Recent news reports have carried the headline “Vegan parents starved baby.” Unfortunately, the media does a poor job of communicating what is really important about this story. As a result, the animal rights movement is dealt more bad press.

In Atlanta, Lamont Thomas and Jade Sanders were found guilty of murder in the death of their 6-week-old son, Crown. In court proceedings, in answer to questions about their lifestyle choices, the couple explained that they were vegan because of concerns about animal cruelty.

The prosecution asserted the baby’s malnourishment and subsequent death was due to the fact that he was fed too little and did not receive enough nutrients. Reportedly, the kitchen cupboards in the family’s home were virtually empty.

Starving children is not consistent with the values of any vegan families I know. Most vegans I know actually do have lots of food in their cupboards, and the vegan parents I know educate themselves about vegan nutrition for children. Most people I know who are concerned about the humane treatment of animals also are concerned about the welfare of children.

The media has sensationalized this tragic story by focusing on the inflammatory, but irrelevant, detail that this family is vegan. The oversimplified version of this story is drawing unsupported conclusions. The headlines miss the point completely.

The truth is, children can be at risk if they are improperly cared for by their parents, whether the families are vegetarian or not. Apparently, this infant was not breastfed, but rather was given juice and soymilk (not nutritionally-complete soy-based infant formula).

Even a meat-eating family could feed its children too little or foods with inadequate nutritional content. If this family’s cupboards contained a can of sugary soda and a jug of hormone-laden cow’s milk instead of fruit juice and soymilk, you can bet that the headline would not have focused on the dietary preferences of the family.

Focusing on an irrelevant detail gives the media an excuse to avoid covering the real stories prompted by this case: the welfare of children and families in America and the inherent animal cruelty associated with our nation’s food industry.