dlish

this article just blew me away.

A greek couple have been barred from adopting because they're vegetarians and would likley impose their lifestyle on the child.

by the looks of it i can only deduce that the agency thinks that the child would be malnourished in some way by being prevented from eating meat, which is a false notion that many vegetarians would agree with me on.

the only other reason i can think of is that these adoptive parents are a minority in some respect and the malnourishment line is being used as an excuse.

what's next? denying jewish and muslim couples from adopting because the child cant eat pork? denying homosexual couples because they wont have a mother or a father? ...the list can go on

__________________
An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere

I always sign my facebook comments with ()()===========(}. Does that make me gay?
- Filthy

fill23ca

Wow. That's insane. I have a friend who is vegan and is raising two healthy wonderful kids. To deny a loving couple the chance to adopt a child based on this is absolutely ridiculous. What expert would say that you have to eat meat or fish? Protein is found in many other foods.

__________________
"The worst day of your life, so far." Homer Simpson

noodle

Wait, what?!?!
The nerve of these people... trying to "inflict" their healthly lifestyle upon a poor, defensless child that could instead be shipped off to a normal family that will force-feed them TV dinners and McDonalds...
Are they willing parents? Stable parents? Making ends meet?
Give them children, for fuck's sake. There are enough out there that can't find homes. And to argue about not giving them meat... I'd facepalm, but I'd have to hit myself so hard, the chair would tip over.

__________________

Charlatan

Wow. Billions of Budhists and Hindus were just told they are socially irresponsible.

Now, *that's* a broad brush.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Baraka_Guru

Well, does this mean we can deny smokers adoptions as well? You know, smoking indoors with children is a form of child abuse, and we shan't take any chances.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

bagatelle

More shocking to me is this:

The whole adoption thing is tricky, because ideally, you would always have to consider the child's best interests.

Child's rights should go over couple's rights.

There are markets for selling children - is this really caused by strict adoption policies or the desperate need of couples to have children?

__________________

Ourcrazymodern?

Weird reason indeed. Does anybody have any idea why the birth rate is so low? (All I can think of is a smart-ass answer.)

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

Strange Famous

Apparently these people consider that they have a right to an adopt a child and ought to sue if someone prevents them. I find that a pretty hard principle to accept. The state has to have a view. With all of these stories (like the ones were someone sues McDonalds for burning themselves with coffee) you find when you look into it that the truth is less clear (like the guy went into McDonalds saying he was burned and needed help and they refuse to let him get some cold water)...

I suspect that there are other reasons these people have been turned down as well as their bizzare dietry regime.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Charlatan

Sorry. How is being a vegetarian bizarre?

I really hope you are kidding.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Baraka_Guru

We now know that there are harmful effects of a meaty diet. Children can get plenty of protein and iron from vegetables, beans and other plant foods that avoid the fat and cholesterol that are in animal products. [...] I no longer recommend dairy products after the age of 2 years. Other calcium sources offer many advantages that dairy products do not have.

—Baby and Child Care (7th ed.), Dr. Benjamin Spock

If a vegetarian diet is good enough for the legendary Dr. Spock, it's good enough for me. I think denying adoptions to vegetarian parents is ridiculous. I would imagine that vegetarians tend to be more health-, diet-, and nutrition-conscious than the average person.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Strange Famous

I think if you yourself choose to not eat meat as a consenting adult that is a justified choice. If you enforce that on your kids (biological or adopted) I would judge that as both unfair and at least to a degree "bizarre"

Yes, you can be healthy as a vegetarian, but usually only with taking supliments for the vitamins and minerals you are missing out on.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

telekinetic

I get to decide what my biological kids eat, why should my adopted kids be any different? If I want the house to be HFCS free, it is. If I want it to be meat free, it is. It is a parent's responsibility to do what they feel is best for their kids, and if they believe a healthy vegetarian diet is best, so be it.

__________________
twisted no more

Baraka_Guru

Um, consumers of animal products also need supplementation to get the vitamins and minerals they're missing out on. Probably more so than vegetarians.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Strange Famous

There are clearly limits to what parents can decide on behalf of their kids.

A parent is a guardian, not an owner.

