Man Sues For Custody Of Children Because Wife Has Them On Strict Vegan Diet

[matcom]

<snip>

TAMPA - Ten years ago, Gayle and Jeff Nelson-Folkersen were overjoyed with the birth of their healthy quintuplets, thought to be the first born in the Tampa Bay area. TV cameras and well-wishers with donations all wanted to share in the proud parents' exciting journey.

But as the five babies grew up, the couple grew apart.

Now the quints are in the middle of an unusual custody battle in which the father claims the mother has "serious psychological control issues" and imposes a strict vegan diet -- no meat, eggs or dairy -- on the children, according to Hillsborough County court files. She even restricts the quints' visits with their paternal grandparents, the divorce petition states, because they have leather furniture.

Jeff, 46, is seeking primary residential custody of all five 10-year-olds. Gayle, 50, says she's more fit for primary custody, having raised the kids as a stay-at-home mom all of their lives.

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/06/25/Hillsborough/Quints_custody_battle.shtml

[LostinVA]

1. If they're healthy kids, it makes no difference

I've seen photos of LeftyMom's son -- he definitely isn't a pasty, malnourished kid.

[Midlodemocrat]

2. But you can't say the same for that vegan in FL guy.

:hide:

[LostinVA]

3. OMG -- you didn't!!!

[Gormy Cuss]

4. It's about the leather furniture, it appears.

It sounds as if the vegan diet isn't the core issue, it's the broader vegan lifestyle tenets
that the STBE no longer or never agreed with. The kids have been vegan since infancy.

Frankly, if the mother really does prohibit visits to the grandparents house solely on the basis of their household furnishings she has some issues. Somehow I doubt it's really the only reason. Perhaps they talk against veganism or try to feed the kids animal products.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

10. the mother is only one parent. if the father/paternal grandparents are omnivores

shouldnt they too have the right to feed the kids as they see fit?

my father wanted us to eat traditional bengali food when we were at his place. my mother had a more international approach to food. we ate depending on which parent we were with.

[Gormy Cuss]

12. Parent, yes. Grandparents, no IMO.

It is sticky when parents adhere to belief systems that prohibit certain foods. If you wish to raise your children as kosher observant Jews and your spouse keeps trying to feed them bacon that's just confusing and not fair to the kids. Similarly, if your children have spent the first 10 years of their lives being told that eating any animal product is cruel or inhumane it's not kind for one parent to feed them food that goes against that belief system and it's a bit confusing if that parent used to hold the same beliefs.

Grandparents on the other hand should respect their children's belief system and make practical accommodation for the them and their grandchildren. Learning what to serve the kids on their vegan diet is reasonable. Choosing clothing gifts that aren't made with wool or leather is also reasonable. Removing their own leather or fur belongings is not.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

15. ok so this is my quandary.

if i have kids with lisa. lisa then decides she is vegan, but i feel very strongly about having meat in food. if we then get divorced, and we share custody, shouldnt i allow my child to eat meat?

also if my child was visiting my parents, and they are meat eaters, and they have my permisssion to allow my children to have meat, shouldnt they be allowed to?

[Gormy Cuss]

17. Yep, that is a quandary.

It's one of the reasons that many people are counseled against dating outside of their faiths or cultures because once there are children the differences seem to be magnified.

There's a difference between what you are allowed to do and what may be in the best interests of the child. If you and Rockit raised a meat-eating kid for the first ten years of her life and now Rockit's become vegan then it may be more confusing for the child if you went against your past parenting just to accommodate Rockit. You can convey to the girl that her other mother has adopted a new philosophy and that when she's in Rockit's care she is expected to respect that mother's wishes. Ultimately the child will become old enough to assert her own wishes in that regard.



And your example of the grandparents is consistent with what I wrote in my earlier post in that they have your permission to feed the girl meat.

[cobalt1999]

5. only thing I can see wrong...

is the restricting visits because of something like leather furniture. If she is violating the custody agreement because of her personal beliefs, then that could be a problem. I doubt the vegan thing only is going to fly.

