To think this is child abuse

[Shelvesoutofbooks]

Warning as this is controversial.
Someone who I know (will try to keep it vague so I wouldn't out myself) has a child who recently ended up in a&e for passing out. This is the 4th time this happened in last 2 weeks but the child has had a fever so has been brought in to a&e. Said child is 3year old and weighs 8.5 kilo and is strictly fed an organic vegan diet. Child attends nursery 5 mornings a week for 3 hrs a day and has lunch there. A vegetarian nursery that has been given the instructions not to give the DC any dairy.

The DC is happy to eat meat and other animal products as when I saw the child at gatherings/parties it has eaten anything with the child's mother not saying anything. But still 98% of the time the child has an extremely healthy diet. (I am very certain of this as)

When the child was brought to a&e and the doctor questioned why the DC was underweight so much the mother simply claimed the child was a fussy eater and refuses to eat. When asked what kind of diet the child has she said everything and that the child is an omnivore.

Now, this was a lie. I was gobsmacked when I heard her say it but didn't want to ask why she was lying.

So far they diagnosed the child with anemia and the child is undergoing dozens of other test to find out "why it refuses to eat". When given some food in the hospital by nurser child happily ate anything it was given.

Ainu to think it's basically child abuse? The poor child is anemic and is passing out because it's not fed properly. I wanted to tell the doctor the mother was lying but my DH said it'd be best to leave it.

I've tried talking to her before how she should be forcing a vegan diet on a child that small but her response was that "meat eaters force their kids to eat meat and other unhealthy stuff, so she can make her kids eat vegan food if she wants to".

The child is not 18 months old. The child is that weight at 3 years old.

Just as a reference, here is what a child I know who just turned 3 ate yesterday (I asked his GM, a friend of mine, who looks after him most days):

Breakfast (7 o'clockish)
Bowl of instant porridge with half an apple grated in - full size breakfast type bowl
3 Strawberries
About 20 blueberries
Half banana
Glass of milk (about 8 ozs)

Snack (10am):
About 2 ounces of cheese
Digestive
More milk

Lunch (12:30ish)
Scrambled egg with cheese and chopped broccoli mixed in
Half banana (remainder from breakfast)
Frozen peas - teacup size serving (he likes them frozen, apparently)
Muesli bar
Water or milk

Snack (3pm):
Milk - 8 ozs
Ritz crackers (5 or 6)
Half an apple dipped in peanut butter

Dinner (6pm):
Pasta with pesto and shredded chicken - breakfast size bowl again
V-8 small can (tomato)
Cantaloupe chunks - 5/6

Milk again before bed (7-7:30pm)

He is a very active little boy, eats similar meals daily, sleeps very well, takes an afternoon nap of about 2 hours.

He never faints.

Shelves
If you are in another country, it won't be possible for posters familiar with SS practices to comment on whether the child will be removed.

Usually in the UK SS will work with the parent if there is a problem that they believe can be fixed with education and monitoring and with an observed goodwill and willingness to co-operate on the part of the parent. There is a threshold of significant harm that SS has to present very persuasively to the judge before a removal order will be granted. SS operate under the supervision of the courts and can't swoop in and take away children. They are accountable to the judicial system.

It is the same in the US. Unless a problem is dire and critical, a child will not be removed. Again, SS operates within the court system of each state.

It might be possible for you to google social service operation and accountability in your country, and find out what the thresholds are for different sorts of intervention.

Be aware that there are always forums, etc., where people who have an axe to grind against social services go to vent. It is better to go to the websites of the agencies themselves for information.

Jonesy
I would report.

Your meal plan of a typical day is horrifying. Until then I wasn't sure whether you were enjoying stirring or you actually had a point. But if that's a real days food, I think you definitely have a point and a child could be coming to real harm.

And that's the crux of it. If there is a child being harmed it needs to stop. Full stop.

The child cannot stop it. It's up to the adults in that child's life. That means you.

