Two teens taken from mother for being overweight

TWO overweight teenagers have been taken into care over fears that their failure to shed pounds is damaging their health.

A judge ruled that they must live with a foster family because otherwise ‘their health needs will continue to be neglected and they will continue to put on weight’.

The ruling is the first to have been made public in which children have been removed from their family home because of concerns surrounding obesity.

District Judge Gillian Ellis said the boy aged 17 and girl of 13 were ‘thoughtful, intelligent and articulate children’.

But although social workers had provided them with Fitbits, gym membership and courses at Weight Watchers they had failed to lose weight.

Sussex Family Court heard the children’s mother had ‘failed to instil in the children habits of healthy eating, exercise, and good self-care’.

Instead she had snacked on ‘crisps and ice creams’ which she kept in the house.

Judge Ellis said: ‘I accept what she says about the difficulty of compelling teenagers to act in a certain way but, clearly, had these habits been encouraged and modelled to the children from an early age, no element of compulsion would now arise.’

She added: ‘The children had failed to engage consistently in exercise...The mother blamed lockdown but exercise could still be taken in the home or by walking outside.

‘The attendance of the family at Weight Watchers had been inconsistent.’

Social workers from West Sussex council had been involved with the family for more than ten years. The children lived with their mother and their father, who left the home in 2019, visited from time to time.

Judge Ellis said: ‘The case was such an unusual one because the children had clearly had some very good parenting, as they were polite, bright and engaging.’

Social workers told the court that the children had also ‘suffered neglect through poor home conditions and lack of guidance on personal care.

‘This had resulted in them being bullied at school and in having low self-esteem.

‘The children’s weight had steadily increased even during proceedings.’

One social worker ‘believed that she had seen packets of crisps, tubs of ice cream, and fizzy drinks which were not marked as sugar-free’.

The mother said she had spoken to her children about the need to eat healthily.

But the judge said: ‘She accepted that for her to be eating Cheddars and ice creams as snacks was not good role-modelling for the children.’

Judge Ellis ruled: ‘She has failed to instil in the children habits of healthy eating, exercise and good self-care.

‘I think she is deluding herself in the same way as every patient under-reports to their doctor what their alcohol intake is.’

The judge said she attached no ‘moral blame’ and the children’s health had ‘driven my decision-making process’.

She added: ‘I am aware that this is a serious, life-changing order, and one with which many people may disagree, taking the view that issues of obesity are matters of choice and lifestyle, with which it is inappropriate for the state to interfere.

‘I am satisfied that this order is both necessary and proportionate for both children, in view of the serious and lifelong risks posed to their physical and mental health if nothing is done to change their lifestyle.’

‘I think she is deluding herself’