Get help from the best in academic writing.

Childhood Obesity: A major Concern for Children’s Health in the United States Essay

Childhood obesity has been on a steady increase in the US resulting in a decline in child health since children who are obese are at increased risk of physical as well as psychosocial health consequences. Ogden, Carroll and Flegal (2008) reveal that by 2008, the prevalence of childhood obesity had risen to a shocking 19.6% for children aged between 6 to 11years.

This is alarming considering the fact that 70% of obese children grow into obese adults. Obesity brings about negative implications on the health of the individual since it is associated with conditions such as type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. It therefore reduces the quality of life and shortens the lifespan of the person.

In addition to the physical healthy implications, obesity may also result in depression due to the psychological abuse that the obese individual suffers. Wardle, et al. (2006) highlight the fact that obesity is a stigmatized condition which results in social exclusion as well as discrimination.

Considering the negative implications of childhood obesity, it is important to come up with solutions to the problem. However, before a solution can be proposed, it is important to highlight the major causes of obesity. While obesity can be attributed to a number of causes, the condition is mostly limited to people who overindulge in unhealthy food and exhibit limited activity.

In the US, childhood obesity levels are closely linked to the lifestyle adopted by the children. Andreacci et al (2007) declares that the increase in sedentary behaviors and decrease in physical activity have been related to the rise of obesity in children.

As can be seen, childhood obesity is a major problem and solutions must be come up with to restore the health of the children and avoid the negative future implications that obesity brings. Proper dieting is one of the means through which obesity can be combated in Toledo.

The CDC (2009) highlights the need for provision of nutritional education guidelines to school-age youths so as to ensure that health lifestyles are adopted early in life and perpetrated all through adulthood. Another means of conducting obesity is by presenting children with opportunities to take part in physical activities both in school and at home.

Get your 100% original paper on any topic done in as little as 3 hours Learn More At school, physical education should be made mandatory in the school curriculum and all students should be required to participate. In the community, parks and recreational spaces should be made so as to encourage a healthy lifestyle by the children.

Childhood obesity is a major issue facing the US and it should not be taken lightly. Obesity not only results in physical health complications but it also causes psychological distress.

This diminishes the quality of life for the child. Even so, there are solutions that can be used to counter childhood obesity. These solutions, if effectively implemented, will result in the improved health of the students which will be beneficial since it will improve the quality of their lives.

References Andreacci, J.L., et al. (2007). “Validation of Sensewear Pro Armband to Assess Energy Expenditure during Treadmill Exercise in Children 7-10 Years of Age”. Journal of Exercise Physiology. Vol. 10 no. 4..

CDC. (2009). Guidelines for School health Programs to Promote Lifelong Healthy Eating. Retrieved from:

Ogden C.L., Carroll, M.D.,

Long term care financing in California versus New York Compare and Contrast Essay

Nursing Assignment Help Table of Contents Introduction




Introduction New York and California have complex Medicaid systems, but one of them is more effective than the other. It is essential to understand how this has occurred so that improvements can be made.

Comparison Eligibility for Long-term care financing through Medicaid in California (Medi-Cal) is determined by a range of factors. These include: one’s income status, assets, citizenship and residential status. California has placed an asset limit on people who qualify for Medi-Cal. One’s bank account, car, and other properties are examined before one can qualify.

An institutionalized patient’s spouse cannot have more than 87,000 dollars if the patient is to receive Medicaid services (Street, 2001). Nonetheless, people who incur frequent medical expenses can be eligible regardless of their income status. In the state of New York, individuals with more than 13, 800 dollars are theoretically ineligible for Medicaid.

However, if one can prove that one has high medical expenditures that leave him or her with 787 dollars worth of remaining income, then he or she would qualify for Medicaid (Empire Centre, 2011). In other words, the state of New York has specific deductible figures that it considers prior to qualification while California is more general in their approach.

The two states also differ in terms of their expenditures. New York’s long-term care financing costs are the highest in the country. This has been brought on by a combination of factors.

First of all, the state has one of the highest percentages of elderly citizens in the country. The national average is 1.8% while New York’s elderly population accounts for 2% of the population (elderly citizens are all those people who are 85 years and above).

Furthermore, older New York residents tend to be disproportionately poorer than other people in the country. Medicaid accounts for 72% of all nursing facility services, yet the national average is 64%. All these factors cause the state’s expenditures to reach enormous levels.

Get your 100% original paper on any topic done in as little as 3 hours Learn More It was reported that in 2009, New York spent 12.4 billion dollars in long-term care financing through Medicaid. Conversely, the state of California spent much less on this service. It used up seven billion dollars in 2008 thus showing that administrative functions may be more cost-effective in the latter state.

Long-term care financing in California occurs through private and public avenues. Medi-cal, Medicare, state aging programs, and county aging programs represent 60% of all expenditure.

Therefore, private funds account for 40% of all expenditure in California. On the other hand, New York is dominated by Medicaid funding. Privately funded long-term care services represent only 13%. This implies that a very huge burden has been placed on the federal government.

A major challenge that exists in both states is the component of spousal refusal. In all federal states, patients who target Medicaid funding can transfer their assets to their spouses. The beneficiary can then refuse to take responsibility for caring for that person (Pear, 2008).

Although spousal refusal was allowed in order to make sure that elderly patients were not placed at the mercy of their irresponsible spouses, the measure has caused more harm than good. States have the ability to sue spouses who steal this wealth, but not all of them are strict about it.

When it comes to the issue of spousal refusal, New York State is more relaxed than California. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why medical expenditure in long-term financing is much higher in New York than in California. Federal states can save about 50 million dollars in Medicaid if they sealed that loophole.

Conclusion The Medicaid program in New York is more superfluous than California’s expenditures because of lower private insurance participation, excessive spousal refusal and flexible eligibility requirements.

We will write a custom Essay on Long term care financing in California versus New York specifically for you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More References Empire Centre (2011). Long term care financing in New York. Retrieved from

Long term care daily (2001). Long term care is too costly says report. Web.

Pear, R. (2008, November 27). New Medicaid rules allow states to set premiums and higher copayments. New York Times, 16.

Street, L. (2001). Understanding Medi-Cal: long term care. Medi-Cal Policy institute, 1-35.