Happy Meal Lawsuit

Why are you even taking your child to McDonald's if you don't want them to have a toy or eat fast food? If you want healthy food, eat at home and let the kid play with one of their own toys. Or go to a restaurant that offers healthy food and bring a toy from home.

Amen! Kids can't get to McDonald's on their own and have no money to buy a Happy Meal. Don't blame McDonald's, blame the parent for taking their child there and buying them the food.

I used to take dd to McDonald's occasionally and let her live it up with a Happy Meal and have fun in the play area. Kids shouldn't have to eat healthily at every single meal any more than I do. The majority of meals should be healthy, sure, but for Pete's sake, the occasional cheeseburger & fries is not going to cause any lasting damage to a child who eats healthily the majority of the time.

Leave the dang toy in the Happy Meal. If you don't want your kids to have either one, then skip McDonald's.
 
If I was going to substitute a lawsuit for just saying no to my kids, I'd also have to sue the companies that sell and advertise:

1)Text messaging

2) Big screen tv's

3) i-Pads, i-Pods and i-Phones

4) Laptop computers

5) Pet stores

6) Video games
 
Before you declare that this sort of legislation has no chance in court, consider the fate of Joe Camel. I am a huge proponent of personal responsibility, but advertising directed at children can lead to some very unfortunate circumstances.

I could see it if hamburgers, chicken nuggets and french fries were illegal for children to consume.

A closer correlation would be the cereal companies and their marketing of sugar disguised as a healthy breakfast. Didn't they have to stop putting free toys in the box? Even then, they still use cartoon characters and such to market their product to kids.

We don't do cereals much. But as mom, the lack of a toy isn't why I limit it.

The goal of the lawsuit, won't do anything for childhood obesity. Parents will still buy it. The toy, is just an extra benefit.

And if McD's has to stop, they all will have to, and parental behavior will not change.
 
I could see it if hamburgers, chicken nuggets and french fries were illegal for children to consume...

The lawsuit had nothing to do with the legality of children smokers - it was about targeting children with an ad campaign for a product that is know to be dangerous. Well, obesity kills more people in America than smoking.

Again, not saying that I support the suit, but there is a precedent.
 

The lawsuit had nothing to do with the legality of children smokers - it was about targeting children with an ad campaign for a product that is know to be dangerous. Well, obesity kills more people in America than smoking.

Again, not saying that I support the suit, but there is a precedent.

Now this is wikipedia--I have a squirming infant so unable to find a better source..but as I remember, it was definitel correlated that they were aiming their product at minors and it accounted for a chunk of their business. The wikipedia article does back up some of what I Am recalling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Camel
In 1991, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a study showing that more children 5 and 6 years old could recognize Joe Camel than could recognize Mickey Mouse or Fred Flintstone, and alleged that the "Joe Camel" campaign was targeting children—despite R. J. Reynolds' contention that the campaign had been researched only among adults and was directed only at the smokers of other brands.[2] At that time it was also estimated that 32.8% of all cigarettes sold illegally to underage buyers were Camels, up from less than one percent.[3] Subsequently, the American Medical Association asked R. J. Reynolds Nabisco to pull the campaign. R. J. Reynolds refused, and the Joe Camel Campaign continued. In 1991, Janet Mangini, a San Francisco-based attorney, brought a suit against R. J. Reynolds, challenging the company for targeting minors with its "Joe Camel" advertising campaign. In her complaint, Mangini alleged that teenage smokers accounted for US$476 million of Camel cigarette sales in 1992. When the Joe Camel advertisements started in 1988, that figure was only at US$6 million, "implicitly suggesting such advertisements have harmed a great many teenagers by luring them into extended use of and addiction to tobacco products."[4]

R. J. Reynolds to this day has denied Joe Camel was intended to be directed at children; the company maintains that Joe Camel's target audience was 25-49-year-old males and current Marlboro smokers. In response to the criticism, R. J. Reynolds instituted "Let's Clear the Air on Smoking", a campaign of full-page magazine advertisements consisting entirely of text, typically set in large type, denying those charges, and declaring that smoking is "an adult custom".