_

I dont know about the US, but in the UK a kid can be taken into care in extreme cases because of the diet they have. I remember a couple of years ago there was a 9 year old kid who was some impossible weight (like 15 stone or something) and he was temporarily taken into care as his mothers inability to stop him eaing junk food was deemed if not an abuse, a proof that she was not a suitable guardian.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Cimarron29414

Since dk isn't here yet, I'll say it on his behalf:

Ah, all our resident statists in a tizzy over The State imposing its values on you. It warms the heart.

__________________
Gives a man a halo, does mead.

"Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

Fremen

I can't copy/paste select passages from an article, just a link, due to the limitations of this tablet, but your question intrigued me, so I googled it.

Greece - Demographic Trends

From the article, they state many reasons for the low birth rate in Greece, but the one they posit as the highest, is that women are employed more and more outside the home.

The other reasons seem to be immigration away from Greece, having to work longer to make the same amount of money as other European countries, who work less hours, longer life expectancy, etc.

I would also think that because they're living on an island with finite space, it might have something to do with it.

__________________
Google

EventHorizon

first off... to me this read:

noodle: are you a vegetarian?

nonvegetarian: nope

noodle: you were force fed tv dinner and mcdonalds and will do so to your offspring because eating meat makes you more evil than saddam, the Mansons and sunburns.

Edit: also, hindus aren't vegetarians, they just dont eat beef. my roommate is a pretty hardcore hindu and he still loves chicken breast or baked cod.

a little unfair no? Bakara i agree that if its good enough for Dr. Spock, its good enough for me but i love spaghetti and meatballs and have since i was a kid. im not suffering from malnourishment. vegetarian, omnivore, carnivore it shouldnt matter, let the couple adopt a kid and if they're deemed to be responsible people (who arent going to starve this kid or feed him just pizza etc..), dietary preferences be damned

__________________
Does Marcellus Wallace have the appearance of a female canine? Then for what reason did you attempt to copulate with him as if he were a female canine?

Quote:

Originally Posted by canuckguy Pretty simple really, do your own thing as long as it does not fuck with anyone's enjoyment of life.

Strange Famous

There are Greek islands, but Greece itself isnt an island. It borders Turkey and Bulgaria for a start, probably other places too?

I would have counted the relative conservative nature of the society as a whole as one reason for a low birth rate personally.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Charlatan

So let me get this straight. The 400 million (give or take 100 million) Buddhists that do not eat any meat, are Bizarre? Really.

Raising a child as a vegetarian is not only not bizarre, it is a normal part of life for many (many!) people in this world. Just because you can't imagine what it would be like to go without meat, doesn't mean it is wrong. It's not wrong. It's just different.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

LordEden

I'm glad SF got the "vegetarians are weird" trolling out of the way, makes it easier for me.

[Insert random rants about eating nothing but grains and veggies]

[Beat dead horse over and over again]

[Ad Nauseum]

Ok, now that's out of the way, let's answer the OP. It's wrong for them to deny this pair of hippies a podling because they are vegetarians. While I don't believe anyone who isn't a Buddhist, Hindu, or from the Asia Minor area should be a vegetarian, that doesn't mean they are going to be bad parents.

Hell, being a vegetarian is hard work, there is a will power there that is amazing. No meat, no stock, no bacon, no [insert every wonderful food ever made with meat]; not eating those items every day is HARD. If they instilled just an ounce of that willpower and self-discipline into the chubby-faced little parasite, it will turn out to be one amazing kid.

My view of vegetarianism has slacked off from full on hatred to minor annoyance (giving it to a beautiful vegetarian nightly had something to do with that). While I know I will never be a vegetarian or suggest it to anyone else, it's not a bad gig. They (vegetarians in whole) usually are more health conscious, environmental friendly, and less likely to feed the kid junk food till it is to fat to run one lap around the gym.

I know a lot of couples in the world that should never have or raise kids, but being a vegetarian should not be a reason why they shouldn't have one.

Granted, I do feel bad for the kid. Denying the kid bacon? That's just cruel... but not a reason why they shouldn't raise him/her/it.


