Obese in Britain

could be an indication that a child has a condition that needs investigation

I agree “could be” but not always though . Which is why a little reading between the graph lines is needed . Instead of nasty accusing letters .

Gilly the public are very quick to condemn social services, health services and any other agencies involved, whenever a case of child neglect or cruelty is brought to their attention.

Surely it’s better to try to prevent such things happening if we can.

Surely it’s better that 10 families receive a ‘nasty accusing letter’ that isn’t needed, or isn’t appropriate, than that one child suffers appalling neglect or abuse that could have been prevented.

Of course Janea I don’t want to argue just sharing my experience of how charts can be misinterpreted when they are taken as absolute. As I said earlier, in the past we have used the charts to our advantage.

I believe parents can opt out of the weight / height check. A health check..that's all. Nobody forcing a parent to act on it! Lot's of hissy fits going on..people will complain if something is overlooked / not done!

DD is expecting a negative letter for DGS1 who has gained weight this year.

He has porrigde for breakfast, school lunch, and a hot meal in the evening which either I or DD prepare. We are controlling portion size and keeping carbs low! He does love cakes but only has them( not loads!) ay weekends. Deserts are usually fruit or yogurt or a homemade fruit milkshake. He has sweets on Friday.
He plays footie 2 x week & walks to & from school. When the weather is good he is out on the trampoline! But he is deffo chubby!

Desserts!!

Those who are saying height/length isn't taken into account, well if the Docs are using the current growth charts it should be. These charts are found here
www.rcpch.ac.uk/resources/growth-charts
Children are supposed to gain weight, it's not gaining weight that is so much the concern, it's a significant mismatch between the weight and the height. Checking weight and growth can also point to other concerns
It would not be wise to opt out of checks, ok to opt out for yourself but children deserve to have the best health care possible, whether or not that upsets the parent, and refusal of health care for a child could be classed as neglect
The best thing is to sit down with a health professional and go through everything, sometimes we don't fully read letters and if you read on it might not be so negative

Gilly: 'could be an indication that a child has a condition that needs investigation

I agree “could be” but not always though . Which is why a little reading between the graph lines is needed . Instead of nasty accusing letters .'

Why see the letters as nasty and accusing? Why not take it all positively, discuss it with health professional, and hopefully agree together that there is no problem? The attitude of the parents (and dare I say, grandparents) are massively important, as always with kids.

Agree totally oodles that parents should not be allowed to refuse the checks. As jane says above, parents are the first to blame social and health services, and education- if anything goes wrong- and even sue.

Surely the sensible option is to have the parent present when the children are weighed, then if the child is obviously not overweight whatever the tables say, it can be let go, but if there is a problem it can be discussed there and then.

DGS has been underweight for years. It is a matter of concern to his parents and he is being seen by specialists, but the school medical authorities send out the letters but do no follow up. DGS's parents have not once been contacted by the school medical authorities to express concern about his low weight or suggest any further examination or referral to a paediatrician.

What is the point of these tests, if they result in just a nasty letter if your overweight and nothing else.

The thing is height/weight can vary so much. If a child is overweight at, say 7, he/she may be fine at sixteen, without any worrying being done about it.

It's just not like checking hearing or eyesight.

What is the point of these tests, if they result in just a nasty letter if your overweight and nothing else

Monica monitoring of school children’s growth has two functions - as explained above, it can flag up serious concerns about a child’s health and development.
Secondly, the statistics are used by Public Health to compile a picture of child health and development nationally so that regional differences can be highlighted, and trends over the years can be observed.
It’s easy to dismiss public health and epidemiology as being the preserve of nannies and big brother, but we should remember that it’s due to public health measures that the role of vitamin D was identified, rickets prevented, tuberculosis controlled and deaths from lung cancer prevented by the campaign against smoking.

I think it is likely that the letter to your DS and DiL about your GS will have been copied to his GP and because he was already being seen by a specialist, no further action taken.

Responsible parents do not need a letter from school informing them that little Johnny or Mary is over or under weight. They will already be fully aware and will be either doing something about it (if possible) or will have sought advice from health professionals.

A letter from school to those parents who cannot see what is right in front of them will not make a fig of difference.

There are hundreds of shocking examples on line of parents being sent letters to say their child is obese (yes they use that word too) when they are a 1or 2 lbs above average for their age and clearly not overweight at all.

Oh and rickets (due to lack of vitamin D) is hugely on the rise. My local Asda pharmacy is running a program giving out information and free vitamins. Chatting to the pharmacist most of the children fall into a similar category.

Gillybob it that was the case, or is the case, then why the increase?

It is patently clear that obese parents don’t see a problem when their child is obese too. Waiting at school pick up time I notice this time and time again. Perhaps the notion of a ‘responsible’ parents needs defining.

Rickets....was a disease of the poor in Victorian times. Poor diet. Poor diet, poverty and obesity can be linked.

Why should a child be labelled obese when they are only a pound or two above the average weight for their age?

At my DGC's primary they have a healthy eating class to teach the children themselves (as young as 4/5) what is good for their bodies and what is not so good. They never say that children shouldn't have something at all (which can often work the other way) and my grandson (now 9) is quite clued up on this. Not that he particularly needs to worry as he would have to sit still to put on any weight.

Is it perhaps true Anja that very overweight parents assume that their child being overweight is "normal" for them?
Just thinking

No child would be labelled obese when just over average weight. They would be labelled overweight perhaps. Height is taken into consideration despite someone upthread stating it wasn’t.

You last point obout ‘very overweight’ parents is doubtless true.

PS of course the term ‘average’ may well indicate that the ‘average’ child is overweight anyway, with all that implies.,

Google children being labelled as obese and you will see that they are labelled as such for being just a pound or two above average and perfectly normal and healthy. Don't want to single one case out to highlight but there are plenty .

gilly if rickets is on the rise, surely that underlines the importance of medical examinations in school, and parents being notified of findings.

Would a school examination pin point lack of vitamin D though JaneA ? or is lack of vitamin D something that would develop longer term (in other words not identified until it was too late) resulting in rickets? I'm not sure? I was shocked to learn that such thing was on the rise in the UK .

My point has never been against school (medical) examinations, it has always been about looking outside the graph and taking other factors into consideration. A (so called) healthcare professional labelled my DGD as "dangerously underweight for her age". She is one of the fittest and most healthy children you could ever wish to meet. She was subsequently refused crucial insurance on their say so and it wasn't until we took independent and "real professional" advise that this was overturned.

Maybe I just have a personal bug bear regarding graphs and averages.

I'm always amazed at how (what seems like) so many children fall through the net.

There are conditions that prevents the body absorbing Vit D efficiently too... kidney disease, celiac etc.

The government / health professionals know that obesity /underweight can cause or be a symptom of other health problems . To check all children at 11ys and suggest to parents that they follow up with a GP if they fall outside the usual range seems a pretty sensible screening. If you have already had answers or have no concerns and choose to ignore it that is a parent's prerogative.

gilly yes, there are clinical signs of rickets that would be picked up at a medical.

I meant pre-rickets JaneA . In other words could a school check pick up the lack of vitamin D ? Way before rickets ?