Why is it not neglect?

[Dr_Gonzo]

When people get to fat that they can't walk or even leave their own bedroom, why aren't the people that continue to ply them with life threatening amounts of food done for neglect? For example, the 90 stone man who's been in the news recently says he eats 4 'family sized' takeaways a day, yet he can't get up of his bed. Some one is going out and getting this food for him which has led to his weight gain and the subsequent threat to his life.

If someone continued to supply illegal-drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes for a bed bound person who was dying through over consumption of the said product they'd surely come afoul of some neglect law. So why isn't this the case with food?

[DrTre]

It's anything but neglect isn't it?!

[davido140]

sometimes it is.. This is from Yesterday.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-237...

Edited by davido140 on Friday 23 October 14:58

[G_T]

Interesting point but there's no law against buying an alcoholic alcohol or smoker cigarettes is there?

[Penny-lope]

davido140 said:

sometimes it is.. This is from Yesterday.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-237...

Edited by davido140 on Friday 23 October 14:58

It seems this family have actually been used as an example. NHS Tayside supposedly were happy with the weight loss that the children had managed, but Social Services still said they should be taken from their parents for undisclosed reasons.

There was a family (one girl, and two boys) who went the school I work in. All three were/are larger than any of the children involved in this story, but still their mother meets them at the school gates with bags of sweets

[DrTre]

Neglect is inattention though...what's being described is irresponsible and a multitude of other things but it's not strictly neglect, in either the defintion of the term or, I imagine, legally, is it?

ETA am splitting hairs, I take the point

Edited by DrTre on Friday 23 October 15:08

[saleen836]

If a person can afford that many take-away meals of that size in a day it just shows the benefit system is working well and you are indeed better off claiming!

[pad58]

saleen836 said:

If a person can afford that many take-away meals of that size in a day it just shows the benefit system is working well and you are indeed better off claiming!

I so agree ,I was waiting for someone to say just that.

[voyds9]

saleen836 said:

If a person can afford that many take-away meals of that size in a day it just shows the benefit system is working well and you are indeed better off claiming!

They are not fat they are disabled (so more money) and the feeder is classed as a carer so more money still.

[B15TT0]

What's classed as a family size takeaway? It could be just a load of cheap rubbish from those manky places that sell massive pizzas for a fiver or something.

If it's a full Indian banquet for 4 on the other hand with a mixture of curries, sides, naan breads and pickles I .... thmMMMMmmmmm.............

Sorry. Got distracted. Where was I?

[rocksteadieeddie]

Dr_Gonzo said:

When people get to fat that they can't walk or even leave their own bedroom, why aren't the people that continue to ply them with life threatening amounts of food done for neglect? For example, the 90 stone man who's been in the news recently says he eats 4 'family sized' takeaways a day, yet he can't get up of his bed. Some one is going out and getting this food for him which has led to his weight gain and the subsequent threat to his life.

If someone continued to supply illegal-drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes for a bed bound person who was dying through over consumption of the said product they'd surely come afoul of some neglect law. So why isn't this the case with food?

Errr, he was only 70 stone. Fatist!

[Jasandjules]

I had the same thought. Along with, it's not too hard to get him to lose weight is it? Simply stop handing it to him. Or better yet, place it a few feet from his bed so he gets some "exercise"..... Or, just hand him salad for a few months....

[paddyhasneeds]

Littlejohn makes an interesting point in todays Mail - to paraphrase, we have campaign after campaign from the Government telling us to eat healthily or face the consequences, yet when you do get so large they can't look after themselves the state pays for their food, and for someone to fetch it for them and feed it to them rather than force feeding them slim-fast and fitting a gastric band.

It does send a rather mixed message.

[Rach*]

His "carers" should be sacked, when he was too fat to leave the house they would bring him take-aways everyday, reading in The Wail today... 6 sausages, 4 pies, 4 fish, 6 bags of chips, curry sauce etc.

£15k in benefits a year.


The opinion column suggested he should have been sectioned under the Mental Health Act and I agree with them.


Would you call social services if a family member or someone you came into contact with at work was feeding their children to death?