Being vegetarian and court

[JMKid]

I raise my LO as a veggie. My ex strongly hates this as he is big meat eater. He is complaining about it and hates having to follow the diet. My LO has a very balanced and varied diet aside from no meat or fish, always a healthy wide, very active and not hindered in any way. He is going to raise this issue at our next court hearing. Can they insist I start giving LO meat or insist the ex gives him meat? I appreciate as he gets older he can choose but surely I can decide? Things are very very fraught between us and know this is about control as is everything else he does.

If the couple were still together, the father would quite possibly still put meat into meals he had prepared.

At 2, there are lots of things a child hasn't tried yet. Trying meat isn't really going against custom.

Am glad someone else understands.

Don't agree with it being extra effort. Instead of meat do Quorn or leave the meat out! !

JMKid, I think most people understand your discomfort but there is nothing society views as harmful either in a vegetarian or meat eating diet, so unfortunately you are stuck with your discomfort.

It is more effort to cook two versions of a meal if one's typical meal would include meat or fish, or to buy quorn if you prefer meat based burgers/mince etc

He very very rarely cooks. Tends to eat out like 95% of the time.
But yes I'm realising i have to accept it.

Of course it's extra effort.
Not only do I have no idea how to cook quorn, but I would then have to cook separate meals.
Even just having to check the ingredients of everything would be extra effort.

Or maybe for the odd occasion everyone has a meat free meal?

I have a separate veggie meal to my family and it's no real extra effort at all OP.

It doesn't matter whether it's extra effort or not.

OP - This issue will not be resolved by considering whether or not your expectation is a "reasonable" request or not. You do not have the right to request that he complies with your parenting model, no matter how easy, convenient or hassle free that compliance would be.

You do not have primacy over your daughters parenting. You and your ex have equal status. If you cannot agree, then you ask a court to intervene. In this case, the no-order principle applies. It is possible for you both to parent your DD in the way you each want when she is in your respective care. No court order is required as it is not an issue that overlaps across both homes, like for instance, the choice of school she will attend, or whether she is vaccinated or not. Her diet is not irreversible.

By that same token, middle, it would be "no effort" for the vegetarian parent to chuck half a tin of tuna into half the tomato pasta sauce and maintain the child's "non-veggie" diet.

No court is going to suggest that happens.

OP, glad you are coming to terms with this and sorry it's distressed you

Advicepls7080
As I said dp and his father's cancer is not genetic it is purely down to the list of outside causes of which eating meat was the only thing that they did.

When people say everything in moderation is not going to do you any harm do they realise this means just 3oz of meat per day.

You cook Quorn exactly the same way as you cook meat.

As I said dp and his father's cancer is not genetic it is purely down to the list of outside causes of which eating meat was the only thing that they did.

We are a long way from fully understanding the causes of cancer. It may be that your DP and his father both ate too much red meat and this caused their cancer but it is equally possible that there was some other cause.

When people say everything in moderation is not going to do you any harm do they realise this means just 3oz of meat per day

That is red or processed meat. Other types of meat are fine. The average person in the UK eats 2.5oz of red or processed meat per day - men on average eat 3oz per day, women 2oz. So 3oz of meat per day is not some fantastically low figure.

There is evidence to suggest that those eating above average amounts of red meat have an increased risk of bowel cancer. However, that is nowhere near enough to justify the courts enforcing a vegetarian diet. As has been said on this thread, the courts will not intervene. Both parents can feed their child as they see fit.

Oliversmumsarmy, just because that's the only thing in the list that they did doesn't mean it caused the cancer. Its a risk factor that's increased. In any event you say it's not genetics which means that the specific gene wasn't present to give familial risk, but there is still a risk if a close member gets it under 50 - that's not to do with genetics it's another risk factor.

Some people may not do ANY of the things in the list and yet still get cancer. It's an increased risk (and even then the percentages are smallish) not a given.

I find it bizarre people actually think it's that simple. The way cancer forms and cells divide and mutate is hugely complex science.

It's just the same as lung cancer. Smoking greatly increases the risk, but that doesn't mean everyone who smokes gets lung cancer or conversely people who don't won't get it.

Oliversmumsarmy, just because that's the only thing in the list that they did doesn't mean it caused the cancer. Its a risk factor that's increased. In any event you say it's not genetics which means that the specific gene wasn't present to give familial risk, but there is still a risk if a close member gets it under 50 - that's not to do with genetics it's another risk factor.

Some people may not do ANY of the things in the list and yet still get cancer. It's an increased risk (and even then the percentages are smallish) not a given.

I find it bizarre people actually think it's that simple. The way cancer forms and cells divide and mutate is hugely complex science.

It's just the same as lung cancer. Smoking greatly increases the risk, but that doesn't mean everyone who smokes gets lung cancer or conversely people who don't won't get it.

your ex would clearly be disrespecting your parenting if he states he will be feeding your child meat.

But it could also go the other way. The OP is not prepared to feed her child a diet including meat, despite the child's other parent believing it to be the appropriate method of feeding.

I don't see any reason to be vegetarian in my house. I like meat and I don't believe it does my child any harm. When he is old enough to make his own decisions, then I will respect that, but for now, he eats what I serve. Why is my choice any less valid than that of a vegetarian?

My DH was in this situation - his ex is vegetarian. We feed DSS a vegetarian diet when he is with us because to do otherwise would cause conflict - and conflict is definitely bad for kids. Personally I think conflict about food is particularly damaging. So small price to pay for a calmer relationship between separated parents. It's not a huge hassle, in fact I've enjoyed trying out different veggie recipes over the years.

So to be reassuring, I don't think there is any way the courts would make a veggie mother feed her child meat, or find that her choices were a problem (unless they were so restrictive the child was suffering, obvs). The conflict around diet is part of a wider picture of difficulty in communication/working together. Trouble is, in terms of either/or decisions, someone has to be the adult about it and put the child first. If you know the ex will feed the child meat there is no point asking for an undertaking that he won't. In that situation, you just have to give the child emotional permission to eat what Dad provides and accept it.

And please, no 'packed lunches'. That just gives the child the message that Dad can't be trusted to feed them.