To think this is discrimination and its damn right wrong.

[EvalionAngel]

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.

You don't wake up one day and be 20 stone.

There are very few medical reason for being morbidly obese. Most people this size eat too much and don't move enough. Anyone who is 20 stone and thinks they eat healthily is lying to themselves. Write down everything you eat for a week. Absolutely everything.

Anyone who says that they are 20 stone and fit are simply disillusioned. It's just not possible.

To become 20 stone you have to be eating some seriously terrible food in enormous quantities, not the best example to set to kids who have to be placed with foster parents. As gmbk said you are lying to themselves.

As a PP said, they need foster parents to be role models in every aspect.

She has on going health issues, she likened fostering to adoption and she doesn't sound like she has a lot of experience with children, especially children with additional needs.
As someone with a lot of experience working with foster children and their foster parents, I think there are number of factors that make her unsuitable.
She's run to the dailyfail with the fat angle. That might be one of many, unlikely it's the only reason.

This is scientific curiousity... I wonder if a very heavy person, female 15 stone+, who insists they don't overeat & get lots of exercise, if they then lived my lifestyle for 6 months, would they still be so heavy.

If yes... why.
If no.... were they in denial or was it really just relatively small things that made the difference.

YABU

Look I'm no waif myself and I get how difficult dieting is but this woman can't manage her own diet healthily.

And the mobility issues. If a child runs off she's got no chance. What if she trips and falls down?

Being fat is a choice (unlike ethnicity etc 🙄)
and it's hers to make. Stay that size and don't foster or get slimmer, healthier and more active and foster.

She's not just been turned down because she's fat - no way

Mrs dv is spot on and being a fc is more demanding than being a parent - it's a full on job 24 hrs a day - you have to be 'drop everything' available at all times - this woman seems to have little grasp of the job

I agree as well that being that overweight isn't just bad luck/bad health etc it's s sign of something wrong with the relationship with food - all the excuses don't wash - eat well and exercise - it's not a complex concept

Yabu

It's ridiculous. A person who has proven they have an unhealthy relationship with food and fitness for a long period - you don't get that overweight in a short period - is being denied paid work looking after vulnerable children due to it. I'm not seeing the problem.

Mobility, fitness, attitude, I've been overweight post pregnancy and babies, I was less likely to do physical stuff with my children. I'm now a healthy weight and my attitude and abilities are different.

You can't compare biological parents with someone who is being screened for paid work. The LA has a duty to ensure that foster carers are capable of providing what is needed for the children they place with them.

I would like to think that there are more reason for her being turned down than her weight.

While I understand restricted mobility would be an issue with a toddler or young child, there are loads of older children and teenagers who just need a stable caring home life, where mobility would not be an issue if the emotional stability and love were there.

I have a feeling (not just because this is a Daily Fail article) that there is more to this case than simply her weight.

FYI, my family fostered from the time I was 6 to the time I was 26. I saw a lot of kids come and go, and, especially with the older kids, really the only thing needed was patience and understanding, which is not related to weight IMHO.

People of 20 stone can be fit, my old pe teacher was that and you should have seen her run, i have met many people between 15 and 20 stone who are fit and healthy.

Bashing people other weight is crap and bmi should have been thrown out years ago, you can be 3 stone heavier but wear the same clothes size as someone 3 stone lighter. It means nothing. Did anyone wver wat hgoks naked show , he regularly showed women who weighed the same but wore different dress sizes or who worethe same dress size but weighed totally different amounts.

They should look at lifestyle and personalities and stamina and many other criteria but weight should be one only be looked at if the person is unhealthy and immobile. Just being overweight doesnt always mean you are unhealthy and immobile but most people are swallowing what is being told them instead of looking around and seeing teachers and nurses and carers all healthy and working long shifts and many who also exercise but who are large.

I'm sorry being 20 stone for most people does not equal fit and healthy - you are at much higher risk of heart disease, strokes, cancer etc

Being obese/morbidly obese is unhealthy despite what many in those categories may want to believe, or do you think doctors etc are lying about this?

or do you think doctors etc are lying about this?