*****

I don't know what it is about this article, but it just screams "FAKE" to me. Just seems too.... hokey. It's like it was made just to yell and rant about vegetarians' rights and how big government shouldn't put their nose into someone's stomach.

Or it could just be me.

__________________
Vice-President of the CinnamonGirl Fan Club - The Meat of the Zombiesquirrel and CinnamonGirl Sandwich

EventHorizon

i completely agree, if they want to feed their kid on a vegetarian diet it isnt bizarre at all, but pulling statistics out of thin air doesnt really help the discussion much. i have nothing against you personally whatsoever (quite the opposite actually) but trying to argue a side without accurate facts is just letting your passions get the best of you. also, i have yet to meet a buddhist that doesnt eat meat.

Buddhist vegetarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

__________________
Does Marcellus Wallace have the appearance of a female canine? Then for what reason did you attempt to copulate with him as if he were a female canine?

Quote:

Originally Posted by canuckguy Pretty simple really, do your own thing as long as it does not fuck with anyone's enjoyment of life.

noodle

Ha ha ha ha ha. Actually I was more appalled that they'd keep vegetarians from adopting children and that there are migrant gangs selling them, hence the quote.

I don't think meat eaters are evil, and I'm not a vegetarian.
I also don't think that dietary choices define good vs. bad parents or people.
If they're so concerned about people inflicting a dietary lifestyle on children, why are they not focusing on those couples feeding their kids tv dinners and McDonalds? I was attempting to addres the absurdity of steroyping people based on their dietary lifestyle (vegetarian) which is actually infinitely (but possibly arguably) more healthy than that of those people in the US that often are offered foreign children for adoption that make extremely poor dietary choices.
Apparently, I failed.

__________________

Fremen

Damn, I can't believe I forgot this so soon. I was looking at an atlas last month or so, paying particular attention to the Mediterranean area and noticed that Greece wasn't where I thought it was. I was surprised somewhat because I'd always heard of the Greek Isles, but never really paid attention in geography class too much to where they are.

Thanks for pointing it out, Strange.

__________________
Google

Charlatan

The number 400,000,000 wasn't wrong, what I applied it to was. Roughly 40% of the population of India is vegetarian. India has a population of 1 billion.

I wrote Buddhist and should have been more accurate (speed kills... it also makes a mess of your posts).

For the record... I eat a lot of meat. I am not passionate about vegetarians, I just know that there are a heck of a lot of people getting painted with a very broad "bizarre" brush... and that annoys me.

Some people are so sure that their way is the only way. I say recognize diversity and embrace the fuck out of it. Your life will be richer for it.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

bagatelle

If it's any consolation, I can't place all American states on a map.

And I haven't updated my knowledge of all new European countries, they've added since my school days.

On-topic: coincidentally I've been talking to a Greek woman in another forum. She has been trying to have own children for a few years, but her IV's have not been successful.

Since there's only one case, I know, I can't draw conclusions about Greek fertility.

__________________

dlish

true, but this question isnt about meat eaters or vice versa.

The issue here is, does the government have a right to deny this couple a child because of a practice that is widely accepted in the western and eastern worlds. It's not a 'bizarre' practice to become a vegetarian. i think that's SF just being his usual self here with his choice of words. Sure, vegetarianism is not the majority, but it's no where near bizarre, weird or strange.

Having lived with a woman for 10 years who just happens to live, eat and breath dietetics, i can safely say that health professionals have no issues with vegetarianism.

As long as you are getting your nutritional requirements from other sources, who cares whether its from meat or not. The government should only be stepping in in the case of malnourishment or abuse. Vegetarianism in concept is not an abuse.

__________________
An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere

I always sign my facebook comments with ()()===========(}. Does that make me gay?
- Filthy

Strange Famous

Ok, first all of being a Hindu doesnt mean you cant eat meat (although most Hindu's doint eat beef). I have quite a few mates who are Hindu, and they all eat meat. I dont know enough about Budhism to comment on the assertion all Bubbhists are vegetarian.

Secondly, there is no evidence that I can see from the original post that the couple involved are prohibited by religion from eating meat.

