The
fat police are here
September 3, 2003
Arkansas recently passed legislation
addressing childhood obesity. The legislation, House Bill 1583, is:
"an
act to create a child health advisory committee; to coordinate statewide
efforts to combat childhood obesity and related illnesses; to improve the
health of the next generation of Arkansans; and for other purposes."
Via House Bill 1583, Title 20, Chapter
7, Subchapter 1 of the Arkansas code was amended to:
"Require schools to
include as part of the student report card to parents an annual body mass index
percentile by age for each student ..."
Ridiculous, you say! Absolutely.
Welcome to systems education where the purpose of the school is no
longer to educate the child for intelligence (a classical education) but
rather, to produce a world class worker (the product) for the business
(the customer) in a total quality (outcome based) system; said workers to be
trained to fill jobs according to regional economic development strategies and
regional labor market needs as determined by the federally controlled Workforce
Development Board.
In this endeavor, the child must arrive
at school on the first day and every day thereafter "ready to
learn" (Goal 1 of the eight national goals outlined in Goals 2000, Public
Law 103-227.) Any child who does not arrive at school on the first day and
every day thereafter ready to learn is said to be "at risk" for
failure. What constitutes "at risk?" Anything, anything at all, that
might adversely affect the child, whether it be
mentally, physically, or emotionally.
Obesity can adversely affect the child
mentally, physically and emotionally. As such, the child is at risk for failure
and, therefore, deemed not ready to learn. And besides, face it, in this day
and age of streamlined "human resources," what customer (business)
wants an obese employee?
Under Goal 1 of Goals 2000, a child who
is not ready to learn, is at risk for failure, is subject to the intervention
of social services inclusive of mental health and health-care providers, a
partnership of social services and schools under state and federally funded
readiness-to-learn grants, such that every child shall receive the help he/she
needs to reach his/her "full potential" as a human resource.
Sounds too "far fetched" to be
plausible? Think again. Genital exams have been performed on children on school
premises without the informed consent of parents because the children might
have been sexually molested and would, therefore, be
deemed at risk for failure — mentally, physically and emotionally.
Remember the words of Dr Shirley McCune,
then senior director of Mid-continental Regional Education Laboratory (McREL), quoted in the Bremerton Sun (Bremerton,
Washington) on October 14, 1989:
"When you walk in the
building, there's a row of offices. In one are drug counselors. One is for
social security. Another, family and child psychologists.
Yet another has a doctor and nurse who do well-child exams. ... Schools are no
longer in the 'schooling business,' but rather, in 'human resource development'
..."
What happens if the parent does not
agree with the individual education plan (IEP)
drawn up by the school in partnership with social services incorporating
measures deemed necessary to address the child's weight? If the parent resists,
refuses to agree, refuses to become a partner in the IEP,
the parent is interfering in the ability of the child to reach his/her full
potential. As such, the day will come when parents will be forced to comply or
face having their children removed from their home by child protective services
and placed with foster parents who will comply.
In the words of Joseph C Fields (1993):
"Parents learn that
they must provide the best ready-to-learn student possible. ... Citizens would
no more be allowed to put obstacles in the way of public educators than to
interfere with public medical, police, or fire protection personnel who are
doing their duty."
Idaho is, at this time, piloting a
program in which parents who are found to be abusing drugs are given the choice
of giving up the drugs or giving up their children — having their parental
rights terminated by the courts and their children subject to adoption. But
that isn't the same; that's a parent abusing drugs; they deserve to lose their
children. Right? What's the difference between a
parent abusing drugs which is said to place their child at risk for failure and
a parent refusing to go along with an IEP which is
also said to place their child at risk for failure? What parents need to
understand is that under systems education, anything that is deemed to place
the child at risk for failure, comes under the purview
and control of the school.
If this doesn't send chills up and down
the spines of parents, it should. Those who believe it won't happen to them, or
it will only happen to "that family" over there, are deluding
themselves. Readiness to learn is part of systems education. Readiness to learn
is deemed necessary in achieving and maintaining the sustainable global
environment in which every human resource has demonstrated mastery of
"teamwork, critical thinking, making decisions, communication, adapting to
change and understanding whole systems" (WTECB,
1995) as determined by the federally mandated state assessment.
The first principle concerning
government (or public) schools is that they violate the First Amendment of the
United States Constitution. See Are Public
Schools Constitutional?.
The second principle concerning
government (or public) schools is that their purpose is to benefit the
government in achieving and increasing its power and position.
In the words of Edmund Fairfield,
President of Hillsdale College, on July 4, 1853, "The more the ignorance,
the better the slave ... "
In the words of William Pearson Tolley, Chancelor of Syracuse
University; in 1943, "In a slave state, vocational training may be
education enough. For the education of free men, much more is
required."
Resources:—
Fields, Joseph C; Total Quality for Schools; A Suggestion for American Education; Milwaukee: ASQC; 1993.
Workforce
Training and Education Coordinating Board; High Skills, High Wages;
Olympia: WTECB; 1995.
© 2003 Lynn M. Stuter
- All Rights Reserved