[Deep13]

6. Per divorce judge: "Jesus fucking Christ. Gimme another Scotch."

Simply providing a vegan diet is probably not disfuntional, but some of the other things that the story suggests probably are. They can't see their grandparents because of their taste in furniture? Jesus Christ!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

7. not letting them visit their grandparent on account of leather furniture is insane

if indeed that is the truth.

[noamnety]

35. it's reasonable to keep them away from leather furniture

if they are gnawing on it when they are over there.

[LeftyMom]

8. Oh noes! Not vegan kids!

:scared:

[LostinVA]

21. We all know what THEY'RE like

[Arkansas Granny]

9. Sounds to me like this is about a lot more than the kid's diets.

That being said, I don't see any reason why a child couldn't be well nourished on a vegan diet as long as the parent(s) are diligent about meal planning and make sure that nutritional needs are met.

[flvegan]

11. A libelous statement made in a divorce/custody filing? SAY IT AIN'T SO!!!

In the picture in the paper, the kids are BAREFOOT OUTSIDE!!! She's obviously trying to kill them, but only after severe psychological damage has been done.

Not only should the husband get custody, but vegmom should be flung, via giant catapult, from the courthouse steps into Tampa Bay.

[skygazer]

13. When you strip all the hot-button topics away

This sounds like your basis use-the-kids-to-make-life-difficult-for-your-ex situation. Why can't adults behave like adults and realize how much damage they do to their kids by putting them in the middle of these tug-of-wars that have nothing really to do with the welfare of the kids?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

14. best. comment. ever.

[unpossibles]

16. oh how I hate these stories

why is it people have to descend upon these stories and leave shitty comments about all vegetarians based on one person's take on it?

they are always so ignorant and based on BS that it drives me up a wall.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

19. who is the "they" you are referring to?

[unpossibles]

39. the people who (at the link, not here)

say "clever" things like:

- if god didn't want us to eat animals, he would not have made them out of tasty meat
- vegans are killing their children
- vegans/vegetarians are weak, sickly, wimps
- all vegetarians are fascists, etc/Hitler was a vegetarian

etc.

Sorry. I don't care what anyone eats, but I've heard these things so much over the past 16 years that it drives me nuts. For the record, I seldom even bring it up until someone else does, and I am just sick of all the negative stories on vegetarianism.

[Kali]

26. I haven't read the whole thread yet, just to your comment

and I don't see a single example of what you are talking about yet.

[unpossibles]

38. I mean the comments on the story itself not here n/t

[Jimbo S]

18. How's the mother going to support the kids?

If she stays at home and doesn't work?

Also, let the kids decide for themselves if they wish to be vegan or want a little more variety in their diet.

[mzteris]

20. She DOES'T WORK?

With five 10 year olds?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


Honey, she WORKS. She just doesn't get paid for it.

[Jimbo S]

27. Answer my question.

If she doesn't have an income, how does she support the kids?

[mzteris]

28. It's called child support. EOM

[Jimbo S]

29. So he's suppose to cough up the money but not her?

[mzteris]

30. No - she's contributing - without pay the services of

housekeeper, "babysitter", chauffeur, laundress, accountant, cook, shopper, maid, nurse, organizer, counselor, life coach, swim instructor, monster scarer, homework helper, tutorer . . . .

you think taking care of five ten year olds is a piece of cake or something????

What, you think she's lolling by the pool? Getting her hair and nails done? Tripping the light fantastic?

Who BAILED on the five kids, eh?

[Jimbo S]

36. I wasn't dismissing her efforts

I guess my quip is Gayle automatically believing she is best fit for primary custodian on the fact she's been the one staying at home.

It appears Jeff is willing to work and raise the kids, which is more than what Gayle is motivated to do but it's hard to tell from the article.

Or another option us have Gayle work and let Jeff stay home with the kids.


Who BAILED on the five kids, eh?
-father claims the mother has "serious psychological control issues"

Because (assuming) the father is intiating the divorce doesn't automatically make him the bad guy. But who knows the whole story?

