New Health Care Bill Puts Kids First

The view point article by Dr. Johnston, demonstrates citizens of the U.S. and in particular doctors in the U.S. do support health care reform. Dr. Johnston, a pediatrician, outlines in his article many positive impacts the health care reform bill is going to have on U.S. children and their families. He notes that children will not be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, which is also important for children who have significant special care needs.

As Dr. Johnson outlines, reimbursement is going to improve for the providers who give medical care to children. Specifically, time and access according to Dr. Johnson are going to improve for children and their families because the medical care providers are going to be more supported. Even more striking is within the bill where it supports preventative care and in the article it says, out of pocket co-pays for regular preventative checkups are not required. Dr. Johnson reports if children lead healthy lives in childhood, it is more likely they will lead healthier adult lives

Lastly, he states the mission of the American Academy of Pediatrics and their mission, which wants every child to live their best life possible. Dr. Johnson says this mission is closer to being met due to the health reform care bill because of the “Bright Futures” program where families can seek guidance on the health of their children. Additionally, young adults can now be covered on their parent’s insurance policy until the age of 26, which helps stop the gamble young adults are having when deciding not to carry health insurance or not carrying adequate health insurance. He also does not suggest this change will be easy, but in his opinion there are “positive changes” taking place for “children, their parents and grandparents.”

I chose this article because I feel the opinion of a pediatrician is important to highlight. His opinion matters on what is happening with health care reform and children. Doctors, like Dr. Johnson are on the front lines and caring for America’s children and their voice should be heard on health care reform this complex. It is also imperative to address the fact that he is speaking about the reform realistically. Dr. Johnson acknowledges that this will not be an easy change and the media has shown us that the reception of the reform bill is extremely mixed.

I agree with the many points he makes, as a student and young adult having the option to remain on my parent’s insurance policy until the age of 26 is very appealing. It seems that having this option will ensure that young adults reduce the risk of going untreated for disorders or health issues because they did not go to the doctor because of a lack of insurance or inadequate insurance. Additionally, the point he makes that I feel the strongest about is that preventative care will be stressed and encouraged. Preventing long-term health problems in children, leads to healthier more productive adults. It seems absurd to me that such care not be given to children or any U.S. citizen for that matter.

In conclusion, I am also pleased to read that medial providers will be reimbursed and adequately compensated for the care they provide to America’s children. There will always be a need for health care providers and I believe supporting them, in turn, causes children to be cared for even better. I think it will be interesting to see what happens with the reform, while I do not understand all the complexities it brings; I support reform that will have a positive impact on America’s children.

For more information:
http://www.childrenshealthfund.org/advocacy/health-care-for-kids/health-reform

http://www.childrenshealthfund.org/content/grading-health-care-reform-house-bill

Snack Generation

The beginning of March marks the start of National Nutrition Month, which is a nutrition education and information campaign created by the American Dietetic Association. As we try to focus our attentions on the importance of healthy eating and exercise, a glaring trend in the United States must be addressed. Children and adolescents today are facing dramatically higher rates of obesity compared to the recent past, and according to one recent study done by the Trust for America’s Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, childhood obesity rates have more than tripled since 1980. Also, according to this study, obese or overweight children represent greater than or equal to 30% of all children in 30 different states, with Louisiana ranking 7th nationally having 35.9% of children considered overweight or obese (F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies Are Failing in America 2009). These statistics show just how important and widespread this issue is, and the need for healthy and active lifestyles seems more pertinent now than ever.
The causes of obesity and overweight children can be attributed to a number of different factors, from lack of exercise, staying indoors, lack of nutritional meals, etc. However one recent trend seems to show that snacking is one major factor in this epidemic. Snacking, for many children, has replaced the traditional three nutritional meals of the day: breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Instead of eating healthy foods at these times, children are filling up on calories from foods that provide little to no nutritional value, such as cookies, salty snacks, and fruit drinks. Children eat snacks on average about three times per day, accounting for about “27 percent of an average child’s total daily calories”. Children today are eating more frequently and consuming more calories, but are eating less nutritional foods and performing fewer physical activities. Dr. Popkin explains, “My underlying fear is that we’re moving away from being hungry and eating for satiation to just eating… Food is there, and we eat”.
As we celebrate National Nutrition Month, we should focus more energy on teaching and implementing healthy eating habits with our children and adolescents so that they may continue the healthy lifestyle into adulthood. Obesity in America is becoming an epidemic and is the foundation for several medical problems like diabetes and cardiovascular issues. If we can nip the unhealthy lifestyles in the bud, during childhood, the effects have great potential and could possibly decrease the astronomical medical and health care costs we face as adults.

This blog is based on an article from the New York Times titled “U.S. Children: Generation Snack” by Tara Parker-Pope. To read this article, visit http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/u-s-children-generation-snack

Land the Helicopter Parents!

At this point in time, it is fair to say that people know what it means to be a helicopter parent. These hovering parents are enmeshed in their child’s life to an unhealthy extent. These parents often manage their child’s time and ensure their kid’s success. This parenting style has been widely discussed in newspapers, magazines, and TV. There are some benefits seen in helicopter parenting. Obviously, it is better to have an over-involved parent than a parent that is not involved at all, but many problems are seen in children of helicopter parents. Logically, problems arise during the time when kids leave their parents. This time is college.

