You’re Going To Have A Hard Time Having Sympathy For Runaway Rachel Canning

I also can’t understand the parents of the friend who Rachel is living with financing her lawsuit. The father of the friend, John Inglesino, wrote in a letter submitted to the court:

‘Rachel is likeable, communicates exceptionally well and is highly motivated to attend and excel at a college appropriate for her. That is why my wife and I have decided to fund this lawsuit. We know that if Mr. and Mrs. Canning are not required to fulfil their legal obligations as parents, that Rachel’s ability to fulfil her potential will be greatly diminished,’

They have already paid $12,597 for Rachel’s lawyer.

This whole thing sounds to me like even though Rachel’s parents had started therapy for her eating disorders and tried to work with their daughter in setting up some rules, she moved out just because she didn’t like it. I’m sure this was their way of showing some sort of tough love and maybe they wanted Rachel to see what life would be like if they weren’t supporting her. They probably weren’t expecting her to move in with a friend who had parents willing to pay for her to sue them. The news report talks about Rachel’s parents breaking down in tears in court and I can’t help think that this whole thing is extremely unfair to the younger siblings who still live at home. All of the focus is on this mess and it can’t be easy on them.

The judge has set a date for the secondary hearing, but advised that the plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence up until now to suggest she would win the case.

I think this whole thing should just be solved by ordering Rachel to return home, since she expects her parents to support her, and for all of them to get family therapy. I just know if this were my daughter I’d have a hard time dealing with all of this.

(Image: Daily Mail Video)

Share This Post:
    • personal

      I’m with the parents on this one. I do think they should continue paying the tuition for the final few months of high school, but if she CHOOSES to live with her friends and they CHOOSE to let her, then she can forget about any child support if I’m the judge.

      • keelhaulrose

        I’m with you, especially on the tuition. I’m assuming the parents made the choice of school, and with less than half a year left they should see it through to the end. But other than that you don’t get to runaway and be supported. Part of the point of running away is to get away from parental influence, and if you still want their support get your ass back home. There are a lot of kids who have been kicked out at 18 (or earlier) and they don’t get any support.

      • brebay

        She has no standing to bring the high school tuition case, because it’s a contract between the school and her parents that was signed when she was 17, and she’s not a party to that contract. The school can sue her parents, but they can only recover up to the time they knew the parents were in breach. If they let her stay once they knew they weren’t paying, they’ll likely have to eat that. Either way, she’s not a party to the back-tuition claim, the school can never collect that from her because they had no contract with her.

      • CMP414

        I definitely think they owe the school regardless because they registered her for the entire year so what ever tuition is still owed should be paid. After all her enrollement essentially took a spot from another potential student so I feel the school loses money in that sense

      • brebay

        Yeah, definitely the school has a case, especially if they can show they couldn’t have filled her spot with someone from a waiting list. It seems to me that if the friend’s parents really wanted to help, they would have just paid the rest of her year (which I think was $6000?) or tried to get enough donors to fund a scholarship for her instead of running up $12,000 in attorney’s fees.

      • Kate

        They do not have to pay the school, as the contract is on a semester basis, and they informed the school of their intention to stop paying after the first semester. The court documents and depositions can be found online, and they include a scanned copy of the contract that outlines the terms and conditions. Rachel decided on her own and without parental consent to keep attending the school. Morris Catholic School is not suing the parents, because they do not have legal standing.

      • deb

        Right. And I read that the parents contacted the school in October (when the child left) to say that her tuition was paid for the first semester but that they would not pay for the next term that began in January. So parents owe nothing and girl can figure out life for herself. Good luck. hehehe

    • JLH1986

      I sincerely doubt that Rachel took it upon herself to sue her parents and asked the family to fund the suit. It sounds to me like she didn’t like the rules at home, ran away, and the family she lives with wanted some sort of compensation…say around $654 a week or whatever to take care of this girl. I’m not absolving Rachel of any guilt here, she sounds like a spoiled little girl who NEEDS some strict rules and I agree with the judge here. However, I feel like the parents of the girl she is staying with have some complicity in this lawsuit, perhaps more than Rachel. Because she can’t afford $12k in lawyer fees. It seems like Rachel jumped from the frying pan into the fire.

      • notamused72

        I agree that the other family is culpable in this lawsuit. Rachel’s parents are not perfect, but they seem more stable than many parents I have dealt with as a teacher. She needs a reality check. She is also about to learn that Social Media hurts.

