All Threads by Date
Psychiatrist deems father "wholly incapable" parent for refusing son's McDonald's request
Did somebody say McDonald's? Yep, a 4-year-old New York City boy, but his dad David Schorr said nope. Now Schorr, embroiled in a child custody case, is suing a court-appointed psychiatrist for defamation for deeming him "wholly incapable of taking care of his son" after he refused to let his kid eat dinner at McDonald’s.
"You’d think it was sexual molestation," Schorr, an attorney-turned-consultant, tells the New York Post. "I am just floored by it."
The trouble began last week, the Post explained Thursday, when Schorr was scheduled to take his son to their usual neighborhood restaurant for their weekly Tuesday-night visit. But that night the child dug in his heels about wanting to go to McDonald's instead. Schorr, who felt the boy had been eating too much junk food lately, refused, saying he could eat anywhere else but the fast-food joint — or have no dinner at all.
"The child, stubborn as a mule, chose the 'no dinner' option," Schorr says in the suit, according to the Post. "It was just a standoff. I’m kicking myself mightily. I wish I had taken him to McDonald's, but you get nervous about rewarding bad behavior. I was concerned. I think it was a 1950s equivalent of sending your child to bed without dinner. That's maybe the worst thing you can say about it."
When the boy went home hungry to mom Bari Yunis Schorr, a vice president at Rue La La, he reported the incident and went to McDonald’s with her. Then she contacted the psychiatrist, Marilyn Schiller, setting the forensic investigation in motion. Schiller, according to the Associated Press, told a judge the incident "raises concerns about the viability" of the father's weekend visits with his son and suggested they be limited or eliminated entirely.
Now David Schorr wants Schiller to return the required $2,750 he paid for her input on the case. Meanwhile, the custody trial will resume in December.
The Schorrs were married in 2007 in a lavish New York ceremony, but Bari filed for divorce several years later.
No one involved in the current case — the Schorrs, Schiller or Bari’s attorney Louis Newman — returned calls seeking comment from Yahoo Shine.
But in a video (see below) of David Schorr posted on Tout shortly after he filed his suit against Schiller Thursday, the frustrated father speaks of his regrets in the situation. He also asks, "How does someone exercise parental authority during a divorce?"
"Great question," Kenneth Neumann, a New York divorce mediator and psychologist with the Center for Mediation & Training tells Yahoo Shine. "The idea is that parental authority should continue during any process. But the notion that you’re under a microscope is true. So often you wind up being extra careful to a fault, particularly when you're afraid of being reported for abuse."
But Neumann, who is not involved in the Schorr case, adds, "It's well-known that allegations of abuse during a divorce have most often been found to be false — because the other parent uses it as leverage — so they're looked at very suspiciously. This, as well, should have been looked at suspiciously." Further, a court doesn't have to follow the recommendation of forensic investigators. But for Schiller to call the father "wholly incapable," the mediator notes, seems extreme based on this incident alone. "There must be more to the story," he says, adding, "Boy, this is a messy case."
And the kid went to McDonalds anyhow.
- And this is why there are so many freakin' miserable kids out there!!
This kid should have been slapped across the face and sent to bed with the message that if he pulls that garbage one more time, the punishment will be much, much worse.
Little Billy will think twice about acting out in the future.
However, if he does, then the parent must be prepared to up the ante.
Having kids, is like training dogs. One must be firm and consistent.
- All dogs behave better when they're slapped across the face.
- That kid is going to be such a spoiled little shit when he gets older.
- Now the kid has learned to get what he wants any time he wants. Good job everyone involved in the case.
- IMO, feeding McDonald's to a child is abuse.
- The psych is biased in favor of the mother obviously.
- Good on the father. The mother needs to get over herself. Why should something so simple have to be drawn into court proceedings?
- Divorces are like Capitol Hill is these days. Scorched earth across the board. You pursue every avenue no matter how petty it is or how evil it is and even you know its not true. People I've seen get divorced, at its nastiest, would think death was too easy on their ex, they want their ex to see them with the house, the money, the friends, and the family while the ex is penniless on the street.