Good luck

It's been reported now and social services are involved. Thanks everyone

Good to hear. I sincerely hope the mother will work with SS and will take this seriously.

It's completely possible to raise a healthy child in this way, I have a friend who is a raw foodist and she feeds her child a raw diet only. They are in amazing health but it has taken a lot of time and effort for her to eat in this way and they take it very seriously.

Is the mother new to this type of diet? Is it simply ignorance and the challenge of knowing what to offer?

I would do some research myself and suggest snacks and meals which have high fat content to her, send the odd recipe which may be more kid friendly as she may be struggling with ideas as it must take some serious planning.

Really glad to hear it. Thank you for updating. I hope they all get the help they need.

Wow! A large number of assumptions being made and conclusions being reached on the basis of limited information in this thread. The mother PRFERS a vegan diet for her child but the child has been observed eating meat at parties (without a fuss being made) so actually is omnivore. So did the mother REALLY lie to the doctor?

I guess immediate questions are: (a) how does the originator know what the doctor has actually been told? (b) how does she know what the child's actual diet is (beyond the mother pushing back when criticised for preferring vegan)? (c) how does she know that the child isn't a fussy eater at home?

If you have a genuine concern then for sure it should be raised but the concern here seems to be wholly predicated upon an objection to the mother preferring a vegan diet for her child at nursery (coupled with a suspicion that the mother lied about diet based on a conversation you had with her when you critiqued her dietary choice for her child). I do not see anything that evidences a deliberate act to starve the child. Also, have you seen the child having an adverse reaction at nursery to the vegan diet or having problems coping with it?

That the child is ill seems to be a given but to be jumping to the conclusion that the mother is starving the child is one helluva a leap. It also risk distracting medical exploration away from what may be an actual condition.

Ok so the part I am not understanding is the 8.5 kilo part.

My child is under weight and visably u der weight due to health reasons and weighs 10.5 kilos at 3.

At 3 years old and 8.5 kilos I do not see this not being picked up on from anyone before Including nursery they would physically look paprr thin.
Also many children are raised in vegan homes and are not sick.

I'm so glad this has been reported.

I don't think it's abusive to raise kids as vegans - my best friend was raised vegan and is now a healthy 30 year old, I was raised veggie/limited dairy and was fine.

I do think it's abusive to raise your kids on a starvation diet, of any kind. Whether meat is involved is not the issue. Failing to provide a child with sufficient nutrients is a massive issue.

Isn't it like when you project that your child is ill when they're not. I think it needs addressing, despite who much she'll be pissed off. Surely it's a choice for when the child isn't at a crucial development stage.

There is an ill child, rightly taken to hospital and being examined. There is nothing in the original post to support a suspicion that the mother is starving her child or has starved her child in the past. The original poster does not like the idea of a child on a (partially) vegan diet and on basis of limited knowledge (and hearing one conversation) accuses the mother of lying to the doctor.
It is right to raise suspicions of concern (provided the processes are there to deal with them properly) but the original poster has not provided any information that provides objective grounds for such a suspicion. The extent to which many contributors to this thread have leapt to a conclusion of abuse is worrying - I hope the professionals that evaluate the suspicion here are trained sufficiently to properly evaluate the concern and that we do not see any precipitous actions that are detrimental to child and family

BTW I am NOT saying this is not abuse NOR that the suspicion should not be raised. I am, however, very concerned that on the basis of: limited information, a suspicion that appears to be subjectively predicated, and no objective evidence of abuse ...the mother has already been judged a perpetrator on this thread. If the social workers and medical professionals (also human) that get involved do not have the training or skills required - and so easily jump to those conclusions that could cause untold damage to child and mother. The "maths" on this suggests at least 199 cases out of 200 when a suspicion is raised (on the basis of much more information that we have had here) would prove NOT to be abuse. Maybe this is the "1" (out of 200) but lets keep in mind it could also be in the "199"!