    • Valerie

      If what she says is true about the way her father has acted toward her then that needs to be pursued and investigated but in no way does it entitle this girl to what she is asking for. What her parents chose to contribute toward her college education is entirely their perogative and if she has to take out loans, well, welcome to the real world sweetie. I do think they should pay out the remainder of her high school tuition since it would be tough at this point for her to go elsewhere but after that, she’s on her own.

      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        …. Kissing her on the cheek?

      • Valerie

        No, waking her up to play beer pong and feeding her shots and cocktails.

      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        I read an email between them where it sounds like he is sort of the “cool dad” (he uses the term YOLO, no lie) but IDK, I mean, none of us can know because we aren’t in the family but it seems like the parents were really just beyond frustrated with her… and IDK, I can kind of see letting an 18 year old drink at a wedding because she has obvsly done it before and he was with her, but who knows if the beer pong allegations were true? It’s all weird

      • Valerie

        It is definitely an odd case and of course most of what Rachel says cannot be proven. It sounds to me like it would be best for everyone if they throw out the lawsuit and send the family to therapy. There is obviously a disfunctional dynamic that needs to be dealt with. Very sad, really.

      • Andrea

        My husband has a couple of cousins that are quite a bit younger than him. At our wedding they were 18 and 17 and their parents allowed them to get pretty toasty. The parents figured, this is a safe environment, they are almost adults and will be out of house in a few months…let’s see how they handle it.

      • bl

        It seems weird to me that you’d keep handing her alcohol if one of the main things you’re complaining about is her alcohol use. And she was likely 17 at the time, which is too young to me, but everyone has their own kid-alcohol policies.

        I’m actually blown away by the dismissal of her claims because “who knows if the allegations are true?”. I believe that she’s mistaken in suing for all this money rather than just emancipating herself and walking away. But she was 18, still in high school, and getting advice from other adults And that doesn’t mean her parents weren’t abusive or problematic.

        In my opinion, it’s not OK to cuss your daughter out when she calls about getting in trouble at school. And it was clearly at a level that the school felt they needed to report. And her claim that he saw her as more than a daughter, encouraged her drinking, and in general made her uncomfortable is in no way contradicted by luxury family vacations and private school tuition.

        This is a complicated case, but the immediate “BRAT” reactions are weird to me.

      • Mystik Spiral

        That’s exactly what I wanted to say, thanks for saying it so well. :)

      • Caitlin

        I have a really hard time believing that her father behaved inappropriately. I feel like if that was actually of concern, his behavior would be a large part of this legal battle rather than an added on as an afterthought.

      • AnonyMouse

        I agree with you. In this case, I feel like she is just trying to justify her actions and gain leverage, rather than being an actual victim. Which is sad because there are so many victims of horrible things that never get justice.

        One of my mom’s friends had a daughter that was out of control, and when they finally put their foot down she got angry she couldn’t see her boyfriend. So, she went to school and told the guidance councillor her dad tied her up, beat her, and molested her, and her mom knew all about it. She did that just to get back at them.

        She later admitted it was all a lie when it became obvious to her when child protective services showed up that her dad could go to jail. She was also examined for signs if a use, but none were found. But, her parents were afaid to discipline her after that, because they did it know what she would accuse them of next. She ended up pregnant at 16.

      • AnonyMouse

        signs of abuse*

      • AnonyMouse

        afraid* didn’t know*

        Sorry. I typed this on my iPad.

    • Caitlin

      I think it is worth mentioning that the father of her friend is an attorney.

      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        I think he is a former one, no?

      • Caitlin
      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        Thank you Darlink

      • Zoe Lansing

        Is Darlink the Travoltified form of Caitlin?

      • Blueathena623

        Yay for calling people darlink

    • Rowan

      We’ve raised a “litigation generation” where so many people talk about their rights while ignoring their responsibilities and this girl is the peak of that evolution. The friend’s dad might think she’s a little darling right now, but that’s because he’s giving in to her spoilt tantrum behaviour. The moment he says no to her, he’ll see her true face. That message to her mother didn’t show much evidence of her exceptional communication skills!

      • bl

        I agree with you that this lawsuit is weird and the demands for money are probably not legally justified, but I think this case is also highlights the unfortunate fact that 18 year olds can’t typically support themselves, even though they are legal adults.

        We require parental income to factor into college aid choices. And I know emancipation is an option, but it is not customarily presented to seniors as an viable choice. If everyone was expected to support themselves at 18 our student loan and government backed financial aid systems would collapse. Fewer people would attend college but subsequently flood the market with unskilled workers looking for jobs that likely could not support their housing, food, and transportation needs. So we set up a system that counts on wealthy parents floating their kid’s survival until age 22+, but allow them to rescind it at any time? But how long can we expect people to help their kids and in what situations?

