Paternalism Pt. 2: Happy - Healthy, Hunger Free - Kids Act

The Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act that was implemented during the Obama Administration caused conflict between parents, the public school system, and the government. Where parents opposed the dictation of health and nutrition to their children and public school systems opposed the costly structural changes to school lunch. Governmental stance to this opposition placed children's health over feelings of autonomy and the expenses associated with large structural change. 

Despite the select feelings of discontent, Government intervention in Public Health is necessary to contribute to the health of children. Backed by medical professionals, the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act advocated to fight childhood obesity. This act ensured that public schools were following healthy nutritional standards for children. With childhood obesity rates skyrocketing, the government stepping in to contribute to the overall health of the youth was justified. Changing public school system meals was within the government's jurisdiction as it is the government's right to set health standards for the health of its youth based on medical knowledge and advisement. 

This main issue with this argument despite medical support, is that to incentivize public school systems to undergo costly structural changes, the government needs to threaten subsidy and funding to public school systems. This threat causes further conflict as the government itself if funded by the people's taxes. This challenging of opposition through threatening funding that originated from the opposition (citizens) creates unrest and anti-government sentiments.