You could ask your friends to help you.  Give them $50 bucks and tell them keep it if they ever see you light up (or vap or whatever).  That may not be enough of an incentive for some.  What if you gave your friend $1,000 and if the scale doesn't show you lost 10 at the end of  3 months, they gave your money to the NRA.  Ah, now it gets more interesting.  

Here comes StickK.com.  Birthed by some smart folks, like Yale profs Dean Karlan and Ian Ayres and staffed by a bunch of recently matriculated Yalies, StickK acts as a go-between, allowing you to deposit money not with a friend, but with them. You sign a contract with StickK to modify a behavior.  You select your goal, the amount of money you're putting up and where it goes if you don't fulfill the contract.

This is how I understand it works.  You choose a goal:  Let's say losing 10 lbs by April 1.  StickK calculates you need to lose a pound a week and you chose to wager $10 a week.  If you don't report back in and make the goal, StickK takes $10 (via credit card). To help you keep honest, you can chose a referee for a weigh-in to verify the loss.  

Generally, I don't support money being used as a reward, especially with children. It leads to the perception that a monetary reward is attached to everything.  Well, in a capitalistic society, you could make that case. Similar to the StickK model, money could be given directly to the resolutions maker by a third person, if a goal was met.  There is no financial loss to the resolution maker, but there is a financial gain.  For example, you have a young daughter with a drug/alcohol problem.  She needs rehab but refuses go and you can't force her. Does she really need to hit rock bottom?  Would she go if you rewarded her with $10,000 when she exited a 3-month drug and alcohol program. That could be just enough push to get her to submit.  I think yes, it would.  What do you think?