Is the Best Practice Educating Students on Body Image and Confidence from the UK or US Educational System?

The UK government is providing parents with packs with information to help their children's body image about themselves.  From BBC News:

A pack to help parents educate children on how the media alters images and to inspire them to be confident in their bodies has had government backing.

Developed for six to 11-year-olds by not-for-profit organisation Media Smart, the pack contains before and after touched-up images of celebrities such as Britney Spears.

It also looks at how ideas of the "perfect" body have changed.

The government said it wanted the pack to "empower parents".

"Young people are being set an impossible standard by images in media and advertising which can erode their self-esteem," she said.

"As parents, we are often aware of these issues, but may not have the advice and guidance we need to talk to our children. 

"I want the pack to empower parents to have those difficult conversations and open the door to discussion."

You can download the parent pack here.  It's only 13 pages but is full of information for children to understand the world of advertising and how this world is a fantasy world made up of photo retouches.

The pack explains:

• what is body image
• what shapes body image

Parents learn raise these issues and questions with their children:

• Are the images children see every day affecting their body confidence?
• Help children understand the pictures they see
• Asking their children "are the pictures we see in the media real"?

The packet details how the magic of advertising works to sell products through the use of airbrushing, digital enhancement and photo manipulation.  There are photos in the packet showing bust enhancement and digitally enhanced photos illustrating enhanced skin color and smoothness.  

One interesting fact listed is 75% of 11-21 girls diet to look more attractive.  What young woman who is "average looking" thinks she is attractive when she looks at photographs in magazines of extraordinary looking models...and those photos have been retouched to achieve that extraordinary level?  Would it help those 75% of women if they realized they were trying to achieve an ideal that is naturally not attainable?

The agency offers tips to help parents talk about their child's body image with the child, and the most important tip coming from this governmental agency is the first one listed, You are the most influential role model in our child's life.  From this very important premise, parents are asked to:

• Be positive
• Help your child accept other people's body sizes and shapes
• Listen to your child's concerns
• Don't tease them about their weight, body shape or looks
• Place value on the achievements 
• Respond to your child's concerns

This is a positive, non-punitive packet for parents to give their children information and learn to distinguish fantasy from reality.  This is quite different than the push to track children's Body Mass Index (BMI) here in the United States and to control food choices under the guise of healthy eating initiatives.  The DOEd's continual emphasis on food rather than acceptance of different body sizes and shapes may contribute to eating disorders, rather than making children healthier:

From Education News:

A new report released this week by the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital has suggested that the numerous programs implemented by schools across the country designed to tackle childhood obesity could be going too far — and could potentially cause eating disorders.
 


Controlling what students eat and tracking their BMIs seems counter-intuitive to empowering them to make good choices when the food police is not around.   Maybe the UK's idea of  helping children accept other people's body sizes and shapes as well as their own, is more healthy than focusing on worrying about obesity and calorie counting food all day.  The UK is equipping parents and students with information for them to talk as a family and make informed decisions, rather than being "nudged" into behavior set by governmental agencies.

Tyranny and Tape Measures Coming Soon to a School Near You?

Will the fat police be coming to a school to you soon? They probably will be arriving soon, if they are not there already.

Who would have ever thought private companies could be regulated if they could offer a toy in a child's meal? Who would have ever thought restaurants would be regulated to the amount of transfat and salt a prepared meal could contain?

The fat police are not content to confine themselves to private industries; they also are patrolling the schools. We've written about Michelle Obama's legislative efforts for her fight in the child obesity movement. Many schools have taken out sodas from vending machines in the schools, which may not be a bad idea. But the fervor of insisting our students are denied sugary snacks to force them to eat healthy vs. teaching them and then trusting them to make good decisions are two different paths toward the same hoped for outcome: healthier children who grow into healthy adults.

Libertarians believe children should be taught about good decisions and then make decisions themselves (critical thinking); choice architects insist they know best for the children and they alone should make the choice on whether soda is offered at school or not (authoritarian school of thought). The push to ban sodas from schools has been around since the 1990's, but it is not stopping at soda machines at school.

We now see choice architects at work mandating regulations at McDonald's and restaurants in New York City. When the Longitudinal Data System is instituted pursuant to Race to the Top mandates, your child's Mass Body Index (BMI) will be measured and entered into a data base. It's been happening in Arkansas the last few years. What happens if your child is deemed as too fat? Could the choice architects fine parents if their child's BMI is too high?

The State of Arkansas explains its actions:

It is important to note that the BMI assessment's primary purpose is to alert parents to the problems of obesity by giving them a health marker. BMI is one of the few tools available to screen children and adolescents for overweight. Secondarily, this information was collected and used as a surveillance tool regarding the spread of the obesity epidemic and as a method to monitor weight trends among children throughout the state.

The intentions may be noble but there are serious constitutional concerns raised by collecting and disseminating this information to third parties. Should a child's weight be part of a data system available to unknown entities? Cato raises concerns as well in writing about the Happy Meal ban, just another extension of the soda in schools ban:

The San Francisco ban, and similar proposals on both sides of the Atlantic, are predicated upon four false assumptions: the fast food sold by McDonald's and its competitors makes kids fat; fast-food marketing causes childhood obesity; fat children grow into unhealthy adults; fat kids incur significantly higher health care costs than skinny ones.