Internal documents produced to the court in Mangini v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, San Francisco Superior Court No. 959516, demonstrated the industry's interest in targeting children as future smokers.[5] The importance of the youth market was illustrated in a 1974 presentation by RJR's Vice-President of Marketing who explained that the "young adult market . . . represent tomorrow's cigarette business. As this 14-24 age group matures, they will account for a key share of the total cigarette volume - for at least the next 25 years."[6] A 1974 memo by the R. J. Reynolds Research Department points out that capturing the young adult market is vital because "virtually all [smokers] start by the age of 25" and "most smokers begin smoking regularly and select a usual brand at or before the age of 18."[7]

In July 1997, under pressure from the impending Mangini trial, Congress and various public-interest groups, RJR announced it would settle out of court and voluntarily end its Joe Camel campaign. A new campaign with a more adult theme debuted: instead of Joe Camel, it had a plain image of a quadrupedal, non-anthropomorphic camel. This image is still used in advertisements for Camel today. As part of the agreement, RJR also paid $10 million to San Francisco and the other California cities and counties who intervened in the Mangini litigation. This money was earmarked primarily to fund anti-smoking efforts targeted at youth.[5]
 
While I can certainly understand the role of the annoying child in the backseat begging for a happy meal and a toy, I don't understand how it is McDonalds fault that the parent doesn't have the ability to so "no" to their child.

Here is the great thing about McDonalds. You don't need to purchase a happy meal in order to get the toy. Many times I have swung through the drive-thru and gotten something to drink and a toy. No fries or nuggets involved. ;)

This parent feels guilty because her children are more then likely overweight and instead of taking a look at what she has done wrong and how to change that she decides to blame the big bad evil McDonalds for her lack of parenting skills. No amount of money is going to help those kids though. :sad2:

Exactly. WHY should they change to suit her and what she perceives to be a "healthy meal"?? Don't like it, don't buy it.

Another great thing about McDonalds, you don't have to go there!! There are entirely too many people worried about upsetting their children, and trying to change the world to revolve around them, instead of saying "No".
 
I am serious. Every Monday and Tuesday, my dad picks my DD up to take her to dance class and drops her off. Per my moms instructions, he has to pick her up 2 hours before she has to be there, so he can stop and buy her dinner. HELLO!!!!!! The kid can eat before she goes. There is food in our house. But, nooooo, that isn't good enough for her precious granddaughter. She does the same thing with my son, if dad is going to run him somewhere, he has to pick him up early enough to go buy him food.

Just find me a brick wall and let me bang my head on it for a while.

my Dad has been gone for 6 years (yesterday) I wish he was still here to take my kids out to dinner (even if it was McDonalds) before their activities. I hope you kids enjoy their dinner with Grandpa......I think it is sweet that your Mom wants him to take them out to eat.
 
While I can certainly understand the role of the annoying child in the backseat begging for a happy meal and a toy, I don't understand how it is McDonalds fault that the parent doesn't have the ability to so "no" to their child.

Here is the great thing about McDonalds. You don't need to purchase a happy meal in order to get the toy. Many times I have swung through the drive-thru and gotten something to drink and a toy. No fries or nuggets involved. ;)

This parent feels guilty because her children are more then likely overweight and instead of taking a look at what she has done wrong and how to change that she decides to blame the big bad evil McDonalds for her lack of parenting skills. No amount of money is going to help those kids though. :sad2:

I agree with you 100%. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? :sad2:
 
Another great thing about McDonalds, you don't have to go there!! There are entirely too many people worried about upsetting their children, and trying to change the world to revolve around them, instead of saying "No".

Exactly. For some parents it's just easier to give in to what their child wants than to say no. Call me crazy but I'm pretty sure a Happy Meal toy isn't to blame for that.
 