- He didn't fixded my cheezbugah!
- My mother didn't feed me for four days once when I refused to eat her meatloaf.
- That's terrible, R11. But not the same situation that we are talking about here.
- Some idiots on another site were saying, "what if they starved to death!?" As per my mother, no child in history has starved to death because they didn't get their preferred food.
Parents like this make me sick. Putting their kid in the position to so easily manipulate them. "Do what I say or I'll go back and tell Mom you starved me all day!" In my day, and I was only born in the 80s, you eat what's in front of you or you don't eat.
My sister's mom said, "Don't go with your dad and get in trouble then come back and tell me how he punished you". They didn't undermine each other. She'd get in trouble a second time (of course, these were age-appropriate punishments).
- And then you have several comedies in theaters in recent years that have shown precocious kids threatening adults that if the adult doesn't give them what they want they will accuse the adult of sexual abuse.
These weren't 'meant for kids' movies, but were clean enough that I'm sure tons of kids see them. I'm usually shocked when I see something like The Conjuring or Insidious that some parents have young kids with them.
- Do you know who is the most recognizable celebrity to a four year old? Ronald freaking McDonald! That's who! I was the same way as a kid, completely transfixed by the Golden Arches. Having a young kid, it's all about compromise. The father could have given him McDonald's that day and something else latter on or went half and half. Luckily, my parents understood my fixation and humored me. By the way, I didn't grow up to be a spoiled brat or overweight, so there!
- 20/20 hindsight, yeah, he should have given the kid what he wanted. He was trying to be a parent and not the kid's 'buddy' though. Fuck him, right?
Who knows, if he had taken the kid to Mickie D's the bitch ex-wife would probably have gotten him in trouble for feeding the kid junk food.
- My mother did the go to bed without dinner thing too. You don't eat what I cook--go your ass to bed.
- It's not an indictment on McDonalds, I eat my share of McChickens, that's not the point. Dad said no, so that's no, just like when mom says no. The parents run the show, not the kid.
- It's interesting to note the difference in replies between this thread and the thread on the kid who didn't get his breakfast for free.
Here the kid is at fault - and goes to bed without dinner.
In the other thread the school was at fault for not serving him food his mother didn't pay for.
- Different situation R19. In this instance, the kid and the mom pulled the dick moves. In the other thread, the school did. And maybe the mom, to be honest I haven't read that thread.
- I doubt that last sentence is true, r15.
- Actually, r19, it's not interesting at all.
A poor child was humiliated in front of his peers and forced to go without food.
A rich child is being used as a pawn by his parents in their acrimonious divorce.
Both children are being emotionally abused by greedy, selfish assholes...whom I bet are republicans.
- R21 I'm 33yrs old, 5'8, 156lbs, 32" waist, athletic build. Do you want my Jack'd ID?
- I was referring to the "spoiled brat" part. Your reply hasn't made me rethink my initial judgment.
- Plus, there's nothing wrong with being your child's 'buddy' aka friend without becoming or being regarded as their peer. At four years old, my father was hands down my best buddy. Who else do you have at that age?
- There is more to this story. The dad has been dragging out this divorce for years. He earns $270,000 a year and he actually took his wife to court because he feels that paying $1,500 a month for child support is too much. There are people who make a quarter of what he makes and pay that much or more.
And the report did say he was incapable of parenting. But it wasn't because of the McDonalds issue at all. He's an asshole and you have to be a GIGANTIC asshole for a therapist to say this.
- It would suck to be a parent. Especially a parent going through a divorce.
- People who make that much money usually are assholes. I guess I should be grateful that I am unemployed and neck deep in debt.
- This thread makes me hungry for McDonalds. Maybe I'll put some pants on and go get a big Mac.
- R19 - I guess it isn't interesting, just sad.
One parent using their kid as a pawn in a divorce.
One parent who can't be bothered to feed her kid or give him money to buy food.
- [quote]Do you know who is the most recognizable celebrity to a four year old? Ronald freaking McDonald!
Kids don't know who Ronald McDonald is, you old fart.