The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 was introduced to allow employees to take up to 12 weeks of leave a year to provide care to their families as well as themselves. To be eligible, the employee must have worked for the company for a minimum of a year and have worked at least 1,250 hours. Companies who have at least 50 employees within 75 miles of their location must adhere to FMLA regulations. A similar law, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is sometimes confused with the regulations of FMLA. It is important that companies know the differences of each law to ensure that they are abiding by the correct regulation. Although America provides FMLA, it is one of three countries that do not provide paid leave. America has fallen behind other countries around the world for providing time for employees to take care for their family matters.

The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 was created to the response of needs in the workforce whose demographics had changed. The prevailing demographic shift was the incursion of women into the workforce that incorporated women from childbearing to mothers of all ages. An additional concern was the aging of the workforce. The post World War II baby-boomer population was aging, so the subjects of disability leaves, medical expenditures, and insurance coverage had become a growing concern. Furthermore, there was a mounting national concern about work and family. The Act was thought to be needed to shield workers from losing their jobs when they wanted time off to address family problems as needed (Lewis, 2004).

The Family and Medical Leave Act has been a topic of vast discussions since the legislation was first introduced. Many corporations have been anxious that the law would cause them excessive manpower and financial hardship to remain in compliance. A dialogue on the history, regulations, and impact of FMLA will be presented.

History

The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 is a Federal Law that endured eight years of congressional debates, 13 votes and two presidential vetoes before it was finally declared a law. The Act first emerged during the Ronald Regan years in 1985 and was introduced as the Parental and Disability Leave Act. This legislation was proposed by United States Representative Pat Schroeder, a democrat from Colorado. Schroeder’s intentions were to allow parents of seriously ill children to take leave from work to care for them without the threat of losing their jobs. Under this proposal, parents were permitted to take 18 weeks of leave in a two-year time frame to take care of their ailing, newly adopted or newborn children. Additionally, under the rules, parents were additionally allowed 26 weeks in which they could return to work part time while continuing care of their children. The employee’s benefits were to continue during leave and they were to return to their previous job duties without penalty (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

The bill was modified in 1986 to include the authorization of leave for the care of the employee’s sick parents as well. The bill was renamed to the Family Medical Leave Act to signify the change. The new proposal provided 26 weeks of leave in a two-year period to cover the employees own illnesses and up two 18 weeks designated to take care of a family member. The bill continued to be modified during the Regan administration but faced fierce opposition by corporations and could not muster support by the President. During the remainder of the Regan years, the legislation never made its way to the House floor (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

During the early years of the George Herbert Walker Bush administration, democrats continued to compromise with republicans to produce a bill that was acceptable for congress. In 1990, congress had agreed upon a family leave act that would oblige employers with 50 or more employees to grant up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave based on family medical needs. Although the bill was passed through congress, the Act was immediately vetoed by President Bush on June 29, 1990 (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

Congress continued to team to pass a similar bill in 1992. President Bush again vetoed the bill on September 22, 1992. The senate struck back by overriding the Presidential veto while the House of Representatives voted to support the president’s position (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996). President Bush’s justification for his use of the veto was centered on his apprehensions on implementing federal leave policies on an already delicate competitive world economy. He offered to endorse an alterative family leave incentive that he had previously proposed (Bush, 1992).

Bush (1992) wrote:
America faces its stiffest economic competition in history. If our Nation is to succeed in an increasingly complex and competitive global marketplace, we must have the flexibility in our workplaces to meet this challenge. We must ensure that Federal policies do not stifle the creation of new jobs or result in the elimination of existing jobs. The Administration is committed to policies that create and preserve jobs throughout the economy — serving the most fundamental need of working families. (p.1)

The third attempt by congress to pass the Act was in 1993 when Bill Clinton was president. Unlike his predecessor, Clinton supported the bill. The bill was signed by the president into law on February 5, 1993. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 became enforceable on August 5, 1993 (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

FMLA Overview

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 provide eligible employees with up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-secure leave per year. The FMLA allows working Americans to take responsibility for family life outside by allowing a reasonable period of unpaid leave time for certain medical and family reasons. Under the FMLA the employee will maintain employer health care coverage as if the employee were still working and not taking leave (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

Eligibility

For an employee to be covered under the FMLA they must work for an employer that has 50 or more employees within 75 miles of the location of the business. Employee eligibility is determined by the number of hours and length of time that the employee has put in with their current employer. An employee must have worked at least 12 months for the current employer and have at least 1,250 hours worked within a 12-month period (Employment Law Information Network, 2004).

There are exceptions to the rule where 50 or more employees are required to be covered by FMLA. All federal, state, and local government organizations must permit employees to be able to use FMLA regardless of how many employees are within the organization. Public schools and other public education institutions must also offer FMLA leave to employees (Employment Law Information Network, 2004).
The FMLA allows up to 12 weeks of leave for the following situations (Employment Law Information Network, 2004):

1. Care of spouse, child, or parent with a serious health condition.
2. Employee’s own serious health condition
3. Birth of a child and care for the child within the first year after birth
4. Adoption of a child and care for the child within the first year of adoption

A spouse is identified by FMLA as a significant other that is legally married according to the laws of the employee’s state. Common law marriages recognized by the state are also applicable under FMLA. This can also be interpreted as same sex partnerships in some states. A parent is defined as the genetic parent of an employee or someone who was the custodian of the employee when they were a child. This includes grandparents or any other person that may have raised the employee in the absences of their biological parents. An in-law is not considered a parent and not covered by FMLA (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

Children are designated as biological children of the employee, adopted children, step children, or children in legal custody that are under the age of 18 or over 18 with a disability. The mother and father of an expected birth of a child can also qualify for FMLA. The leave may be granted before the birth of the child and after the birth of the child to provide care. Additionally, the mother may take intermittent time off for any pregnancy complications that have been documented by the health provider. Likewise, parents are eligible to take leave in the first year of an adoption of a child into the home and during the process of such an adoption. Leave may also be taken intermittently as needed as the procedure of adopting my require employees to be away from work. The employee may take leave for their own serious health condition if it renders the employee unable to perform their duties according to their job position under FMLA regulations (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

Additional qualifications

The definition of a serious health condition is laid out in FMLA regulations. Serious heath conditions are described as illnesses, injuries, impairments or any other physical or psychological condition that requires assistance or suppresses a person from a functional lifestyle. This includes the care needed after a major operation or medical conditions that are under the direct supervision of a physician where the individual would not rehabilitate without care. Serious health conditions are also a condition where consecutive three days or more are required for care. Pregnancies are considered a serious illness when prenatal care is needed. Treatments for substance abuse are also covered under FMLA. This includes treatments for the employee or a spouse or parent who may need support (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

