SUPER-SIZED KIDS:

Morbid obesity is an unfortunate problem that is only becoming worse everyday. The alarming aspect of it is that it is affecting people at a much earlier age; thus, young children are becoming morbidly obese and are experiencing the same health problems as middle-aged adults. The first section of this note defines morbid obesity and its causes and trends. Section two describes child neglect in general and then distinguishes medical neglect. Section three discusses education and prevention, which are both crucial steps in the struggle with weight-loss and weight-gain. Section four summarizes the beneficial aspects of removing a morbidly obese child who is in a life-threatening position from his or her parents. Section five highlights case-studies from California, Iowa, Indiana, New Mexico, and Texas, where children have either died or were removed from their families because of morbid obesity. Section six briefly touches upon similar child neglect scenarios where removal is permissible and compares those situations with those of morbidly obese children. The seventh section considers some credible counterarguments to government intervention, and the final section suggests some recommendations on how to prevent the morbid obesity crisis from becoming worse than it already is. Too many people are dying from weight-related problems already, yet morbid obesity is preventable! This severe state of obesity is something that can be controlled and prevented, but only if parents take an active role in their child's diet and exercise.     

CHALLENGES FACING CROSSOVER YOUTH: AN EXAMINATION OF JUVENILE‐JUSTICE DECISION MAKING AND RECIDIVISM

Although a substantial amount of research documents the increased likelihood of maltreated youths to engage in delinquency, very little is known about them once they cross into delinquency. These youths are often referred to as “crossover youth,”“dual jurisdiction,” or “dually involved” youth, and based on a growing amount of research, it appears these youths face a number of challenges. They have significant educational problems, high rates of placement changes and high rates of substance abuse and mental health problems, and when they enter the juvenile justice system, they are more likely to stay longer and penetrate deeper into the system then their nonmaltreated counterparts. Using data from Los Angeles County (N= 581), the purpose of this study is to identify what characteristics among a crossover population are more likely to result in receiving harsher dispositions and higher recidivism rates.     

PUNCHING THE PARENTING TIME CLOCK: THE APPROXIMATION RULE,SOCIAL SCIENCE,AND THE BASEBALL BAT KIDS*

The American Law Institute proposes that in contested physical custody cases the court should allocate to each parent a proportion of the child's time that approximates the proportion of time each has spent performing caretaking functions in the past. Examined through the lens of child development research, the approximation rule is unlikely to improve on the best interests standard. It is difficult to apply; is perceived as gender‐biased; creates a new focus for disputing parents; renders a poor estimate of parents’ contributions to their child's best interests; overlooks parents’ intangible, yet significant, contributions to their child's well‐being; and miscalculates the essence of how a child experiences the family. A preferable alternative is a better defined, contemporary best interests standard that accommodates new knowledge and reforms that encourage nonadversarial, individualized resolutions of custody disputes.