U.S. Courts are no strangers to whiney people seeking to vindicate their vexations via lawsuits.  Neither is fast food giant McDonald’s.  But this one may take the Dollar Menu Apple Pie.

Reuters reports today that a lawsuit originally brought in California State Court, and since removed to Federal District court, alleges that the Golden Arches has violated consumer protection laws.  Certainly fast food chains have engendered criticism of the quality of their product and its health impact on the nation, and probably rightfully so.  But this suit doesn’t allege cat in the Big Mac or undisclosed transfats in the fries.  No, according to plaintiff Monet Parham, McDonald’s Happy Meal toys are in fact the tools of oppression whereby McDonald’s has improperly foisted its product upon the impressionable youth of America.  Certainly in light of childhood obesity rates, promotional gimmicks which encourage youths to gorge themselves on hamburgers and soda have drawn criticism.  What is interesting about this action is that Ms. Parham’s biggest complaint appears to be, that she frequently has to tell her children “no” when they ask for happy meals.

Qué horor!  Apparently whining (an activity often engaged in by the under ten crowd) has spread to parents.  

There are those of us who have little sympathy for this kind of adult whining.  Working my way through school in a restaurant, I witnessed the myriad ways in which parents deal when, as my father would say, something is not right in their children’s world.  Parental reactions ranged from, “yes, just tell the waiter to bring you whatever you want,” to “knock that **** off.”  Unfortunately, parents seem more and more willing to abdicate responsibility for their kids’ actions.  This is not a novel observation, I know that.  Certainly not all kids handle the word “no” well, and parents don’t necessarily want to deal with their child’s disappointment tantrum.  But do we really need to fashion some kind of legal remedy for parents whose tenacious toddlers have them reaching for the Bordeaux at naptime?

According to many, we do.  Some of us who remember the long lost days of sand covered playgrounds with wooden forts and fun slides are disappointed that some parents’ failure to supervise their kids lead to the more modern playground, safe and dull.  Even there, though, the potential injuries were serious enough that we think children shouldn’t have to suffer because of their parents’ inability to be…well…parents.  Of course the elevation of the skinned knee from “shake it off, kid” to “oh dear! What happened!  Someone call 911!” has certainly played its role.  Well, now some say the logical extension is for McDonald’s, the big, evil corporation, to be held responsible for putting Ms. Parham in the agonizing situation where she is forced to say “no” to her daughter. 

I write this at my own peril, however, because according to many I am now engaged in victim blaming.  The accusation of “blaming the victim” is perfect example of question begging, because it already presumes that there is a victim.  The whole point of my critique is that there is no victim.  As McDonald’s points out, the more abstract proposition is that companies shouldn’t talk about their children’s products, because that would put parents in the position of saying “no.”  And because the modern parent shouldn’t have to say no, so the argument goes, this is an unfair business practice. 

Ridiculous.  For many families, going out to eat is a treat, not a daily occurrence, and that treat is enhanced by plastic water squirters shaped like Puss-in-Boots. 

So here’s hoping that this suit goes nowhere.  Otherwise, keep an eye out in your local mall for the store “(BLANKS)-R-Us.”

Wouldn’t want you to have to tell your kid that you’re not going there today.

The Reuters report can be found here.