Not looking for an argument at all. All the way through the thread you’ve been bringing up things that are entirely irrelevant, such as who fed the watermelon and whether or not the client likes the OP. You even challenged me on an assumption you thought I’d made that the person being cared for was a child, when in fact OP had mentioned a SEND setting, which is specific to children and young people, so not an assumption at all.
Despite explanations from several posters that the client and the person being cared for are two different people you’ve continued in the same vein. OP said she works with clients. It’s clear to posters here that the client is the person responsible for the person being cared for, not the person actually receiving care.
There’s no indication as to whether this is care at home or within a residential or day care setting. My guess is one of the latter from what OP has said - if that’s the case OP isn’t necessarily the only one caring for the person, but she’s clearly responsible for observing and reporting back key elements of care, including food intake. Which doesn’t necessarily mean that she’s the one providing the food, just that she’s responsible for monitoring food intake.
There was a comment from an HCP upthread who said they had come to realise that some of their thinking was ableist. Obviously l don’t know how this came about, but l think it’s very dangerous to ignore a gut feeling, something you know to be true, or even what you know to be common sense and appropriate from experience, in favour of bending over backwards not to offend. And as a disabled person l’ve experienced the consequence of this shift in thinking. l’ve come across many ‘ism’s in my lifetime. Some clearly intended to offend, but most unintended and coming from a place that’s good, if sometimes misguided.
In more recent years l’ve noticed a shift in how l’m treated in health care settings. People tread very carefully in order not to inadvertently offend. And in several instances they have been so focused on treating me ‘just like anyone else’ that they have completely overlooked glaringly obvious elements of my condition which need attention or for which l require assistance of which they should be aware as a HCP, but which they are clearly afraid to address for fear of causing ‘offence’.
If we continue in the vein of assuming offence where none is intended, we end up having to self police everything we say and do. And in a healthcare settings this will inevitably lead to improper care. The person who is the focus in OP’s example clearly has a disability or health condition necessitating a significant care need. If all is as OP has said here then she will now think twice about what and how she reports back. One can only hope that omissions and oversights for fear of accusations of an ‘ism’ don’t impact the quality of care similarly to my own experience.