@Bornnotbourne and @Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz I’m amazed to hear neither of you think the wonderful Dawn French and Lisa Riley were morbidly obese!
For the record, Morbid Obesity is classed as a BMI of 40 or more kgs/m2.
Dawn French is 5ft tall and until recently weighed 19 stone - which gave her a BMI around 52 kgs/m2 - more than 12 points above the threshold for morbid obesity.
Lisa Riley is 5’ 4.5” tall and recently announced she has lost 10 stone (which probably means she weighed around 20 stone beforehand). This gives her a BMI of 48 kgs/m2 - again, well above the threshold for morbid obesity.
So many comments on this thread show how little most people know or understand about obesity, BMIs and/or health risks. Neither do some of the posters appear to understand unconscious bias, prejudice, discrimination, employment law and the consequences of flouting the Equality Act 2010.
Would the Mumsnetters advocating against employing an obese nanny simply because they assume obesity = unhealthy then go on to ask a slim candidate about their health before employing them, or would they just assume slim = healthy?
The one thing the majority of scientists and Mumsnetters (including me) agree on is that a high BMI increases the risk of several health conditions, including sleep apnoea and diabetes. However, this does not mean every obese person will have these conditions or conversely that every slim person will not have them. My husband is very slim but has both sleep apnoea and Type 2 diabetes. No one would ever be able to tell this just by looking at him and employers would probably struggle to find this out prior to offering him a job.
This is because the Equality Act 2010 protects employees with ‘substantial’ and ‘long-term’ health conditions: these are considered a disability under law and, therefore, are protected from discrimination. It is generally unlawful to ask health-based questions to prospective employees: an employer cannot ask about an individual’s health until after offering them a position, although, there are some exceptions to this. Given some of the physical tasks a nanny may reasonably be expected to do, nannying may be one of them. However, understanding exactly what medical information you can legally ask a prospective nanny prior to employing them is a minefield. This is probably why unconscious bias kicks in whereby people make assumptions based on body size without any evidence specific to an individual.
I’m intrigued to know how many of the mumsnetters saying they would not consider employing an obese nanny realise they may be breaking the law? How many of them would ask an obese candidate health questions (such as do you have sleep apnoea?) or just assume this but wouldn’t even bother to ask a slim candidate? The likelihood of a slim candidate having sleep apnoea may be lower than an obese candidate’s risk but it is certainly not impossible. Roughly half of all people diagnosed with sleep apnoea are obese, the other half have a healthy BMI.
Yes, of course obesity increases the likelihood of certain increased health risks but that does NOT mean every obese person will have a condition that may have any impact whatsoever on their ability to care for a child. Neither does it mean they will just want to sit around all day. Conversely, just because a nanny is slim, doesn’t mean they won’t have any high risk conditions. Neither does a nanny being slim guarantee they will be rushing around at full speed all day with bags of energy, all of which is directed at keeping a child permanently on the go too. Many people who are alcohol dependent or addicts are very slim - would you really prefer them to be caring for your child rather than consider an obese nanny?
As for the original post saying the deciding factor is the way the obese nanny struggled to get up from the floor, as I said before, many disabled parents and very loving grandparents might have the same difficulty but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be able to keep a child safe, stimulated and happy.