[lizerdbits]

37. Considering she's been out of the outside workforce for 10 years

her skills and knowledge might be a little out of date and it could be difficult to get a job that pays enough to support everyone but I don't know her education/skill level or how much the guy makes. Add to that paying for day care after school and in the summer which is very expensive so if her potential job doesn't pay as much they all might be worse off- I don't know the age kids are allowed to be home by themselves and for how long but 10 seems young, especially in the summer where it would be all day. As for "motivation," since she's been home with the kids for 10 years I doubt the guy truly knows what he's in for when he says he'll do it all.

Why is it better to stay home with them when you're married but if you're divorced it's not acceptable? She's doing the same amount of work. The only difference is paying for another place to live.

Why do you find it acceptable for her to work and the guy to stay home with the kids? What's the difference?

[ThomCat]

32. All he's contributing is money.

She's doing far, far more work than he is, and he probably gets benefits from his job.

It appears that you have no significant experience with kids.

[LeftyMom]

34. Watching five kids is certainly a monumental task.

Generally the courts will assume in that case that if he's supported them all along that either that will be the case for some time or that gradually she'll take on some obligation, but it will be small since she's been out of the workforce for so long and probably doesn't have much earning potential for that reason.

[otherlander]

22. Isn't ten years old

old enough to decide for yourself whether you want to be vegan or not? I was only 11 when I decided to become a vegetarian.

[Xithras]

25. Not really. My daughter wanted to try veganism but couldn't

My daughter, bless her soul, is far more left than I am, and announced when she was 11 that she wanted to try veganism. While my wife and I try to support her in whatever she wants to do, neither of us have any interest in living that lifestyle. We told her that she could skip the meat portions of her meals if she wished, but that we weren't going to make her any special meals or buy her any special food. We cook meals as a family, and we eat as a family, and we weren't going to allow that to devolve into "Kid X gets this for dinner, Kid Y gets that for dinner, and Kid Z gets something else for dinner".

She can be a vegan when she starts buying her own groceries and preparing her own meals. Until then, she can adapt to whatever we're making (which can be addmittedly difficult sometimes...we had meatloaf with cheesy scalloped potatoes and a salad for dinner last night.)

Kids can make decisions regarding their diet, but without their parents support those decisions aren't really relevant.

[HEyHEY]

23. So, that's where stupid comes from

[jobycom]

24. The story is pretty clear that the issue isn't veganism.

Veganism, the story says, is one example of what the husband sees as a controlling attitude of the mother. He claims it even affects how often she lets the kids visit the grandparents, because of her aversion to leather. The issue is whether he she is too controlling, not whether she's a vegan.

No idea whether his accusations have any merit, obviously, just commenting on what he's saying.

Having said that, people's misconceptions of veganism make accusations like this resonate. I've been accused by my own parents of being too strict with my kids (which is funny in itself, since I'm a softy) because of my vegetarian diet, and I don't even force my kids to be vegetarian. I just don't cook meat, but they get plenty of it. People just are uncomfortable with what they are unused to.

[BreweryYardRat]

31. See, here's the issue right here.

"She even restricts the quints' visits with their paternal grandparents, the divorce petition states, because they have leather furniture."

If that's true, or a couple of the kids want to change their diet away from veganism and she's keeping them from doing so (the vibe I'm getting from the article), then there is a problem. She's being a control freak.

What the kids willingly eat isn't an issue, so long as they're getting plenty of the protein and vitamins they need to grow normally.

However, as flvegan said, people fighting for custody of their kids are likely to lie.

We'll just have to wait and see if the truth comes out.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

33. I have a friend who raised his kids on a vegan diet, and

when they visited his ex's parents, they'd give them all kinds of stuff their stomachs couldn't handle. They'd eat yummy ice cream, then come home with a three day bellyache.

Non-custodial relatives and steps need to respect any dietary restrictions the custodial parent deems best for the kids.