The employer has the right to call for the necessary certification statements from the health care provider that will supply the justification required within the boundaries of FMLA. Heath care providers include medical doctors of medicine, dentists, psychologists, and optometrists that are currently practicing their respective occupation. Nurse practitioners and midwives that are authorized by law are also considered authorized health care providers if they are making recommendations within the prenatal spectrum (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996). Health care providers that are recognized by the company or the company’s health plan are also eligible under the law. Authorized providers are extended beyond the United States and include any health provider that is legally recognized and practicing in their residing country (AFSCME, 1998). Finally, Christian Science practitioners who are authorized by the First Church of Christian Science in Boston, Massachusetts are also considered legal providers (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

Employer Rights and Responsibilities

The employer has the right to be given 30 days notice from the employee of any FMLA leave that may be anticipated. In the account that the necessity for leave is not foreseeable, then the employee must notify the employer as soon as possible. The employer may also call for reasonable updates from the employee of their intentions to return to work. Furthermore, in the case that employee is taking time off because of their health; the employer may request certification from the heath provider that the employee is fit to return to work (Employment Law Information Network, 2004).

The employer may also designate their definition of a 12-month period. There are four allowable ways that an employer can define this period. The first allows a company can use is the calendar year which is defined as January through December. An employer can also use a set 12-month period from the date that the employee started with the organization. The third alternative a company may use is to start the 12-month period from the first day that the employee initially used FMLA leave. The final option for an employer is to calculate the 12-month period backwards from the day the employee first used FMLA leave. The employer may switch between the four options available to accommodate the needs of the company. To do so, the employer must give a minimum of a 60-day notice before executing the change. Employees remaining leave time must be calculated to correctly transpose to the new timeframe (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

The employer has the option to deplete FMLA leave for each day that the employee receives paid medical time off such as short-term disability. However, an employer must not charge FMLA leave during such periods where a compulsory or forced plant shutdown is in effect. Leave may continue to be charged at the end of the shutdown (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

The employer may also exercise the right to limit married couples to a combined 12 weeks leave that is designated for a birth when both members work for the same company. This regulation applies regardless if the couples are working at the same location or otherwise. This holds true when adoptions are the reason for leave. Each individual spouse is entitled to their remainder of FMLA leave for additional reasons (Wimberly & Lawson, 1996).

The employer may call for that all accumulated paid time off be used as a part or the full 12 week of employee leave, making the 12 weeks of FMLA the bare minimum amount of time that an employer may offer for leave. The employer must allocate the leave permitted to the employee as FMLA leave to protect the rights of both the employee and employer (Schmidt, 2001).

During the employees leave under the FMLA the employer must retain the group health care coverage under the identical circumstances as if the employee were still working and not on leave. Furthermore, included to protect the employee’s rights is the restoration of the employee to their former job or one that is of similar status. Employers must not retaliate against an employee in any fashion for using their FMLA leave. Employers can not claim that allowing FLMA leave to an employee will cause undue hardship for the company (Schmidt, 2001).

The United States Department of Labor mandates that all employers retain and present the Family and Medical Leave Act Poster (WH 1420) in a noticeable place where employees and candidates for employment can examine it. This poster encapsulates the major requirements of FMLA and informing employees how to register a complaint. This poster should be displayed at all locations although there may not be any any eligible employees (Department of Labor, 2003).

Employee Protection

The Family Medical Leave Act is enforced by the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor. Employees who may have a claim that their company may have violated FMLA regulations may contact the agency directly. Employees are not required to exhaust their employer’s complaint system to file a complaint. Employees have two years after the alleged violation to file and complaint and three years if it was a willful violation. A private lawsuit can also be filed to recover damages (AFSCME, 1998). The following damages can be recovered by the employee if a violation is found (Employment Law Information Network, 2004):

• Back pay, in which is comprised of wages, salary, and benefits that were lost during the time frame of inequity.
• Monetary losses, these are the tangible losses incurred as a direct consequence of the violation. This includes the expenditures of providing care up to 12 weeks of wages.
• Liquated damages, which is equal to the sum of lost wages plus interest. These damages may be reduced or abolished if the employer can demonstrate that they acted in good faith.
• Attorney fees can be recovered by the employee.
• Injunctive relief, this is where the employer has practiced deliberate unwarranted actions to discriminate against the employee. The employee can be restored to their pervious job and the company is barred against any retaliation against the worker.

Americans with Disabilities Act

There is a similar law that originations must be aware of that protects disabled workers. This law is known as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Companies must be aware of the similarities and differences between FMLA and ADA to determine which circumstances follow the correct legislation (Schmidt, 2001).

Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act became in effect on July 26, 1992. ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in employment and defines certain rights of disabled workers in the workplace. Unlike the FMLA, ADA is a civil rights statue that safeguards disabled employees from prejudice from acquiring and sustaining employment and forces employers to make reasonable accommodations to the qualified employee (Schmidt, 2001). Employers must be aware that ADA not only covers protects current employees as with FMLA but potential employees that are applying for employment (State of Florida, 2003). ADA is not restricted to offering leave time as with FMLA but offers supplementary safeguards. ADA mandates that employers that have 15 or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or previous calendar year be subject to the law (Schmidt, 2001).

An individual qualifies for ADA if she or he has a physical or psychological impairment that significantly limits one or more of that individual’s life functions. This also includes anyone who has a documented history of such impairments. Additionally, individuals are qualified if they are considered to have an impairment. Pregnancies and temporary impairments are not included in the scope of ADA (State of Florida, 2003).

To initiate the process, an employee must inform their company that they need an accommodation (State of Florida, 2003). ADA requires the employer to actively engage to provide accommodations to the approved worker. Additionally, ADA contrasts with FMLA in the following ways (Schmidt, 2001):

• ADA provides the eligible worker with an unlimited amount of obligatory leave time when it is an accommodation.
• ADA does not require a minimum number of hours or months as a stipulation for eligibility.
• ADA covers the employee only and is not intended to cover the workers family members.
• Employee may return to work beyond the 12 weeks designated by FMLA and must be reinstated to the same or similar position and salary.
• Under ADA, the employer is not required to preserve employee’s benefits during approved leave.