That depends. On an individual level many doctors are too overworked to do more than glance at a persons weight on a chart and issue commands. Sometimes they will ask lifestyle questions, many times they don't.

On a population level, BMI is highly flawed because it's only an average. So on average people of a certain weight will have health issues, but not everyone.

If they were really interested in determining her fitness, there are other measures. Like a fitness test and blood tests for example. Which are far more telling than a number on a scale.

Being 20 stone is not a good idea. Fat acceptance may have its place but anyone who thinks it's fine being 20 stone is probably conning themselves. However that is not to say it's easy to lose weight. It's very hard for many people.
Most women of 20 stone should be 10 stone.

Thing is if you can't properly care or run around after a toddler then how can you do the job properly
If a toddler decided to run towards a road would she be able to stop them...no..can she lift the child safely bath a child and cook food suitable for them. These are all valid questions and I'd it's a no then..I'm afraid there is no choice

When people go on about BMI being rubbish, its usually because their own is in the obese category. It's not rubbish, it is fairly accurate (although blunt) and you not liking what it tells you is no reason to not use it.

The fact is thatmost people who are severely overweight are not fir, are not healthy, and have other problems related to their weight. Not all,but most. And this woman obviously has many other issues.

it is fairly accurate

Yes, it's a very accurate mathematical calculation. It's a simple way to classify people into a weight category.

What it isn't is a diagnostic tool.

Only this woman's doctor can tell her about her health risks.

Waist is good too - if your waist is double your height = over weight.
So 5 foot 5 (65 inches - halve that) waist of 32.5 inches okay, any more not okay. Fat around the middle is the worst kind so going by a tape measure around your waist is a good plan for most people.

kaelea - If you ever want to post about your childhood, try coming over to the adoption board, where there are other posters who have had difficult childhoods (as well as adopters and birth parents)

I've been that Weigjt at 5fy
There's a very uncharitable part of me that wonders why she hasn't got a job and yet can get a job fostering
I do know one person whose in laws own an agency, they get a lot of unemployed type people who want to foster
The insecure nature of placements means it's not a reliable income for a lot of people

I do think the weight is relevant in a way. Someone io knows dh lost about 10 stone on liquid diets to adopt. He's IMMENSE now - he's a lovely dad. That was all a waste of time as she is fit and able to look after the kids, he works ft but in I can't see him making old
Bones as he's just enourmoua

However, another friend posted a photo of her dh the other day with their 5 yr old. I knew he was big but he is the same sort of size
He's her natural
Dad so no one questions it

I think my post has wandered a tad lol
Surely weight and longevity it more relavwnt to adopters but how can that lady claim she is fit to foster when she doesn't work? (Appear to - she's a student but claims can study and foster)

If she loses weight, then what is the problem with her waiting until she is more fit and healthy? She looks morbidly obese. She cannot possibly be healthy being that fat. Also, fat adults tend to have fat kids. There is an unacceptable risk to any children being placed with her that they would be given a terrible diet and end up fat too. Clearly she has a bad diet so why should vulnerable children be susceptible to being given a bad diet too?

She's failed her medical. So whether BMI is a useful measure or not, whether you are 45 stone and can do a four minute mile, whether you know a woman whose sister's dog had a walker who was round like a weeble but could chase down a greyhound is really really really irrelevant. She failed her medical for this job. And frankly does she look like Usain Bolt (who doubtless has a BMI of about 50)?

Like MDV says I wonder if she's just a good enough carer for LAC but not for your kids. Because I notice that lots of things which are good enough for LAC aren't good enough for other kids. Almost as if they really don't count at all...

You don't need to be a Doctor or know her BMI, weight or dress size to know that she is clearly obese. The numbers just confirm what is obvious by looking at her.
She is not currently a suitable candidate to be a foster carer - most people aren't for a whole variety of reasons. It's rarely just one thing that makes the persona unsuitable.

Usain Bolt has a BMI of 24.4, apparently. :). Very much in the healthy zone & all that. George Clooney has BMI of 24, if we believe his published stats. Michael Phelps comes out at BMI=23.6.
Any other athlete-celebrity BMI myths we'd like to destroy?