Of all the absurd and unbelievable stories circulating around the internet this week, one about a father being labeled ‘unfit’ because he wouldn’t feed his son McDonald’s really takes the cake.
A father from New York named?David E. Schorr says Marilyn Schiller,?the court appointed physiologist assigned to his divorce case, pronounced him “incapable of caring for his nearly 5-year-old son” because he offered him a choice for dinner one night his son didn’t like: ?he could go anywhere he wanted for dinner, except to McDonald’s, or he could get no dinner at all.
After arguing with his irate and out of control child, and giving him numerous opportunities to choose a place, any place at all that wasn’t a McDonald’s, he finally took his son back his mother’s home without dinner. ?Now, Schorr is paying the price for what he says was his attempt to curb his son’s intake of too much junk food.
According to the Huffington Post, Schorr has now filed an anti-defamation suit against the court appointed psychologist, who claims that Schorr’s decision to not feed his son McDonald’s “raises concerns about the viability of the father’s weekend visits with his son.”
“Normally not a very strict father who rarely refuses his child McDonald’s,” Schorr put his foot down Oct. 30 “because his son had been eating too much junk food,” the suit said. Schorr himself didn’t immediately return a call Friday.
He quickly regretted his stance when his son threw a tantrum, but he felt that giving in would reward bad behavior, so he offered the elsewhere-or-nowhere “final offer,” as his court papers put it.
“The child, stubborn as a mule, chose the ‘no dinner’ option,” the suit says. And the father promptly carted the boy back to Bari Schorr’s building, still trying to entice the child into changing his mind as they waited in the lobby for her to get home from work, according to the suit.
No hand was laid on the child; he wasn’t abandoned in a parking lot, nor was he subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment other than being told “no” and taken home and given some time to think about what he had done, and how he had acted. ?It’s right out of what many would consider the Parenting 101 Handbook, but for Schorr not wanting to feed his son junk food seems to be turning out into a legal nightmare.
If you’re a parent, what would you have done in this situation? ?Would you have given in to your child’s tantrum and just taken to them to McDonald’s, or would you have done the same thing Schorr did, and taken your child home to calm down and think about what they had done?
Let us know in the comments below.
Edited by SS
