Fast Food Advertisement Ban: UK Parents Should Have No Choice Over Parenting

Parenting

Fast food consumption in the UK is a time-bomb waiting to explode anytime. Fast food consumption has been attributed to the rising levels of obesity among UK children and adults. Obesity can result in a host of ill health including diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.

The subsequent cost of these conditions to the tax payer is enormous. The government intends to reduce this cost by making policies not aimed specifically at reducing adult obesity but at minimising child obesity. A major piece of legislation being considered in this regard is the ban on fast food advertisements on televisions before 9pm.

The reason for this proposed ban on fast food advertisements is very simple. Most children tend to be up by 9pm watching television programmes including fast food advertisements. They cannot make informed decisions about the effect of such advertisements on their health. Neither can their parents make it for them. Hence, there is the need for a ban on television advertisements containing fast food.

Can we question policy makers about this decision? Some people will say no. They believe that policy makers know the best for the child. They assume that many politicians are learned and have worked in other sectors of life before joining politics. Therefore, they are capable of making well-informed decisions for the best interest of the child using this knowledge and experience.

Supporters of the proposed advertisement ban will also argue that parents are not sensible enough most of the times to decide what is in their child best interest. If these parents are left to their devices, they will ruin their children’s future. Therefore, knowledgeable policy makers should help parents make decisions regarding their children welfare.

There is no denying the fact that politicians tend to make decisions based on knowledge and experience. Arguing however that parenting powers should be taken away from parents and given to policy makers on the basis of this fact will be an insult to many learned and sensible parents who are capable of parenting their children. Let us not forget that politicians regularly tend to ignore the available evidence when making decisions simply to win votes or support for their party.

This case is demonstrated by that of Professor David Nutts. Professor Nutts was a former UK government adviser on drug policies. However, he ran out of favour with the government and was sacked when he declared that horse racing was more dangerous than drug taking. Apparently, the government wanted him to reinforce the popular view that drug taking was dangerous. This raises the question about whether the proposed ban on fast food television advertisements is evidenced based on child welfare as opposed to lobbying based on the perceived fast food effect on child health.

Furthermore, banning fast food advertisements on Television before 9pm may not be the solution to the child obesity problem. The ban does not affect the sale of fast food in restaurants. Parents can still take their children to take-away shops to buy fast food. In addition, most of the food responsible for obesity are not necessarily the fast food advertised on the televisions regularly. They include food on the supermarket shelves such as cheese, chicken, cakes, and snack bars which parents can buy when doing their normal shopping.

Instead of banning fast food advertisements on televisions so that children cannot become obese it is important to promote the importance of exercise at school. Sedentary lifestyle is one of the factors attributable to child overweight and obesity. In contrast, exercise helps the body metabolise fat and sugar thereby reducing the risk of weight gain. By exercising, children can burn excess fat and sugar they consume from fast food.