Personal Responsibility And Obesity: A Constructive Approach To A Controversial Issue

Abstract

The concept of personal responsibility has been central to social, legal, and political approaches to obesity. It evokes language of blame, weakness, and vice and is a leading basis for inadequate government efforts, given the importance of environmental conditions in explaining high rates of obesity. These environmental conditions can override individual physical and psychological regulatory systems that might otherwise stand in the way of weight gain and obesity, hence undermining personal responsibility, narrowing choices, and eroding personal freedoms. Personal responsibility can be embraced as a value by placing priority on legislative and regulatory actions such as improving school nutrition, menu labeling, altering industry marketing practices, and even such controversial measures as the use of food taxes that create healthier defaults, thus supporting responsible behavior and bridging the divide between views based on individualistic versus collective responsibility.

The food environment, its effects on dietary consumption, and potential for measurement within agriculture-nutrition interventions

“…Sectors including agriculture, marketing, industry, and government influence the food environment, and are set within social and cultural norms and values. Domestic nutrition research in high-income countries uses the ecological approach to diet and health outcomes routinely, and describes the role the food environment plays in food choices and nutrition transitions (Popkin et al 2005;Larson and Story 2009;Swinburn et al 2011;Wansink 2010;Drewnowski et al 2013;Brownell et al 2010). In international nutrition research and advocacy, the food environment has been considered to a lesser extent.…”

Increasing public support for food-industry related, obesity prevention policies: The role of a taste-engineering frame and contextualized values

“…The food industry shapes the conditions in which food choices are made so that cognitive biases favor overconsumption. Examples include junkfood vending machines in schools, bundling of high-calorie meals as in "value meals" or "all-you-can-eat" buffets, increased portion sizes, placement of candy near the checkout counters of nonfood-businesses, and so on (Brescoll et al, 2008;Brownell et al, 2010;Just and Wansink, 2011;McKinnon et al, 2009). 2.…”

“…Throughout the media, as well as in political discourse, obesity is often framed as either an issue of personal responsibility or as a societal concern (Kersh, 2009;Klein and Dietz, 2010), with the most dominant of the two being personal-responsibility (Brownell et al, 2010). The personal-responsibility frame, which emphasizes the individual's responsibility for his or her obesity status, typifies an episodic frame, contextualizing social concerns solely within the realm of the individual by focusing on discrete events happening to specific people in particular places and at particular times (Iyengar, 1991).…”

Lifestyle as a choice of necessity: Young women, health and obesity

“…At the basis of such initiatives is the intention to educate and vest responsibility over one's health (Brownell et al, 2010). The sociology of health inequalities has provided many criticisms of this approach for its over-simplistic understanding of people's health and lifestyles, notably for its neglect of social structure and social inequalities as important determinants of health.…”