In dissimilarity to the FMLA, the ADA provides an undue hardship defense for the employer. If the employer can establish that providing exceptionally expensive accommodations to the employee would be detrimental to the finances or operations of the company, the employer may not be required to perform these accommodations (Schmidt, 2001).

An employer can not make an individual undergo a medial examination before an offer is made to the employee concerning a position. However, an employer can declare that the offer is conditional on the results of the tests if the same standard is held for all employees in that position. Current employees can be asked to take a medical exam to determine if they can perform the vital duties of the position. Medical exam can also be used to determine if the employee needs the accommodations that are requested (State of Florida, 2003).

FMLA Cases

Congress enacted the Family Medical Leave Act to balance employees’ home life and workplace demands. But the often-burdensome regulations of FMLA have led to litigations through our judicial system. During 2003, 39,425 FMLA cases were concluded resulting in $212,537,554 in back wages paid to employees and $9,993,041 in civil penalties assessed to companies (Department of Labor, 2004).

There is one lawsuit that has been the focus of much debate. In 2002, Ragsdale v. World Wide Wolverine was decided by the Supreme Court. The case is presented as follows (Cornell University, 2003).

The company, World Wide Wolverine approved Tracy Ragsdale for 30 consecutive weeks of leave for cancer treatments under the Wolverine leave policy. At the end of seven months of leave, Tracy Ragsdale asked for an extra 30 days or part time work under FMLA. Her request was denied. When Ragsdale did not come back to work after her initial leave request she was terminated (Cornell University, 2003).

Ragsdale filed a lawsuit, insisting that Wolverine in no way informed her that her 30 weeks of leave would be designated as FMLA. She insisted that she was entitled to an additional 12 weeks under the Department of Labor regulation 29 C.F.R. 825.700(a) (Cornell University, 2003).

The Ragsdale argument was eventually listened to by the United States Supreme Court and determined on March 19, 2002, under an infringement of FMLA. The Supreme Court rejected the argument by Ragsdale maintaining that the penalty provision that permits employees’ additional leave when employers fail to inform employees their leave would be designated as FMLA, was unfounded. The court established that company did fail to inform Ragsdale in advance that her leave would be considered as FMLA and their verdict sustains the rule that employers must continue to follow the obligation of notification. Furthermore, the Supreme Court evaluated all statutory penalties concerned in the Department of Labor’s guidelines for providing individual notice and resolved that this penalty was disproportional to the original intentions of Congress. The court regarded that Ragsdale’s serious medical circumstance would have kept her from returning to her job whether or not she was informed of the FMLA entitlement. It was left for interpretation that in other cases the up-front notice may weigh in how an employee would decide to control their rights in taking the leave (Cornell University, 2003).

The Supreme Court decision does not impede or overturn the individual notice obligation from the United States Department of Labor. Furthermore, the judgment does not amend any of the FMLA statutes. However, it succeeds to place in doubt the issue of automatic penalties for any originations who fails to abide by the regulation in question. This ruling grants an employer who inadvertently breach a Department of Labor directive for FMLA guidelines, a chance to sustain their argument without any additional fines or consequences (Brown, Mero, & Robinson, 2003).

Statistics

In 2000, the U.S. Department of Labor performed a survey that was sent to various employers and employees. The survey was focused on the impact and opinion of the then close to decade old FMLA law. From 1993 to 2000, over 35 million covered and eligible personnel took advantage from exercising leave for family and medical reasons (FMLA Survey and Information., 2002).

The assessment suggested that more than 80 percent of eligible employers, the Act had a positive effect, or no evident effect, on business efficiency, profitability, or growth. This contrasts with the companies’ initial beliefs when the Act was originally presented to the public. Moreover, two-thirds of eligible employers stated that, overall, conforming to the Act was very or somewhat effortless (FMLA Survey and Information., 2002).

The survey further revealed that more than four in five employees in the study agreed that every worker should have up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in a year for family and medical troubles. Despite this, the reality is that more than half of the workers who received family or medical leave were anxious about having sufficient money to pay their bills. This may clarify why 88% of those who wanted time off but did not use it stated that they would have taken FMLA leave if they could have received some compensation during their leave (FMLA Survey and Information., 2002).

It is projected that 40% of workers expect to need family leave within the next five years. This may lead to pleads to amend the FMLA regulations to accommodate the requests of workers. The survey suggested that Americans endorse the expansion of Unemployment Insurance (UI) or Temporary Disability Insurance (TDI) to supply paid family and medical leave. 79 percent of Americans favor supplying family leave insurance through expanding UI or TDI (FMLA Survey and Information., 2002).

Conclusion

In this fast-paced modern world, daily demands of careers have taken time away from parent’s duties of raising a traditional family. Despite the initial resistance to the Family Medical Leave Act by corporations and politicians, this law is now considered an important step to protect the value placed on a family. However, this should be viewed only as one small step to protect families in the United States.

Out of 158 countries around the globe, 130 have leave policies for parents, of which 98 percent have paid leave. Merely three, the United States, Ethiopia and Australia, present unpaid leave. The question if the United States will ever supply any paid leave does not to seem to be expected soon (FMLA Survey and Information., 2002). Nevertheless, as the world seems to place importance on the significance of family, Congress may possibly have to mull over strengthening current FMLA regulations or establishing new laws to keep in tempo with the remainder of the world governments.

As the leader of the world, America should be assertive in being the world leader in family values as well. This country should set the standards for the world to follow our footsteps instead of lagging behind the rest of the world. America should continue to improve measures to protect families while finding a balance with our careers.