So, her kid stole her car keys and some money, learned how to drive, and went and purchased a happy meal without her?

Oh wait, they didn't? SHE drove them there and bought the meal?

Then she can blame herself... Can you sue yourself?

(I like sarcasm)
 
So, her kid stole her car keys and some money, learned how to drive, and went and purchased a happy meal without her?

Oh wait, they didn't? SHE drove them there and bought the meal?

Then she can blame herself... Can you sue yourself?

(I like sarcasm)

:rotfl::rotfl: Love this!! McDonalds should counter-sue her!!!
 
So, her kid stole her car keys and some money, learned how to drive, and went and purchased a happy meal without her?

Oh wait, they didn't? SHE drove them there and bought the meal?

Then she can blame herself... Can you sue yourself?

(I like sarcasm)

:thumbsup2
 
It's not just parents - it's grandparents, aunts and uncles, older siblings, family friends.

I have to have the conversation with my parents at least 4 times a year, and mine are 15 and 13. I keep telling them there is this wonderful new little word. Learn it, Love it, Embrace it, and Use it. It's so easy to say - Noooooo!

My dad just chuckles at me and mom calls me a smart butt(the other word though).

I am serious. Every Monday and Tuesday, my dad picks my DD up to take her to dance class and drops her off. Per my moms instructions, he has to pick her up 2 hours before she has to be there, so he can stop and buy her dinner. HELLO!!!!!! The kid can eat before she goes. There is food in our house. But, nooooo, that isn't good enough for her precious granddaughter. She does the same thing with my son, if dad is going to run him somewhere, he has to pick him up early enough to go buy him food.

Just find me a brick wall and let me bang my head on it for a while.

Just maybe it's not about the food or lack thereof in your home. My guess it's about quality time with the grandkids. They are getting a great opportunity to spend time with grandparents, not all kids have grandparents. Let them enjoy it.
 
This is the quote that gets me:

"What kids see as a fun toy, I now realize is a sophisticated, high-tech marketing scheme that's designed to put McDonald's between me and my daughters," said Monet Parham, of Sacramento, Calif. "For the sake of other parents and their children, I want McDonald's to stop interfering with my family."

If she thinks McDonald's is interfering with her family, her parenting issues are a lot bigger than a plastic toy.
 
Before you declare that this sort of legislation has no chance in court, consider the fate of Joe Camel. I am a huge proponent of personal responsibility, but advertising directed at children can lead to some very unfortunate circumstances.

I'm not ready to equate an occasional cheeseburger and fries to smoking.

Her quotes read like one of those conspiracy theorists.
 
I'm not ready to equate an occasional cheeseburger and fries to smoking.

Her quotes read like one of those conspiracy theorists.

I don't think he was necessarily making that equation personally, just saying that the courts might. They are known to make some very irrational leaps like that.

I'm pretty strict with eating healthy and think the vast majority of what they sell at McDonald's is total garbage. While to occasional treat is one thing these people who feed their kids a happy meal 4 times a week should be ashamed of themselves. It sure as heck isn't a choice I would make.

That being said, it is a choice to do that and if you choice is different than mine more power to you. I hate the trend where good choices are legislated or bad choices, at least when it comes to nutrition, punished (read: taxed). I am against the sugar tax, pop tax, salt tax, and all these other government schemes that on the face are to make us healthier but in reality are money grabs even though I consume very little of those items. While this is a court case brought by an individual a ruling in her favor would set a precedent that is as powerful as legislation.

Eating healthy or not is a choice and we are all free to make either good or poor choices. McDonald's publishes their ingredient list and I believe also their nutritional information. As long as that is reasonably accurate (nutritional info is never 100% spot on) the parent has the information available to make the proper choice for them and if that choice is no they should be ashamed of themselves if they let McDonald's marketing sway them.

Just my 2 cents.
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer

New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom