did you just start a thread to reply to me. LOL wow

I think you are preaching to a wrong person. I did not keep neither junk food nor pop in my house (did not keep alcohol or narcotics either). No one is obese or abused and neglected.

I do not need government interfering in my parenting because my child's health and safety is my priority. For me "my kid my choice" worked. But that's me. Someone needs to interfere when parents make ridiculous choices and educate them or if they refuse to learn, apply some consequences.

There is someone on marriage forum who lost all of her children (taken away by state)due to neglect and abuse. she also thought, "her kids, her choice"

That wasnt me on the marriage forum......

"someone needs to interfere when parents make ridiculous choices"

REALLY? WHO gets to decide? (besides courts, law enforcement or child protection agencies) and even they get it wrong from time to time. What if the way you raised your DD is seen by others as ridiculous, even though you believe you did the best you could and with the right intentions?

Neglect or abuse? There are parents that have religious beliefs that might be seen as neglect or abuse by some, but they (the parents) also feel the right to practice their religion. (as in refusing blood transfusions or medical procedures that conflict with their personal/religious beliefs)

"REALLY? WHO gets to decide?."

courts, the law.

Of course they get things wrong too, but at least there are some regulations. So the law enforcement interferes when needed.

That's why "my kid my choice" is overly simplistic view. Luckily there is some resemblance of the law that would stop some crazy parent.

imamommy, even if somebody would think it is ridiculous how I raise my child there is nothing to write home about, pretty boring stuff. Now if i decide to give her a bottle of vodka at age 15, then authorities should interfere because apparently I cannot make proper choices.

yes some parents abuse or neglect their children and the law could do very little about it, but it does not make it OK.

Yes, I did start a new thread, not specifically directed at you FD, but in response to the topic that came up on the other thread and I didn't want to hijack. I thought it was relevent.

I wasn't saying you had narcotics, soda pop or junk food in the house or that you are a bad mother. I currently have both junk food and pop in the house, I have a liquor cabinet and I have also had narcotics in the house (vicodin for pain) although usually the strongest "drug" you'll find in my medicine chest is Tylenol. I don't think that makes me a bad mother.

What I am saying is the government is hardly the governing body I want to be in charge of my child due to the reasons I listed above. Their track record is just not that good. I don't need the "salt police" knocking at my door just because one kid overdosed.

I do agree that there should be procedures in place for abuse. I'm not negating the importance of child abuse laws, etc. Consider how many truly horrific cases fall through the cracks of the child justice system and then think about the government trying to regulate how many sodas each child is drinking. Impossible. But they can take the machines out of the schools. Obesity is killing more kids than salt.

In my opinion, anyone who hopes the government would punish a person if their child died while doing something like riding in the back of a pickup truck (barring the insanity of going 75mph down the freeway, joyriding drunk with Johnny in the truckbed holding on to his carseat for dear life) is losing sight of the big picture.