Paternalism: "Happy" Healthy - Hunger Free Kids Act

Paternalism in public health is historically a controversial topic. From the public feelings of distrust towards the government and questions about the government's involvement in everyday life, society has commonly pit governmental power against personal freedom.The Healthy - Hunger Free Kids Act is another example of government intervention in the daily lives of citizens' along with the controversy surrounding it.

Supporters of this act claim that childhood obesity rates are skyrocketing due to public school lunch menus. Claiming that because lunch menus that are funded by the government, it is the government's responsibility to protect and encourage healthy eating habits. Supported by public health officials and the general public, most argue that this act is for the improvement of the overall health of children. This act introduces the necessary food groups and nutrition into children's lunches promoting long term healthy eating habits.

Dissenters of this act argue that because the government is funded by the people, decisions made should include more public opinion. Opposition argues for the freedom of choice for children with extremists arguing this act as an attempt to remove freedom and independence from the youth. Although opposing opinions on this act were not widespread, a more popular financial opposing standpoint connects to the expenses associated with restructuring the school menus. Avoidance of these restructuring expenses led to greater opposition to this act.