References

AFSCME (1998). Afscme guide to the family and medical leave act: Questions & answers. Retrieved July 19, 2004 from http://www.afscme.org/wrkplace/fmla.htm
Brown, J. A., Mero, N. P. & Robinson, R. K. (March 2003). Employer penalties for failure to provide individual employee notification under the family and medical leave act: “Clarifications” following ragsdale v. wolverine worldwide, inc. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. 15(1). p. 11.     New York. Retrieved on July 15, 2004 from ProQuest.
Bush, G.W. (1992). Message to the senate returning without approval the family and medical leave act of 1992. Retrieved July 8, 2004 from http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/papers/1992/92092206.html
Cornell University (2003). Ragsdale v. wolverine world wide, inc. (00-6029). Retrieved July 18, 2004 from http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/display.html?terms=administrative&url=/supct/html/00-6029.ZS.html
Employment Law Information Network (2004). Fmla Summary. Retrieved July 5, 2004 from http://www.elinfonet.com/FMLAsum.php
FMLA Survey and Information Web Site (2002). Fmla statistics. Retrieved July 8, 2004 from http://www.familyleavesurvey.homestead.com/FMLAStats.html
Lewis, G. (2004). Violence at work: Causes and protection. Retrieved July 18, 2004 from http://www.geraldlewis.com/chapter%20draft.htm
Schmidt, M. (2001). Employee leaves of absence: Overlapping and conflicting requirements. Retrieved July 4, 2004 from http://www.fbwhlaw.com/docs/Interplay Between FMLA and ADA.pdf
State of Florida (2003). Comparison of ada and fmla. Retrieved July 20, 2004 from http://www.state.fl.us/dms/hrm/leave/fmla_ada.html
U.S. Department of Labor (2003). Family and medical leave act (fmla) poster. Retrieved July 15, 2004 from http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/posters/fmla.htm
U.S. Department of Labor (2004). Wage and hour division enforcement in fiscal year 2003 at ten-year high. Retrieved July 16, 2004 from http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/statistics/200318.htm
Wimberly & Lawson (1996). The family and medical leave act of 1993: A practical guide for human resources professionals. Retrieved July 8, 2004 from http://www.wimlaw.com/fmla.htm

The post The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 appeared first on Michael A. Hartmann.

Introduction

The McDonald’s Corporation has been beleaguered for their questionable business practices and ethics. Opponents claim that the corporation aggressively advertises low nutritional food products to children. Challengers also claim that the food is also causes health problems for children and adults as well. These ethical issues have placed the corporation in the spotlight as a representative of fast food restaurant industry. McDonald’s has escaped civil lawsuits thus far. However, the company has been unable to break away from ongoing criticism concerning the integrity within its social responsibility practices.

McLibel

Fast food restaurants have become a popular target of criticism by marketing opponents (Raeburn, 2002). Studies show that near half of the money spent on food by Americans is for eating out. This is estimated to generate over 100 billion dollars income each year for restaurants in the United States. These studies also further conclude that each day at least 25% of America visits a fast-food chain (Appleson, 2003). Fast food has also seen a rise in distribution in the public school system. In the mid 1990’s, 13% of schools served fast food in schools. This has been an issue with nutritionists because the fast food being served lacks the nutritional value that conventional school food does (Raeburn, 2002).

In recent years, The McDonald’s Corporation has been frequently challenged as the leading source of the controversy surrounding marketing food to children (Raeburn, 2002). The corporation reportedly spends two billion dollars each year on advertising. The company also targets children by using promotional tools such as toys, school programs, school team sponsorships, and figures such as Ronald McDonald (McSpotlight, n.d.). To their credit, McDonald’s raised an estimated $15-20 million in 2002 to sponsor World Children’s Day. This is in addition to the 300 million dollars raised to their Ronald McDonald House Charities (RMHC). The corporation claims that these funds are to improve the heath of children around the world (McDonald’s Corporation, 2002).

While their marketing techniques are being criticized, it is the lack of nutritional value that has generated most of the concerns. Fast food rarely meets USDA nutritional guidelines and is high in fats. Today’s super sized menu items have tripled the amount of calories in an order of french-fries that were ordered in the 1960’s (Raeburn, 2002). Typically a person could consume 900 calories in the super-sized soda and french-fries alone (Bird, 1998).

McDonald’s has defended these claims by launching a campaign that also uses information from health experts and nutritionist. McDonald’s has stated that eating habits are just a single element involved in obesity. They state that additional elements such as genetics, exercise, cultural issues, economic, and over-eating contribute to obesity as well. The corporation further states, according to the American Dietetic Association (ADA), that it is unhealthy to eliminate an individual’s favorite food from their diet (McDonald’s Corporation, n.d.). The company further claims, “Many nutrition professionals agree that McDonald’s food can be part of a healthy diet based on the sound nutrition principles of balance, variety and moderation (McDonald’s Corporation, p. 1). McDonald’s also states that there are heaps of alternative foods found in their menu such as salads (Raeburn, 2002). According to the fast food company, it has been providing nutritional information on their menu items for over 25 years (McDonald’s Corporation, n.d.). Under pressure, the company announced in 2002 that it was adding yogurt and a sweetened fruit menu for children. However McDonald’s opted not to accept any responsibility for health problems but to shift blame to other sources (Raeburn, 2002).

Furthermore, McDonald’s has designated a few restaurants to partnership with the Eat Well Play Hard (EWPH) program in New York State. The goals of the EWPH are to prevent obesity in children and reduce the likelihood of chronic diseases through a proper diet and exercise. EWPH selected McDonald’s because of their successful marketing strategies to children. Under a three month promotional period, McDonald’s offered an alternative Happy Meal Plus to the menu that was the same price as the standard Happy Meal. The Happy Meal Plus contained the same food as the Happy Meal but included a cup of fruit. The soda was replaced by the choice of a low-fat milk, low-fat chocolate milk or low-fat frozen yogurt parfait. The conventional Happy Meal toy was replaced with an item that would bring about a child to do physical activity such as a jump rope, Frisbee, or beach ball. Surveys given to the customers indicated that 90% thought that the Happy Meal Plus was pleasant and would purchase it again (Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2002).

A landmark lawsuit filed against McDonald’s was dismissed in a US District Court in January 2003 (Appleson, 2003). A lawyer was suing on behalf of several teens that blame their obesity on food consumed from the franchise. The lawsuit further claimed that the company deliberately misled customers in regards to the nutritional value of their foods and did not warn customers of the health risks from eating them (BBC News, 2002). This case has been coined as the “McLibel” case (McSpotlight, n.d.). One of the plaintiffs was a 400 pound 15 year old boy that testified that he obtained diabetes and this weight gain because of the restaurant chain. The boy claimed that he ate at McDonald’s everyday since he was six (Appleson, 2003). His mother claimed that she had always believed that McDonald’s fast food was healthy for her son (BBC News, 2002).

The lawyer for McDonald’s claimed that the suit should be considered frivolous. He pointed out that McDonald’s has been providing data on their menu items to the public for many years. The lawyer went on to say that the fast food giant has nothing to hide and the public has a full understanding of the nutritional value of fast food (BBC News, 2002). The judge agreed with McDonald’s on these points and ruled that he did not find evidence that the company was intentionally misleading customers (Appleson, 2003).

Although the judge dismissed the case, he scolded the company on their cooking and processing methods. He further warned McDonald’s the plaintiffs could re-file their case if evidence can be obtained regarding the processing methods of their products (Appleson, 2003). Future lawsuits are expected and other fast food chains are concerned that if a lawsuit against McDonald’s similar to this is successful that they might also be held liable in future cases (BBC News, 2002). Other experts believe that the fast food companies should be partially held accountable for obesity and diabetes in the same fashion that cigarette companies were to nicotine addiction and lung cancer (Bird, 1998). Many nutritionists and attorneys believe that food companies should be held responsible for some of the estimated 117 billion dollars spent on obesity related illnesses (Raeburn, 2002).

In response to prevent a rash of lawsuits, the US Congress has introduced the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act. This legislation would limit lawsuits against restaurant chains to cases where the companies fail to meet regulatory requirements (Supermarket Guru, 2003).

False Advertising

According to the Harvard School of Public Health, 30,000 or more premature heart disease deaths are caused each year by Trans Fatty Acids (TFA) from partially hydrogenated oils in our food supply. In response to these concerns, in September 2002, McDonald’s issued a Press Release that announced a significant reduction of TFAs with improved cooking oil. The new oil was said to reduce French fry TFA levels by 48%, reduce saturated fat by 16% and dramatically increase polyunsaturated fat by 167%. However McDonald’s never committed to the change. Later the company removed the September 2002 Press Release from its website and according to challengers, McDonald’s attempted to hide the existence of the declaration (PRWeb, 2004).

In January 2004, BanTransFats.com, Inc., A California non-profit organization filed a lawsuit against McDonalds Corporation for false advertising regarding its announcement they would implement a change to new cooking oil by February 2003. The plaintiffs claim that McDonald’s lied about this change, and they have not complied by the announcement. The plaintiffs’ further claim that McDonalds never made the change to the new cooking oil, and made no announcement to the public that they had not made this change. They accuse the company of false advertising, misleading the public and not taking the health of others seriously for profit. In the lawsuit, the accusers are asking for an order for McDonalds to inform the public about failure to use the cooking oil, with the same degree of publicity as they gave in September 2002. This lawsuit is still pending (PRWeb, 2004).

Super Size Me

McDonald’s has also received negative publicity about their food quality from filmmakers like Morgan Spurlock. Morgan Spurlock is an award-winning writer, director and producer. Spurlock directed a documentary about McDonalds that was entitled “Super Size Me.” During the making of the film, which is an examination of fast food and obesity in America, Spurlock subjected himself to a grueling, 30-day “McDonald’s only” diet to document the impact on his health. He started out at a healthy 185 pounds and had packed on 25 pounds by the end of the diet. Within a few days of launching his diet, Spurlock, was depicted as vomiting out the window of his car, and doctors who examined him were claimed to be shocked at how rapidly Spurlock’s entire body deteriorated. Moreover, it is professed that his liver became toxic, his cholesterol shot up from a low 165 to 230, and he stated that his libido declined and he suffered headaches and depression (Keppler Associates, 2004).

On March 3, 2004, McDonald’s announced that by the end of 2004, the Super size option will no longer be available in the United States apart from in certain promotions. The company claims that the option was eliminated as part of an endeavor to simplify its menu and give customers selections that support a balanced lifestyle. McDonald’s claimed that the Spurlock movie was not a factor in the menu change. A company spokesman rebuffed the movie and referred to the movie as “a super-sized distortion of the quality, choice and variety available at McDonald’s.” (CNN, 2004)

Conclusion

McDonald’s business ethics and integrity has come into the spotlight. The company has yet to demonstrate genuine endeavors to change their marketing techniques or their questionable food products. Although McDonald’s has escaped lawsuits in the past, however, they may be held liable for some of the health issues surrounding their products such as obesity and diabetes. The corporation consistently avoids any accountability and attempts to shift blame to other sources of unhealthy factors that contribute to diabetes and obesity. McDonald’s has to find a balance between attaining good profits and producing healthy food. Until then, the company must prove that they are indeed making changes and being perceived as being more socially responsible.

References

Appleson, G. (2003). Obesity suit against McDonald’s dismissed. Retrieved February 25, 2004, from http://news.findlaw.com/news/s/20030122/foodMcDonald’sdc.html
BBC News (2002, November 22). McDonald’s targeted in obesity lawsuit. Retrieved February 27, 2004, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2502431.stm
Childhood overweight – A public health issue. (2002, November). Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 11, S4-S5. Retrieved February 29, 2004, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).
CNN (2004). McSupersizes to be phased out. Retrieved March 3, 2004, from http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/03/02/mcdonalds.supersize.ap/index.html
Keppler Associates (2004). Morgan Spurlock. Retrieved February 28, 2004, from http://www.kepplerassociates.com/speakers/spurlockmorgan.asp?
McDonald’s Corporation (2002, May 13). Social Responsibility Report. Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://www.McDonald’s.com/corporate/social/report/media/socialresponsibility.pdf
McDonald’s Corporation (n.d.). Facts about overweight and obesity: What the experts say. Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://www.McDonald’s.com/countries/usa/food/health/health.html
McSpotlight (n.d.). Issues: Advertising. Retrieved February 28, 2004, from http://www.mcspotlight.org/issues/advertising
PRWeb (2004). McDonalds Exposed for False Advertising. Retrieved February 28, 2004, from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/1/prwebxml99615.php
Raeburn, P. (2002). Why we’re so fat; Fast food as school, huge portions, and relentless TV ads make it easy. Newsweek, 3804, 112. Retrieved February 28, 2004, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).
Supermarket Guru (2003, February 1). Obesity and Fast Food Lawsuits. Retrieved February 27, 2004, from http://www.supermarketguru.com/page.cfm/1288

The post McDonald’s Ethical Challenges appeared first on Michael A. Hartmann.

The success of corporations marketing food products to children has drawn criticism from various special interest groups. There is a growing controversy on the ethical implications involved.  Many issues such as obesity, compulsive behavior and self identity crisis in children have been blamed on marketing targeted to children.

The Controversy of Marketing to Children

Introduction

Advertising has evolved over the years from a way to expose a given product or service to a scientific approach.   Marketers have effectively researched techniques on how to manipulate a target consumer into purchasing their products.  Children have been a favorite of corporations because they can be easily convinced to desire their products.

While this has proved to be extremely profitable for the marketers, opponents believe that targeting and manipulating children is not ethical.  In order to understand this controversy, an examination of techniques and the implications of marketing food to children will be introduced.

Children as a Powerful Marketing Segment

In the United States there are about 40 million children between the ages of 5 and 14.  Children in one of three American families are reported to influence dinner grocery purchasing decisions.  Furthermore, children always or often influence the purchase of breakfast foods (Hunter, 2002).  To measure this influence on a monetary scale, children are responsible for influencing more than 170 billion dollars a year of their parent’s money and an additional 22 billion dollars of their own funds.  This purchasing influence is likely to increase in the future (Hunter, 2002).  Children represent about one third of the major market (Beder, 1998).  Marketers have come to realize the influence that children have on household purchases.  Children are viewed as a powerful segment to be contended with (Stanton, 1998).

Not only do children represent the current market, but they also represent the market of the future.  Children are viewed as vulnerable marketing targets.  They can be easily manipulated into developing purchasing habits that will be carried into adulthood (Beder, 1998).

As children age, their impact and influences on purchasing decisions take different roles.  There are several stages that children are in as they grow (Beder, 1998).

• From age one: Accompanying parents and observing.  Children are exposed to the shopping world and observe their parents choose products from a vast selection of attractive items (Beder, 1998).  Items purchased by parents are chosen fully based on decisions made by parents (Moser & Horton, 1999).
• From age two: Accompanying parents and requesting.  Children are starting to request items that they recognize from media advertisements.  They may reach for these items, whine, grunt, and cry or make some other gestures that they desire these products (Beder, 1998).  At this stage, children begin to badger their parents to purchase specific products (Moser & Horton, 1999).
• From age three: Accompanying parents and selective with permission.  Children are able to make their own choice and present the products to their parents for approval.  These products are mostly recognized from advertisements on television (Beder, 1998).
• From age four: Accompanying parents and making independent purchases.  Children can learn to make their own purchase for products that they selected.  Children may be allotted their own funds by their parents or another source to make a purchase (Beder, 1998).
• From age five: Going to the store alone and making independent purchases.  Children yearn for the power to make their own decisions.  Children are likely to purchase products tied with the brand names that they have been exposed to on television or another advertising media (Moser & Horton, 1999).

Advertisers claim that they are merely empowering the children into the marketing process.  Critics rebuff these statements and declare that children are naive in this stage of life and are taken advantage of by marketers.  Although many different products are targeted to children, critics have focused on the exploits of advertisements of low nutritional foods (Moser & Horton, 1999).

The Product Demands of Children

Being that children are viewed as such a valuable segment, companies must seek out techniques to ensure that children take interest and understand advertisements the first time they are exposed to them (Barrett, 1997).  Manufacturers that fail to reach the children effectively will be largely ignored by them (Beder, 1998).  Millions of dollars are spent each year by advertisers to research effective means of reaching children (Hunter, 2002).  These techniques are constantly being updated to keep up with the changing attributes of children’s trends (Barrett, 1997).

Food manufacturers have made use of research to help keep in touch with the desires of children.  One of the most successful research tools has been using focus groups with children.  Researchers listen meticulously to find out what children want to eat, when and where they eat, and what attracts children to food products (Hunter, 2002).

Food producers have established that children prefer exciting packaging, flavor matters, and largely ignore the nutritional aspects of food.  Children are obsessed by fun and instant satisfaction.  Children love wild names for flavors and colors.  The use of attractive bright colors on packaging with creative names has been found to allure children.  Children also love food products that contain toys and gadgets.  Colors of the food itself have also come into play (Hunter, 2002).

Blue is now the favorite color of children.  Food companies have responded to this by introducing blue food coloring in their products.  This has resulted in products such as blue French fries, margarine, soda, applesauce, and mayonnaise. Products that will turn their tongue blue are an additional thrill (Hunter, 2002).

Other colors can be extremely popular when the product has a different color than what is used traditionally.  In response to research by Heinz, the company introduced ketchup that is the color green.  This introduction has created a surge in the interest that children have in the ketchup market. Sales for this products reached ten million dollars in the first seven months. Children have also requested that Heinz create additional colors in the future.  The company already has plans for a purple color to be introduced (Hunter, 2002).

Cartoon characters have also played a dominant marketing role in attracting children.  Food marketers may try to develop their own sentimental characters.  They may elect to license an already popular character that children are familiar with on television or at the theatre.  Children are also preferable to packaging that can be easily held in their hands or shaped like a cartoon character or animal (Hunter, 2002).

Noting that the children are driven by fun, not much research is invested in the nutritional substance contained in the food. These marketing practices have raised concerns with nutritionists and other groups as well (Hunter, 2002).

Parents are coaxed by their children to purchase food products based on the children’s appeal to the product resulting from these advertisements (Hunter, 2002).   In a poll administered by www.supermarketguru.com, parents were asked a series of questions concerning food marketed to children.  Eighty percent of parents polled found that the source of brand recognition for children was television ads.  There were 81% of the parents that agreed that there was too much food marketing to children.  Although 51% thought that the taste of these foods was good or excellent, only 7% agreed that the nutritional content of these foods were good or excellent (Brandweek, 2002).

World Nutritional Concerns

The American Medical Association has warned the nation that obesity is the leading health problem.  Researchers found that 30.5% of Americans are considered obese.  This has increased from 22% indicated in a similar study conducted during the 1990’s (Raeburn, 2002).  Obesity is believed to increase the risk of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, and other ailments.  Only tobacco accounts for more than the 300 thousand deaths a year attributed to obesity.  This same study found that 64.5% of Americans are overweight and 15% of children aged between six and nine are also considered overweight (Raeburn, 2002).  In order to be considered overweight, a child’s Body Mass Index (BMI) must exceed 95% (Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2002).

In addition to obesity, there has also been an increasing concern for the nutritional value of the food ingested by Americans today (Raeburn, 2002).  Published in the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals Report, about half of the children five years and younger do not get enough calcium.  The report also indicated that 56% of boys and 46% of girls between six and 11 also lack enough calcium.  Also children six to 12 were found to only eat half of the recommended daily servings of fruits and vegetables (Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2002). Not only are nutritionists concerned about children’s physical implications of being overweight, there are some emotional consequences also involved. Overweight children are more likely to have emotional problems such as a low self-esteem because of their appearance (Public Health Association of Australia, 2002).

Health organizations, nutritionists and dietitians have placed most of the blame on advertisements by the food industry (Raeburn, 2002).  They blame these companies for child obesity, lack of nutrition in these products and the physiological concerns of children.  These groups have taken a strong stand against the practice of marketing food to children and challenge the intent of these advertisers.  Many nutritionists feel that it is immoral how the industry advertises unhealthy food products (Nutrition Australia, 1988). In 1998 companies in the United States spent 118 billion dollars on media advertising.  By average that would be five thousand dollars for every person in the country (Moser and Horton, 1999).

The concern over child obesity has become such an international  issue that the World Health Organization is in the process of considering countering strategies against marketing these foods to children (Wentz & Bowes, 2002).  United States President George W. Bush has launched a personal campaign to persuade Americans to keep fit and follow a healthy diet (BBC News, 2002).

The Impact of Television Advertising on Children

Advocates argue that television advertisers are the principal culprits of targeting children with questionable marketing tactics.  Children are exposed to more television advertisements than by any other source.  They cite that food advertising accounts for between 25% and 76% of all advertisements during children’s viewing time (Public Health Association of Australia, 2002).  Television advertising consists of roughly 70% of the total sum of funds spent on advertisements to children in the United States (Beder, 1998).  Television viewing times of children which typically are from 7 to 8 pm and 3 to 6 pm on weekdays and Saturday mornings are saturated with advertisements for low nutrient foods Public Health Association of Australia, 2002).  These commercials are carefully studied for maximum psychological impact on children.  Some commercials take many months to create to achieve these results.  Children are continuously exposed to these commercials to generate interest for the children to pester their parents for the products (Moser and Horton, 1999).  Before children in America reach school age, they will have spent an average of 5 thousand hours in front of the television (Beder, 1998).

Experts believe that children under the age of eight cannot determine if a commercial is making real or implied claims about their product.  They further claim that at that age, children believe nearly all that they hear on television.  Activists also claim that the bombardment of television advertisement for low nutritional foods deprives children of their exercise time. There is also an argument that only on rare occasions will foods that are considered nutritional are advertised to children (Public Health Association of Australia, 2002).

Food and advertising firms have rejected the idea that television ads have a colossal impact on children (Public Health Association of Australia, 2002).  Advertisers also discard the claims that television ads are causing children to consume excessive food and soft drinks (Bachmanit, 2002).

Recently in December 2002, the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) has called for all food advertising during children’s viewing times to be banned (Advertising Education Forum, 2002).  The PHAA believes that children’s eating habits are directly related to protection from disease in adulthood.  They also state that eating patterns in life are established in childhood and that advertisement has a significant influence on these patterns (Public Health Association of Australia, 2002).

This concept is not restricted to Australia alone.  Around the world, various organizations and health experts have been lobbying their governments to establish regulations to food advertisers.  In Italy, a group of opposition members of Parliament has introduced a bill in the Chamber of Deputies which called for a mandate that all radio and television operators abide by a children’s rights policy.  The British Medical Journal has released publications that recommend action against targeting children by food advertisers.  Finland, Norway and Sweden have already imposed strict marketing guidelines (Carter, 1996).  In the United States, the Los Angeles school district has banned the sale of all carbonated soft drinks from their 677 schools (Advertising Education Forum, 2002).

McDonald’s Corporation Case Study

Fast food restaurants have become a popular target of criticism by marketing opponents (Raeburn, 2002).  Studies show that near half of the money spent on food by Americans is for eating out.  This is estimated to generate over 100 billion dollars income each year for restaurants in the United States.  These studies also further conclude that each day at least 25% of America visits a fast-food chain (Appleson, 2003).  Fast food has also seen a rise in distribution in the public school system.  In the mid 1990’s, 13% of schools served fast food in schools.  This has been an issue with nutritionists because the fast food being served lacks the nutritional value that conventional school food does (Raeburn, 2002).

In recent years, The McDonald’s Corporation has been frequently challenged as the leading source of the controversy surrounding marketing food to children (Raeburn, 2002).  The corporation reportedly spends two billion dollars each year on advertising.  The company also targets children by using promotional tools such as toys, school programs, school team sponsorships, and figures such as Ronald McDonald (McSpotlight, n.d.).  McDonald’s also raised an estimated $15-20 million in 2002 to sponsor World Children’s Day.  This is in addition to the 300 million dollars raised to their Ronald McDonald House Charities (RMHC).  The corporation claims that these funds are to improve the heath of children around the world (McDonald’s Corporation, 2002).

While their marketing techniques are being criticized, it is the lack of nutritional value that has generated most of the concerns.  Fast food rarely meets USDA nutritional guidelines and is high in fats.  Today’s super sized menu items have tripled the amount of calories in an order of french-fries that were ordered in the 1960’s (Raeburn, 2002).  Typically a person could consume 900 calories in the super-sized soda and french-fries alone (Bird, 1998).

McDonald’s has defended these claims by launching a campaign that also uses information from health experts and nutritionist.  McDonald’s has stated that eating habits are just a single element involved in obesity.  They state that additional elements such as genetics, exercise, cultural issues, economic, and over-eating contribute to obesity as well.  The corporation further states, according to the American Dietetic Association (ADA), that it is unhealthy to eliminate an individual’s favorite food from their diet (McDonald’s Corporation, n.d.).  The company further claims, “Many nutrition professionals agree that McDonald’s food can be part of a healthy diet based on the sound nutrition principles of balance, variety and moderation (McDonald’s Corporation, p. 1).  McDonald’s also states that there are heaps of alternative foods found in their menu such as salads (Raeburn, 2002).  According to the fast food company, it has been providing nutritional information on their menu items for over 25 years (McDonald’s Corporation, n.d.).  Under pressure, the company announced in 2002 that it was adding yogurt and a sweetened fruit menu for children (Raeburn, 2002).

Furthermore, McDonald’s has designated a few restaurants to partnership with the Eat Well Play Hard (EWPH) program in New York State.  The goals of the EWPH are to prevent obesity in children and reduce the likelihood of chronic diseases through a proper diet and exercise.    EWPH selected McDonald’s because of their successful marketing strategies to children.  Under a three month promotional period, McDonald’s offered an alternative Happy Meal Plus to the menu that was the same price as the standard Happy Meal.  The Happy Meal Plus contained the same food as the Happy Meal but included a cup of fruit.  The soda was replaced by the choice of a low-fat milk, low-fat chocolate milk or low-fat frozen yogurt parfait.  The conventional Happy Meal toy was replaced with an item that would bring about a child to do physical activity such as a jump rope, Frisbee, or beach ball.  Surveys given to the customers indicated that 90% thought that the Happy Meal Plus was pleasant and would purchase it again (Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2002).

A landmark lawsuit filed against McDonald’s was dismissed in a US District Court in January 2003 (Appleson, 2003).    A lawyer was suing on behalf of several teens that blame their obesity on food consumed from the franchise.  The lawsuit further claimed that the company deliberately misled customers in regards to the nutritional value of their foods and did not warn customers of the health risks from eating them (BBC News, 2002).  One of the plaintiffs was a 400 pound 15 year old boy that testified that he obtained diabetes and this weight gain because of the restaurant chain.  The boy claimed that he ate at McDonald’s everyday since he was six (Appleson, 2003).    His mother claimed that she had always believed that McDonald’s fast food was healthy for her son (BBC News, 2002).

The lawyer for McDonald’s claimed that the suit should be considered frivolous.  He pointed out that McDonald’s has been providing data on their menu items to the public for many years.  The lawyer went on to say that the fast food giant has nothing to hide and the public has a full understanding of the nutritional value of fast food (BBC News, 2002).  The judge agreed with McDonald’s on these points and ruled that he did not find evidence that the company was intentionally misleading customers (Appleson, 2003).

Although the judge dismissed the case, he scolded the company on their cooking and processing methods.  He further warned McDonald’s the plaintiffs could re-file their case if evidence can be obtained regarding the processing methods of their products (Appleson, 2003).  Future lawsuits are expected and other fast food chains are concerned that if a lawsuit against McDonald’s similar to this is successful that they might also be held liable in future cases (BBC News, 2002).  Other experts believe that the fast food companies should be partially held accountable for obesity and diabetes in the same fashion that cigarette companies were to nicotine addiction and lung cancer (Bird, 1998).  Many nutritionists and attorneys believe that food companies should be held responsible for some of the estimated 117 billion dollars spent on obesity related illnesses (Raeburn, 2002).

In response to prevent a rash of lawsuits, the US Congress has introduced the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act.  This legislation would limit lawsuits against restaurant chains to cases where the companies fail to meet regulatory requirements (Supermarket Guru, 2003).

Conclusion

The issues of marketing to children by the food industry have legitimate arguments on both sides.  Nutritionists and heath experts have been engineering increasingly more relevant information to support their claims.  These groups have made it clear to the food industry that they will not tolerate health being traded for profits.  On the other side, marketers have responded by stating that they are merely giving the kids what they want to stay competitive.

As this issue comes into the forefront of American politics, the nation may see a wave of public opinion that will swell against companies like McDonald’s.  This may be in similar fashion as the public took against the tobacco company.  Eventually companies like McDonald’s may be held liable for some of children’s health issues such as obesity and diabetes.  Food marketers may have to find a balance between attaining good profits and producing healthy food for children.  This may be their only escape to avoid a massive impact of multi-million dollar lawsuits.

While the two parties disagree on many issues, they both agree that in addition to a healthy diet, children should exercise daily to prevent obesity and other health problems.  For the sake of the nation’s children, food producers should have an obligation to approaching this issue with integrity and honorable intentions.

References

Advertising Education Forum (2002, December).  News.  Retrieved January 28, 2003, from http://www.aeforum.org/latest.nsf
Appleson, G. (2003). Obesity suit against McDonald’s dismissed.  Retrieved February 3, 2003, from http://news.findlaw.com/news/s/20030122/foodMcDonald’sdc.html
Bachmanit, T. (2002). Enough is enough. Beverage Industry, 12, 8.  Retrieved January 22, 2003, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).
Barrett, P. (1997). Are ads a danger to kids?  Marketing, 15.  Retrieved January 31, 2003, from Proquest database.
BBC News (2002, November 22). McDonald’s targeted in obesity lawsuit.  Retrieved February 2, 2003, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2502431.stm
Beder, S. (1998). Marketing to Children.  Retrieved January 28, 2003, from http://www.ouw.edu.au/arts/sts/sbeder/children.html
Bird, P. J. (1998). Ronald McDonald is Joe Camel in a Clown Suit.  Retrieved February 8, 2003, from http://hhp.ufl.edu/keepingfit/article/camel.htm
Carter, M. (1996). The moral crusade against TV ads for children.  Campaign, 44.  Retrieved January 30, 2003, from Proquest database.
Chew on this: Parents nibble on kiddie-food questions. (2002, April 1). Brandweek, 13, 22.  Retrieved January 30, 2003, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).
Childhood overweight – A public health issue. (2002, November). Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 11, S4-S5.  Retrieved January 29, 2003, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).
Hunter, B. T. (2002). Marketing foods to kids: using fun to sell; the appeal of crazy colors, flavors, and more. Consumers’ Research Magazine, 3, 16-19.  Retrieved January 28, 2003, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).
McDonald’s Corporation (2002, May 13). Social Responsibility Report.  Retrieved January 30, 2003, from http://www.McDonald’s.com/corporate/social/report/media/socialresponsibility.pdf
McDonald’s Corporation (n.d.). Facts about overweight and obesity: What the experts say.  Retrieved February 1, 2003, from http://www.McDonald’s.com/countries/usa/food/health/health.html
McSpotlight (n.d.).  Issues: Advertising.  Retrieved January 28, 2003, from http://www.mcspotlight.org/issues/advertising
Moser, H.R. & Horton, L.M. (1999). The Marketing and ethical implications of advertising to children.  Retrieved January 30, 2003, from http://www.olemiss.edu/courses/mktg351/publication.htm
Nutrition Australia (1998, April 18). Into the mouths of babes: Marketing to children.  Retrieved January 30, 2003, from http://www.nutritionaustralia.org/News_in_Nutrition/Published_Papers/Orations/marketing_to_children.asp
Public Health Association of Australia (2002, December).  Television food advertising during children’s viewing times.  Retrieved January 29, 2003, from http://www.phaa.net.au/policy/TVfoodAdvertisingF.htm
Raeburn, P. (2002). Why we’re so fat; Fast food as school, huge portions, and relentless TV ads make it easy.  Newsweek, 3804, 112.  Retrieved January 28, 2003, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).
Supermarket Guru (2003, February 1).  Obesity and Fast Food Lawsuits.  Retrieved February 3, 2003, from http://www.supermarketguru.com/page.cfm/1288
Wentz, L. & Bowes, E. (2002). Marketing deemed a health risk factor. Advertising Age, 47, 14.  Retrieved January 22, 2003, from InfoTrac database (Expanded Academic ASAP).

The post The Controversy of Marketing to Children appeared first on Michael A. Hartmann.