The key point I am trying to question is the apparent assumption that these people have the *right* to be given a child and think they can go to court and sue someone if the state decided for whatever reason that they are not fit to be guardians. As long as the state does not base its view on racial prejudice, I can see no objection to them making any judgment like this.

What you be preferable? They just hand out kids to anyone without giving the slightest thought of the child's welfare? Maybe the child this couple may have gotwould have been 12 years old and already decided for herself that she wanted to eat meat, and the new guardians deny her this right and instead force her to eat potato and cabbage.... would this be right?

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Charlatan

You are correct that this is about the state's right to refuse a couple to adopt. On that point, I think everyone here would agree. Screening prospective parents before they adopt is important. Not everyone is fit to be a parent (financially, mentally, etc.).

The point upon which we appear to be disagreeing is whether vegetarianism is just cause for rejecting prospective parents. A number of us are saying, we do not draw a line of acceptance here and, despite being meat-eaters ourselves, don't see any reason why anyone else should either. Whether you eat meat or not has nothing to do with raising a healthy baby. Nothing.

There is nothing here to suggest that the child being adopted is anything but a baby. To introduce the suggestion that the child is now 12, is just grasping at straws. Clearly if the child is 12, it has a voice and can make up it's own mind. But you know, as well as everyone here in this thread that we are not talking about a 12-year-old child.

Further to all of this, you are still wrong to suggest that vegetarianism is somehow "bizarre". It doesn't matter whether it is for religious, moral or just because, that you are a vegetarian. Going without meat, while unthinkable to many, is not something that is going to harm the child. While it is different from what you see as normal, I can assure you that there are many people who would look at your lifestyle and suggest it is equally bizarre. The truth is, neither is bizarre. It is just different.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Strange Famous

Well, the point is rather than when you apply to be adoptive parents (at least as I understand it) you might get either a baby or a 12 year old.

And my original point was I suspected that there was more to this than the couples diet, but this is what they CHOOSE to blame.

I remember reading about McDonalds being sued because a woman burned herself with a cup of hot coffee. "well, thats ridiculous" I thought, but when I read into it the woman had spilled burning coffee on herself, rushed into the store and been refused access to the bathroom to get cold water on the burn and get her jeans off - causing the burn to be worse than it should have been. In light of this info, it seemed quite right they were sued.

I suspect it is the same here. The decision to allow people to adopt if a complex measure of risk against need... I suspect the couple is bringing up one probably minor point. I repeat that I find their sense of entitlement to me more troubling than the stance of the local authorities of Crete on vegetarianism.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

bagatelle

Was it clearly mentioned, vegetarianism was the reason, or where they weighing up on many possible couples to adopt this particular child and vegetarianism was mentioned as an unfavorable factor compared to other couples?

__________________

Strange Famous

yes, but the article is written from the point of view of the couple, and since they are suing the local govt they are not in a position to answer the case in the media.

In my opinion, the fact that they decide to sue rather than to reach a compromise with the local govt proves in itself they are not at this time fit to adopt. It seems to me that it isnt about them wanting to give a home to a vulnerable kid, its about them wanting to be parents for their own sakes and that isnt the right motivation.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

bagatelle

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can come to this conclusion based on the fact the couple is suing the government.

They think they are fit to adopt and don't want to compromise their own way of living, because they see nothing wrong with it.

They actually might have point in being discriminated against compared to other couples, but child's rights should be in question when finding a home and if there are several couples to choose from, I could imagine vegetarianism might give them the reason to favor the other possible parents-to-be.

Does the government decision mean they aren't allowed to any adopts at all?

I don't know how these things go. Were they evaluated as unsuitable parents in general - clearly deemed misfit due to vegetarianism - or were they compared to other candidates, lost this "competition", but might have a chance to adopt later, if other parent candidates are deemed less suitable based on some other criteria?

__________________

Charlatan

Stick to the question at hand. We can speculate all we want about what the other reasons might be for the rejection of their application to adopt. Frankly I don't care to do this other than to acknowledge that there may be other reasons.

