I recently read a well-balanced article on this contentious subject in the Los Angeles Times (December 21) by Amina Khan. In the first case of its kind, in June 2009 a South Carolina mother, Jerri Gray lost custody of her son, Alexander, after being charged with criminal neglect. At the age of 14 he weighed 555 pounds (252kg). Ms Gray is facing 15 years on two felony counts. Other parents have been told to demonstrate progress in helping their children to lose weight or risk losing them.

Should parents be held responsible for their child’s obesity? The proponents of advertising junk food to children argue that what children eat should not be controlled by regulation, by a ‘national nanny’, it should be up to parents to ultimately decide what their children eat.  But can they? Can parents compete with the one billion dollars spent each year on the estimated 30,000 advertisements their children will see and be influenced by? Can parents compete with cheap junk food being available at every turn? It’s a  simple idea to blame and charge parents – but ‘simple’ is the only word I can find to explain the attraction of charging parents with abuse – pity that obesity is an incredibly complex pyschophysiological condition.

To my mind, we can’t blame parents until we first give them the resources they need to do the job properly and then they fail to use them. Government need to help them by treating the marketing of foods to children in exactly they same way as they treat the marketing of cigarettes and alcohol to children – for exactly the same reasons! Excess food, like excess alcohol, is dangerous to the health of our precious children. Secondly, parents need help in how to create healthy eating habits in their children – while our work is obviously all about this – we are at the beginning of a very long haul.

Let’s remember exactly why it is that we don’t advertise cigarettes and alcohol to children and why we don’t rely just on parents to discourage kids from smoking and drinking …