There are a gross number of students in higher education that have lower levels of functioning because they had helicopter parents. These students lack the ability to manage their time, manage their money, motivate themselves to do work, do their laundry, cook their own food, find their way around campus, and the list goes one. Additionally, helicopter parents are notorious for ensuring their child’s success. In high school if little Timmy made a bad grade, mom could call the teacher and lobby for a B+ instead of a C-. In college, students who are used to being the “most special” and made great grades (some of which were negotiated by their parents) receive a rude awakening when they find out they are not the smartest in their college biology class. These kids can’t believe that their professor won’t curve their grades or let them do extra credit. Naturally, when all else has failed, these children in college will do the only thing they know how. They will call mom and dad.

Thank goodness that college, for the most part, does not support helicopter parenting. The New York Times reported on different tactics that universities in the Northeast employ to cut the cord from parents to kids. Scott Chesney, from the University of New Hampshire, wrote in an online letter to parents: ''I hope you see that at one level we embrace the notion of partnering with you to make your son's or daughter's experience as productive as possible. Frankly, however, we worry sometimes that your interventions may well be impeding your son's or daughter's climb toward independence." At the University of Vermont, students are employs as ''parent bouncers" during orientation to stop parents from wandering into workshops specified for students. Parents leave campus with magnets saying that they ought to ask their child before calling a professor, such as ''What do you think you need to do to work this out?" and ''Who have you talked to on campus about this?" These examples are just a few ways colleges are attempting to limit helicopter parenting.

Though these strategies are well intentioned and many times effective, technology and the nature of habitual behavior makes these parenting changes hard to enforce. Email, texting, and instant messaging keep parents as close as they want to be with their children. So what can be done? A start can be to begin these college interventions in high school. High school is when kids are trying to find autonomy and are skill building through trial and error. If you are a helicopter parent when your kid is seven or eight, you are being a good parent but if a parent is still micromanaging their 17 year old, something is wrong. High school professionals such as staff and educators can develop policy such as not negotiating grades with parents, facilitating helicopter parent support groups, and teaching parents the dangers of helicopter parenting. If these parents were to stop these behaviors, their children could become more independent and more prepared for their life as an adult in college and after. Thus, retention rates would increase on campuses all over the country. It is time we got back to supporting our kids and guiding them into adult hood instead of dragging them behind us.

Blog based on the New York Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/business/yourmoney/11wcol.html

Recession Effects Kids the Most

It would be hard to ignore that children are on the wrong end of the receiving line during this recession. Where there is job loss, a child suffers. Where there are home foreclosures, children suffer. When money runs out for the electric bill, a child suffers and the where there is (fill in the blank) statements can go on and on. It is simple, when a child’s parent or parents suffer, the child suffers. The article, America’s children: Protecting the weakest, printed within the Economist magazine is a true demonstration about what struggles the country is experiencing.

The article begins with what could be considered, good news, stating that children placed in the foster care system was reportedly down 11% since 2002. However, this news is not expected to remain “good” for very long. According to the article, experts are predicting this decrease is going to go back up, finding more children again placed within the system. As a soon to be social work graduate, hoping to work within the child welfare system, I am concerned about the tasks ahead. No one ever said working in child welfare was easy, that’s not the concern; the concern exists because a system that is often lacking appropriate funds already is going to absorb even more cuts. This is what I believe the writer of the article means by stating, hurting America’s “most vulnerable children.”

The question here is, how can children whose parents, no longer able to support them, be supported by a system that may not be able to best support them either? Where is the best place for a child? We know of course, with their family, but when that is not an option, the child welfare system takes over. I think the article touches on a sensitive point, suggesting during times of hardship parents are more likely to harm their children. Is the system going to be able to sustain itself, in order to best serve these harmed children? Only time will tell. Another question exists, as a result of these projected cuts in money and ultimately services, how will we know if the reports and statistics are accurate? There may be a small bright side.

As a budding social worker I fear and have hope, that those who advocate on behalf of children and families will do so in full force. If social workers and child advocates are working hard to serve children, I believe their reports will be accurate giving us a better idea of how to best serve children in the future. The true test of people’s character and willingness to help is evident in times of hardship and while families and children are suffering, some are coming to their rescue. An organization and concept new to me, is that of Safe Families. Safe families as described in the article allows parents to leave their children with volunteer families, similar to foster families, only the children remain in their parent’s custody. As the article alludes, the recession has caused more people to come forward and help children and families out. This concept could possibly be developed into a new branch of the foster care system, where families can seek a safe alternative to providing for their children during the recession. While this may sound like idealist speech, I think during such times it is imperative to search outside of how we have always done things.

Consequently, the concern goes back to overloading an already overloaded system. If it is projected the number of families seeking help from this organization, Safe Families, is going to “double,” considering what this doubling could also mean for the foster care system is a must. For now, let’s hope organizations similar to Safe Families, are contributing throughout the United States; it seems many children would go underserved without them.