While the article specifically targets fast food, I believe sodas have been categorized by the fat police as being as dangerous as fast food. The article goes on to debunk these assumptions and offers forth an interesting fact:

The evidence also shows that the goal of encouraging children to eat low-fat diets is not only unsupported by the evidence but also risks significant harm in terms of adverse effects on growth and nutrient intake.....The evidence-less Happy Meal ban should remind us that the entire idea of fat children is largely a cultural construct, not a scientific one. A hundred years ago, today's penchant for thin children would have been considered a shocking instance of child neglect.

The idea that children weighing over a certain amount are fat or obese has no scientific foundation, as the dividing line between fat and normal is purely arbitrary, representing nothing more than a public health bureaucrat's notion of where normal ends and fat begins.

If your state is receiving Race to the Top funding or has signed onto common core standards, tell your child to watch out for the fat police patrolling the halls at school. It used to be the ruler that was dreaded by children when their knuckles were rapped; currently it is the tape measure around their waists. Is this a violation of you and your child's civil liberties?

Thanks to a reader from the American Thinker site who left this comment:

If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny. – Thomas Jefferson

Gaze into the Crystal Ball: A Glimpse into the Future as Envisioned by Choice Architects

Following up on yesterday's post, I thought you would like to learn more information on "Nudge". I believe this theory has replaced the idea of what makes a republic a republic. Here's an online definition of "republic":

A republic is a form of government in which the citizens choose their leaders and the people (or at least a part of its people) have an impact on its government. The word "republic" is derived from the Latin phrase res publica, which can be translated as "a public affair".

As we are highlighting in these posts, the educational decisions for public education are being made mainly by organizations, leaders and czars who are not elected. These decisions have the same theme: people are to be "nudged" by "choice architects" because we (the citizens) are misguided and need to be correctly guided to make better decisions. The people (at least when it concerns education) are not considered when decisions are made for their children in public school.

We see it in the curriculum in our schools set by the State Department and EPA. We are seeing standards set not by our local or state school boards, but by a group of states based on mandates set forth by the Federal government. We are being nudged toward an accepted way of attitudes and behavior. Michelle Obama petitioned Congress to enact her program through legislation to the schools:

It’s important to be clear,” she said, “that we can’t do any of this unless we pass the Child Nutrition legislation that’s before Congress right now.”

Under the act, food sold in schools would have to meet new nutrition guidelines, but schools would get an increased amount of federal reimbursement money for meals. It would also expand the number of poorer students who are eligible for free and reduced-price school meals.

While this may be a noble cause, should the federal government be granting monies to school if they adhere to certain legislation? This reminds me of Race to the Top grants. If states do what the Federal government mandates, they get money. If they don't agree to give up educational control, or at least adopt Common Core standards, money for certain programs (such as Title 1 money) will be withheld. Both of these scenarios sound like serious pushback to me, not nudge-like in the least.

If you are interested in learning more about "Nudge" you can visit the Nudge blogsite. Here is an interesting piece on nudging and obesity in Japan:

Under a national law that came into effect two months ago, companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of their annual checkups. That represents more than 56 million waistlines, or about 44 percent of the entire population.

Violators are given nutritional guidance and “further education” if they are still overweight after six months of dieting. The law has prompted companies to adopt nudges.

Welcome to the world of "Nudge" that is driving educational policies in the United States as well as measuring citizens' Body Mass Index (BMI) in Japan. It's already here, by the way, measuring your child's BMI and blood pressure is included in RTTT mandates. Could that "further education" in Japan be considered "re-education" in the United States? Apparently the British have been re-educated since 2008 of the dangers of potatoes:

A spokesman for Devon County council said: "The new guidelines came into place for secondary schools this month and all schools are required to abide by them."

The United States has banned potatoes from WIC purchases and are now proposing potatoes be banned from school lunches:

Talk of banning spuds may sound impossible in Idaho, but the federal government is proposing to do just that when it comes to school lunches. The USDA is expected to release changes to the federal school lunch program by the end of the year.

I guess with the push for "International Education Week" we should welcome the nudges we receive, right? After all, we're one big happy global family. We are expected to share the same menus and watch our waistlines. The government and other organizations will make certain that happens. It's the transformation of the culture. Be sure to thank your choice architects.

It's ironic, isn't it? If you think about it, the founders revolted against England for many reasons and transformation is mentioned in the reasons for the Revolution. As you read this explanation of the founders' discontent, think of the underlying cause for the transformation they were seeking. Was it to control the populace or to allow them true freedom of choice?

The American Revolution was the result of a series of social, political, and intellectual transformations in early American society and government, collectively referred to as the American Enlightenment. Americans rejected the oligarchies common in aristocratic Europe at the time, championing instead the development of republicanism based on the Enlightenment understanding of liberalism. Among the significant results of the revolution was the creation of a representative government responsible to the will of the people.

Where is the will of the people in "Nudge"? It's non-existent. The mandates set forth in education or health or food choices represent the oligarchy of "choice architects". When did our government become responsible to an oligarchy vs to the will of the people?