The fact remains that the OP was set up to discuss whether or not being different, and in this case specifically vegetarian, should be grounds for refusing the application to adopt. I think we have clearly shown that being a vegetarian is not sufficient ground to reject an application for adoption. Introducing other possibilities is not relevant to the question.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

genuinegirly

This story bothers me on an unexpectedly deep level. I am not educated on the adoption process in Italy, but in the US there is a 6-month "Home Study" that one must pass in order to become eligible to adopt a minor. This is an all-consuming, highly detailed background check where every aspect of the potential parent(s) are scrutinized. Interviews are conducted with family members of the to-be-parents. Work history, financial records, criminal record, emotional well-being, medical history, age, religion, marital status,lifestyle choices, house size, bedroom setup, cleanliness, diet... All of these things and more are scrutinized and analyzed in extreme detail before the agency who conducts the home study determines how many children of what ages, gender, special needs, etc. can be adopted by the applicant.

This is a draining, expensive process. I assume a similar process was followed in Italy, and that this couple did not meet the requirements. For whatever reason, the fact that they are Vegetarian is grabbing the bulk of media attention. I assume that the reporter is being truthful when they state that it is the primary reasoning for the denial.

This is not the place for me to defend my Vegetarian diet choice, nor is it a place to speak on someone's right to eat and feed their child whatever they want. It is also not the time to discuss my friends from Southern India who follow the Jain faith and essentially Vegan in their cultural/religious diet choice.

Something to consider, though: I have been in a number of Vegan kitchens where the cooks were baffled when it comes to health standards for working with raw meat. It is possible, though unlikely, that if someone with such a kitchen and cooking habits were to try feeding meat to their children it would actually pose a significant health risk.

Again, I an incredibly bothered by this story and wish I could see every side.

__________________
"Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq

"violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy

Strange Famous

I think you show clearly you consider your own views more relevant to whether someone should be allowed to adopt than childcare professionals in the above post.

I should hope that I have clearly shown I would prefer to leave such decisions to people who are trained to make them.

From the original wire story, which is written only from the couples point of view, we can draw a clear inferrence that there was an expectation that the child would be forbidden to eat meat or fish.

Given that the adoption process CAN involve children of any age, it is not possible to exclude the possibility that the child in question could have been aged 10 or even 14 and used to eating meat. To call this speculation and then dismiss it is not satisfactory. We do not know the age of the potential child and we do know it could be anything from 1 month to say 15 years. Therefore the impact of the parents refusing to let the child eat meat (of the govts expectation that they would do so) must be considered for children of all ages.

in my opinion it IS correct that some people are not allowed to adopt.

I do not believe that anyone here would argue that someone with child pornography convictions should be allowed to adopt. I think in fact that we ALL agree that some differences do mean that adoption should not be allowed.

The situation here is that the authorities suspected that this couple would enforce certain dietary restrictions on the child whatever the childs own will was in the matter.

As we do not have the information to hand, we cannot tell if this is a true judgment or not, we can only ask ourselves - if the authorities believe this to be true is it correct to disallow adoption.

Given that we do not know the age of the child who could be adopted.
Given that we do know the authorities believe (whether rightly or wrongly) that the couple would prevent the child eating meat and fish whatever the wishes of the child itself were.

...I consider this a justified position.

_

Furthermore, and more importantly, I support the right of TRAINED PROFESSIONALS to make these difficult judgment calls.

It seems that you instead believe that this isnt the case?

You're entitled to your view, but for you to prevent it as the only possible view seems to me to be a difficult case to argue.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Baraka_Guru

But it's all so trivial. Meat isn't essential to a child's diet.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Fremen

Now that I think about it, do they even make meat baby food in a jar?

I can't imagine it being good if they do.

__________________
Google

Baraka_Guru

Good question.

Apparently Gerber baby food is mainly fruit and vegetables, but they have what they call "2nd foods" for babies 6 to 18 months. Within that category is "Dinners," which includes grains, pasta, and meat.

It's a kind of weaning kids onto those foods I guess. I think it's kind of like a meat and vegetable stew...but pureed.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

jewels

They do. It's pureed. Doctors recommendations vary, but average would be between 6 and 9 months to begin meat. Gerber calls them 2nd stage (6+ months, when baby can sit). It's just as you would imagine pureed meat to be.

__________________
We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess.
Mark Twain

Baraka_Guru

That's the one.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot