Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire UFB!

Dad �unfit parent for refusing son McDonald�s�
By Julia Marsh and Reuven Fenton
November 7, 2013


Attorney David Schorr slapped a court-appointed shrink with a defamation lawsuit for telling the judge deciding a custody battle with his estranged wife that he was an unfit parent � for refusing to take his son to the fast food joint for dinner.

�You�d think it was sexual molestation,� Schorr, 43, told The Post Thursday. �I am just floored by it.�

Schorr says in his Manhattan Supreme Court suit that E. 97th Street psychiatrist Marilyn Schiller filed a report saying he was �wholly incapable of taking care of his son� and should be denied his weekend visitation over the greasy burger ban.

Schorr, a corporate attorney turned consultant with degrees from NYU and Oxford University, had planned to take his 4-year-old son to their usual restaurant, the Corner Caf� on Third Avenue, for his weekly Tuesday night visitation last week.

But the boy threw a temper tantrum and demanded McDonald�s. So he gave his son an ultimatum: dinner anywhere other than McDonald�s � or no dinner.

�The child, stubborn as a mule, chose the �no dinner� option,� the disgruntled dad says in the suit.

�It was just a standoff. I�m kicking myself mightily,� Schorr said.

�I wish I had taken him to McDonalds, 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,� he said.

Adding insult to injury, he said: �My wife immediately took him to McDonalds.�

Upon reflection, Schorr said he should have remembered that mother knows best.

�The first thing I did was I questioned myself,� he recalled.

�Had I done something wrong? I did what any 43-year-old Jewish man would do � I told my mother. I said, �My God, did I do something wrong here?�

�Even my mother, the strictest mother in the world, said, �Why didn�t you just take him to McDonalds? What were you thinking? You know that this is a divorce situation.��

Before dropping his son off at his wife�s E. 84th Street building, Schorr says he tried to make light of the situation by horsing around with him and trying one last time to change his mind about dinner.

But the son apparently tattled on his dad and his wife flipped out and called the shrink, according to the suit.

Schorr claims that Dr. Schiller only interviewed the child and his mother and never asked for his side of the story before telling the court she was gravely concerned about Schorr�s parenting.

Bari Yunis Schorr sued her husband for a divorce in 2011, just four years after they married in a lavish ceremony at the St. Regis Hotel in Manhattan.

She recently filed motions asking the judge to punish her husband for flouting court orders and for a judgment on nonpayment of child support.

Her attorney, Louis I. Newman, declined to comment on the McDonald�s matter.

�It�s a litigation between Mr. Schorr and Mrs. Schiller,� Newman said.

In the past two and a half years that he has had partial custody of his son their time together �has run smoothly without incident� save a scraped knee, Schorr insists in the suit.

He wants the shrink to return the $2,750 he paid for the evaluation.

Dr. Schiller told the Post she could not comment on the details of the incident. She only sad, �I am conducting a forensic evaluation on this matter. I will be issuing a confidential report to the court and the matter will be tried by the court.�

The custody trial resumes in December when the judge will ultimately decide if Schorr is fit to parent his son.

You're right.

UFB.

"Bari Yunis Schorr" the mother.
The kid was fugged from the get go!

The mother should lose her rights for failure to parent her son, instead of relying on a shrink to bring it all together.

I might understand this surreal event a bit more if they went after a parent for taking the kid to McDonalds.

If the facts are accurately depicted, I'd frag that shrink.

Surely the shrink only has the child's best interest at heart.

and not the $2,750 bucks for asking, "Did your daddy hurt your feelings...."

Any other time the authorities would be crying child abuse for taking the kid to Mickey's. It's like, all that trans-fat and suchlike.

All is clear, now.

True that. I have to believe there's more to this than just the culinary delights of MickieDs.

Let me tell you how much influence a step-father has on keeping a kid out of McDonald's.

You're preaching to the choir with this stepdad of three.

Today, I also read of a case in China where a dad of a few kids is suing his wife because all the kids were ugly.

If they had more than one kid, he's lucky he's not in prison.

these are the type of cases that give attorneys and the legal profession a black eye.


disgusting that a human that has done the work necessary to obtain his law degree doesn't have the human decency to tell the whacky mom

"lady let's pick another hill to die upon, really you're upset because his father wanted him to eat a healthier meal?"


people are crazy and unfortunately in a country that has way too many attorneys they can find someone to bring suit for their craziness.

have a hard time imagining the attorney's that post on here or the ones I know personally in my locale entertaining this nonsense


there's a shrink needed in this case, but not the one they're using and he's needed for the mom imo.

in our house, tantrums led to spankings

I'm sure the mother presented it as "His father got mad at him and refused to feed him!". Doubt the actual finding had anything directly to do with McDonalds.

If so, I'm doomed. Probably refused to take my kids to McDonalds hundreds of times, hate their food.

I definitely like the defamation suit though, hope that works. Shrink that's too stupid to talk to the only adult that was present deserves to lose a few grand.

Sometimes we lose sight of the smaller actions that take place around the periphery of the larger battles. The kid in this story is a master player, IMO, and deserves a nod of respect.

He's 4, right? Pretty young, but old enough to know that his parents are fighting over him. Dad makes a power-and-control play by saying "no" to McDonald's. The kid doesn't like it, so he calls.

"I'm not bluffing," says Dad. "I'm not either," says the kid.

The kid goes to his mom, cries, and she takes him to McDonald's. The kid gets his way (and really, that's what most people are looking for in this world) and Dad gets a spanking.

In short: Dad overplayed a weak hand and got his ass handed to him by a 4-year-old.

I can picture the two of them later, at another divorced dad-son dinner:

"That's was very well played, son."

"Thank you, Father. I learned from the best."

I had to read this thread to know what "UFB" meant. Then it was obvious.

The judge should tell the wife that he thinks both parents are effed up and that the kid should go into foster care in the Bronx next time this happens.

Bet that would shut her pie hole up.

No offense Bob but when we as a country have 8 percent of of the workds population. And 88 percent of the worlds lawyers. Stupid things will happen

female judge. Seems like when you put a woman to work at anything other than making babies, they will screw it up.

Both parents, the judge and the shrink should be in public stocks.

The kid, in boot camp.

America, in prayer.

They all probably voted �. kid too.

Yes... Obama got most of the 4 year old vote in 2012.

You noticed, too. Some of these toddlers have pretty old birth certificates.

AMEN Brother!