claims that the Government is trying to dictate the size of children. And critics have dismissed the scheme as mis-guided, costly, bureaucratic and a dramatic extension of the nanny state.

Under the programme, children will be weighed and measured by school nurses and the results used to create a “fat map” of the country. The first checks are to be made in the new school year which begins after the summer vacation. Guidelines have already been issued to nurses who have been urged to be sensitive to the risk of fat children being bullied.

Details of the scheme emerged as Parliament was being told that one in three children between two and 15 was now overweight or obese, putting them at risk from a host of serious illnesses. Thirty-three percent of boys and 35 percent of girls were said to be too heavy. Doctors say that fat children are increasingly suffering from health problems usually associated with middle age, such as joint pains and maturity onset diabetes, previously a problem for those over 40. As part of the scheme, parents will be told how their child’s weight compares with that of healthy children.

The data collected by nurses will be used to monitor the Government’s progress towards its target of halting the year-on-year increase in obesity among the under-11s by 2010. Ministers also hope to use the information to encourage parents to take greater responsibility for the size of their children.

Public health minister Caroline Flint is insisting that it is parents who “first and foremost influence what their children eat.” But parents’ groups have warned that weigh-in letters could be ignored or deeply resented. Margaret Morrissey, of the National Confederation of Parent Teacher Associations, said: “I don’t think it’s going to be terribly effective.” She added: “It appears to be more of the nanny state. What we do in our own homes is our business and some parents may not react particularly well. We all appreciate guidance on good diets but most of us think we are already doing our best. If families prefer a particular lifestyle, all the letters in the world will not make a difference.”

Dr Robert Arnold, of the British Medical Association, said: “It may well be justified in public health terms but one wonders what it will do to rates of eating disorders like anorexia nervosa.” Sociologist Patricia Morgan said: “Youngsters who are tubby as children often become slimmer later in life without outside interference. It used to be called puppy fat.”

Nurses have said the scheme could be an invasion of privacy. Chris Etherington, of the Royal College of Nursing, said: “We have concerns about how it will be done. Children will pick on the tallest, smallest and largest. Is this a positive experience for them to be going through?”

But anti-obesity campaigners have welcomed the move. Dr David Haslam, clinical director of the National Obesity Forum, said: “It’s a good thing, as weighing does increase parental awareness. But the checks should be done more frequently, not only at the start and end of primary school.”

The question of the nanny state, as suggested by Margaret Morrissey, was picked up by the Daily Mail which, more or less, agreed with her in one of its editorials. It said: “When this ruling Labour Party hates competitive sports, sidelines physical education and sells off school playing fields as fast as it can, it isn’t surprising that children grow fatter.

“You thought the solution was obvious? Not to our rulers it isn’t. Instead of encouraging more physical activity, they solemnly propose a vast, bureaucratic scheme to weigh all four and ten-year-olds, store their details on a Government computer and create a national fat map. “Quite what use it will be is anybody’s guess. But the problems are already apparent. The Government’s own experts fear this scheme will lead to more childhood neuroses, more eating disorders and more bullying. But, as usual, Minis-ters ignore the experts. And they certainly don’t care what parents think.”

The editorial continued: “The Government penalises couples, offers incentives to single parents, encourages mothers with young children to go out to work while doing nothing for those who stay at home, assigns supernannies to tell parents what to do and even promotes a nappy curriculum on how babies should develop. And now, this. A nanny state, indeed.”

Whether the Government is creating a nanny state or not, it certainly seems to be pressing on with its agenda for children. In another move, it has banned schools from serving whole milk to pupils, as part of its offensive against obesity. From September, all state schools in England must offer only skimmed or semi-skimmed milk to children.

This has come in the wake of another ban which has already re-moved junk food from schools. The whole milk and junk food bans have also met with severe criticism as part of the work of the nanny state. But, as the Mail editorial has said, the Gov-ernment appears not to be taking the slightest bit of notice of these criticisms. So, for now, it’s weigh on, nursie!