Holy shit, neither of their children had been enrolled in school, the boy was only taken to see a doctor once in his entire life, CPS had never been out to the house, landlord wasn’t allowed in just picked up rent from the porch. No one knew these kids were there essentially.
Well at age 7 they would be entering first grade. The younger child is 5. It’s not good that these kids hadn’t been to any kind of school, but they were still on the young side of being required to. My take anyhow.
Seven is essentially 2nd grade. General rule is age minus 5.
omg "Age minus 5"
there have been times in my life where I've encountered children and I just... no idea what grade they're in or supposed to be in. My ex-wife made fun of me once because of it.
I'm going to lock this little rule inside my brain and next time I encounter a child of known age, I'm gonna belt it out: "OH YOU'RE 10? HOW'S THE FIFTH GRADE?" and feel like a king
Also keep in mind thats usually when they start, so latter in the year it may be 6 difference.
IE, A High School senior (12th grade) starts at 17, but probably ends at 18.
Can also vary regionally. Grew up in Cali, basically everyone started kindergarten at 5 years old. Moved to Oregon during high school and everyone was almost a year older than me. Found out it's because they generally started kindergarten at 6.
They were both school age. 5 years old is kindergarten.
These children were being hidden and no one was looking for them. It's incredibly sad.
I weighed 207 pounds when I was 7, I wish CPS had gotten involved
Hope youre doing better now. ❤️
Thanks! It's a healing journey not a destination type of thing.
Were you like also tall for your age? I can't even comprehend how that would look like. My dad is on a ozempic trip and lost a bunch of weight but still hovers around 100kg. Imagine that in a 7 year old body is crazy
Okay, I'm going to assert that BMI's potential oversimplification of a few edge cases doesn't matter here when I point out that this child had a BMI of seventy.
BMI is a bad, outdated method. But it was used for a reason, which is that it serves as an ok rule-of-thumb for white boys
It's fine as an arbitry metric used to evaluate the same population over time.
It can be used to locate/relativise an individual member of that population within that same population.
It can't be used to simply define any given individual in isolation. But it still is.
Such an extreme outlier is still a valid evaluation in the case though... but only in that the BMI value is extreme, not it's specific value.
116kg for those that work in metric
For people using imperial he’s just over 4’ tall. I have no idea how tall people are in inches saying he’s “50.5 inches” wasn’t helpful to me either
Insane level of neglect
At a hair under 130 cm.
How the fuck does a child even get to that weight. Like I'm five five with bone density high enough I borderline can't swim in freshwater and the worst I've ever gotten to with my weight was 230. Was she weened off milk and skipped right to soda? The fuck.
"On the face of it, this is cruel and extreme suffering from this child caused by the neglect of the parents," Leyton said.
Weird. My read was that it was suffering of this child caused by the neglect from the parents. But, 54%, right?
A kid being 4-5 times the healthy weight for their age is absolutely evidence of shitty parents
You are replying to a grammatical quibble.
Poor kid never had a chance at life.
Healthcare likely would’ve responded, as mandatory reporters. What’s unknown is if the parents avoided the doctor because they knew this or were simply too poor to see a doctor. Not seeing a doctor, with current insurance rates, and the proposal that insurance companies start loan shark in those buying insurance from them, how is this surprising in any context?
Flint MI is a very poor city, on average. Pre2020 you could buy houses for $10k. Now, per the DuckDuckGo AI bot, the average house is $65k. Median household income $33k. And there was the lead in the main water supply not so long ago, not helpful to any of this.
From the article:
Leyton said the father has a good job and the family has real health insurance. The morning the child died, they even called their veterinarian to have their dog treated.
FFS. The dog gets care while the child’s heart explodes under its burden?
It says in the article that the father has a good source of income, and the family has good health insurance. So money and insurance is not an issue. This is pure negligence on the part of the parents.
That also doesn’t surprise me.
"good health insurance" does that mean marketplace insurance or is it actually "good health insurance"? it's seems like that leaves a lot open to interpretation.
True. But if your seven year old is morbidly obese and probably showing symptoms of wider health issues, and you have some form of health insurance for the family (which is inferred by the article), you take them to the doctor more than once in their life and get them checked up. If you don't you are a horrible and negligence parent.
Preventative healthcare for children is free in the US for the most part.
What the fuck
..how…? Like, seriously, how is that even possible? That’s bonkers.
Sugar
Sounds less like an unhealthy diet and more like force feeding, honestly.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.