Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this is discrimination and its damn right wrong.

241 replies

EvalionAngel · 03/09/2016 19:14

A Salford woman is 'too fat' to look after children, says council

dailym.ai/2c2xwoB

If this was race it would be wrong if this was a disability it would be wrong if this was gender it would be wrong. So why is fat discrimination allowed. Time for overweight people to be protected under discrimination and hate speech laws. Overweight people have to face daily abuse and thin privilege. The same way black and POC face white privileges and women face make privilege.

I'm so sick of this.

Sorry for the rant.

OP posts:
MrsDeVere · 03/09/2016 20:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DangerousBeanz · 03/09/2016 20:24

I'm a fat bird. Not 21 stone but I'd be classed as obese. I'm also a registered childminder. I can definitely chase toddlers and get through the soft play. When I was training a lady a bit bigger than me failed her first aid course because she couldn't get up and down to the floor to perform cpr on a child. So I'm aware there are other issues attached to being big and working in childcare.
However I resent the implication that big people automatically have fat kids. My own kids are slim and sporty and we eat a healthy diet. (I have a crappy under active thyroid that makes weight loss really hard and weight gain really easy).

phillipp · 03/09/2016 20:25

Can't help but wonder if the op is/knows this woman. Because her op seems to ignore the article to support her.

She isn't recovering from an operation. She had it last year. Nor did she double her body weight while recovering.

Comparing biological parents to foster parents is ridiculous. It's two different things.

Comparing obese people to disabled people is ridiculous.

This woman and the OP both seem to think her rights are more important than the children's.

PlentyOfPubeGardens · 03/09/2016 20:27

Thank you for reminding me to reinstall kitten block.

MypocketsarelikeNarnia · 03/09/2016 20:27

About 15% of LAC are under 4. But probably a higher % of older kids will be under SGOs so it might be a slightly higher percentage that are with fcs? Maybe? That's about 15,000 nationally I think (although dunno post-BS) so it depends how you categorise 'lots' I guess.Smile

But you need your fcs to be healthy enough to look after any child don't you? And children in care should have optimal care. She can't provide that atm. and she's proved that by being in the daily fail doing a sad face

IonaNE · 03/09/2016 20:27

I think we all know that if she had her own children, those children would not be taken into care away from her just because of her size.

Scarydinosaurs · 03/09/2016 20:30

verb what on earth has Alison Lapper got to do with it? Her son was biologically born to her, not fostered?

MauledbytheTigers · 03/09/2016 20:31

I think it's a difficult one and can see both sides but do wish people were more understanding of obesity and the reasons why people get to that point...not many people want to eat cake enough they'd be 21 stone. It's not often a choice to be morbidly obese (yes people chose to put food in their mouths) but it's quite often a symptom of something much more complicated than "I like cake so I'll eat".

I also don't agree this means they couldn't provide a healthy diet for a child. Firstly the husband isn't particularly overweight and secondly overweight people quite often know what they need to eat. They just can't do it themselves.

A difficult subject for me as I've watched my beautiful sister eat herself to twice her body weight over the course of 10 years, ruining the best years of her life and probably to the point of infertility to. She doesn't want this..it's a symptom of depression, she wants to be normal and healthy but her relationship with food has literally ruined her life. She's loving and caring and would make a fantastic mum and it's likely to not happen for her. I can however see the otherside, that the last thing a foster child needs is more heartbreak.

Blueshoessingloose · 03/09/2016 20:34

Iona; most children of alcoholics, drug addicts and domestic abusers aren't taken into care because there's simply too many of them. That doesn't mean we should allow them to foster. Nor should immobile food addicts.

Foster children need mature, responsible, healthy, strong, competent people who can care for them as they need. Physically and emotionally. Their needs are much more complex than most children's due to their background. She can't do the job. It's that simple.

HeddaLettuce · 03/09/2016 20:39

This is wrong. What about the artist Alison Lapper, whose son Paris featured in the BBC programme Child of Our Time? How would she fulfill the above council's statement?

What about her? Could you have made a more irrelevant point? People don't get vetted to have their own children, they do get vetted to have vulnerable children in care in need of the best people to look after them.

potatoscowls · 03/09/2016 20:44

Don't worry - if you're deemed too thin you get misdiagnosed with Anorexia and thrown in a mental hospital. it's not so much "thin privilege" as "just right in the middle privilege"

Kanga59 · 03/09/2016 20:46

Maybe this is the motivation she needs, to lose weight

HeddaLettuce · 03/09/2016 20:48

Don't worry - if you're deemed too thin you get misdiagnosed with Anorexia and thrown in a mental hospital. it's not so much "thin privilege" as "just right in the middle privilege

No, you don't. Are you on glue?

RebelRogue · 03/09/2016 20:48

Once again for people that refuse to get it
*

Fostering and adopting people are held at higher standards than biological parents. And so they should. Good enough,is not actually good enough when you pick a family for an already vulnerable child.
*
So all the examples of x and y that have their own kids while disabled,mh issues,morbidly obese etc are completely irrelevant. Like i said,there are people out there that have their own kids,that SS have no concerns about but would never be accepted as foster carers or for adopting.

PoohBearsHole · 03/09/2016 20:49

I'd have. thought some of the point of her actively bring turned down is the IVF, surely a council would be concerned the toll this would also take emotionally and physically?

Themoleandcrew · 03/09/2016 20:51

To be honest there were a lot of red flags in that article alone as to her/their suitability to foster. Her weight alone wasn't the reason. I'm a fatty who has adopted and I needed to go through an extra medical and provide proof that I was relatively fit before we were approved.

potatoscowls · 03/09/2016 20:51

Hedda nah, had it happen to me though.

MumOnTheRunCatchingUp · 03/09/2016 20:52

Thin privilege?

There's something I between fat and thin.... Normal!

lljkk · 03/09/2016 20:53

Alison Lapper worried a lot about being a mom & lined up a lot of support for helping to look after her son. Her support was close to 24/7 when he was small. (Her book is great, everyone should read it).

vimtoqueen1 · 03/09/2016 20:55

I am overweight (not obese) as is my husband and we have adopted two children who were both under 2 when they came home.
Since they came home a few months ago we have lost weight running around after them.
I do wish we had been in better shape when they came home as things would have been physically easier.
We went from no children to two who needed nappy changes, picking up, carrying, playing with etc and we both suffered with back pain for a good few weeks!
It might have been easier if we were fitter at the time and certainly if fostering or adopting toddlers you need to be very active!!

WorraLiberty · 03/09/2016 20:56

Her husband is not too big so he could do the playing with the kids.

What do you mean "do the playing", OP?

It's not a scheduled task to be penciled in. It's part of everyday life with children, as is exercise and being able to chase a child/react quickly in an emergency.

Foster carers are paid to care for the kids, so there's no point in comparing them to birth parents who are not.

ProfessorBranestawm · 03/09/2016 20:59

This rings a bell, I remember a similar case a year or two ago. (Not RTFT yet so probably been mentioned already.)

hownottofuckup · 03/09/2016 21:05

What Jobo said - there kids will already have had a crap start in life without adding the burden of a morbidly obese carer to the mix.
They'd do better in a foster family with one carer who is morbidly obese then in children's homes. Where do you these kids are whilst the search for Mary Poppins go on.
And fwiw, have a morbidly obese carer isn't a default burden.
Which is why I doubt very much that this decision was based solely on the ladies weight

Floggingmolly · 03/09/2016 21:06

The lady in question is trying to lose some weight. Then there's no problem, is there? Let her try again when she's no longer over twenty bloody stone Hmm.

It's irrelevant that disabled parents "manage", the local authorities have a duty to the children to place them with someone fit enough to look after them, not just manage by the skin of their teeth.

MumOnTheRunCatchingUp · 03/09/2016 21:08

Well if she's morbidly obese what the hell will she be feeding the children? Her own 'diet'?