        This girl’s life changed dramatically when she abruptly lost her parents’ support, and while that’s just kind of a tough break that she’ll have to get over and I think she’s choosing the wrong avenue to react, I can’t blame her for struggling.

      • sunsmasher

        This is very simple:
        Live by the rules of the house if you want to live there and be supported. If you won’t live by the rules and don’t like them, leave and give up the support.
        You can’t have it both ways. She will definitely lose this legal case.

    • Jell

      Even if all of Rachel’s accusations are true you will never convince me that there is a more appropriate response than to cut one’s losses and run. Put a restraining order on her father, by all means, if he did behave inappropriately for her. Suing him for tuition? In what world is that okay? How does a case like this even gain legs?
      I think that the money this friend’s family put up for her legal feels might have been better spent helping her to pay off any debts she owed and helping her find a way to set herself up in life. She needs to pay for her own education. No parent owes college to a child, that is absurd.
      I don’t understand how it is that a person could have parents as bad as Rachel is making them out to be and still want to accept even a DIME from them for assistance. If I believed my parents to be this way I would do anything to avoid being entangled with them financially.

      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        especially when you see all the photographs of them on vacation etc

      • Zoe Lansing

        I really hate to bring this up again but I was sexually abused by my stepfather and emotionally and verbally abused by my mother. Yet there are plenty of “happy” family photos of us on vacation. It’s impossible to judge what’s going on within a family by a few pictures. That being said, while I obviously have no way of knowing for sure what did or did not happen, my bullshit meter went off big time when reading Rachel’s side of the story. It’s not the happy vacation pictures, however, that set it off.

      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        Right, I hear you, and I know what you are saying, it’s just that coupled with everything else that was presented to the court makes it seem her homelike wasn’t as awful as she claims

      • CMJ

        It also got reported to CPS and they investigated.

      • deb

        and did you sue your parents for $654 a week, plus tuition, etc.? Huh?

    • Heather C

      Hang on, my mom was legally obligated to pay for my college education? I got stiffed.
      Seriously, since when was this actually a thing? Because that doesn’t even make any sense to me. Beyond all of the other things here that don’t add up of course.

      • bl

        Parents aren’t legally obligated to pay anything, but unless a college freshman is emancipated from her parents (which seems questionable from what I’ve read of this case) he/she is required to submit parental income and asset information and financial aid and scholarship ability is based on that. They develop an expected dollar amount they believe parents can contribute (which is always pretty high) and adjust aid accordingly. So if you have wealthy parents who contribute nothing, you’re penalized for at least your first year.

      • Heather C

        Apologies if it didn’t seem tongue-in-cheek. We weren’t wealthy, by any stretch, but my mom’s income still counted against me, even if she couldn’t afford to pay for any of it (I was a twit and went to a school I had no way of affording. Live and learn.). I’m aware of how that works, but it still doesn’t make her parents obligated to pay bupkis, which is more my point.

      • bl

        My apologies as well for misunderstanding. I just wanted to point out how she could suffer a bit from this situation, especially if she was promised money from them when she applied to schools.

        As an aside, I actually do feel for this girl a bit. She likely was spoiled, but I also believe her parents could be assholes as well if they react to teenage acting out that they might never have punished before–drinking, sneaking out, swiping money–by cutting her off at 18. Refusing to pay the high school seems like a reaction to the CPS call. And any further abuse claims should be investigated.

        But I agree that legally, they probably don’t owe her any money and suing them for it was a little misguided.

      • Zoe Lansing

        If she were fighting to become legally emancipated because her parents won’t pay her college tuition and ,therefore,she doesn’t want their incomes considered when applying for financial aid, that would be one thing. IMO, that would be completely reasonable.But that’s not what she’s doing. She’s fighting to NOT be considered emancipated and to force them to pay her tuition. That’s, IMO, is the batshit crazy act of an entitled girl who’s being enabled by her BFF’s batshit crazy, entitled parents.

      • brebay

        She’s 18, so she can’t be legally emancipated, because she already IS emancipated by virtue of her majority. If you want to run the financial aid scam, you have to do it before 18, and very few people are successful at that. Judges are onto it. Ironically, one of the things you have to prove to be emancipated before 18 is that you can support YOURSELF financially. It’s a moot point for her.

      • pixie

        I agree it’s very difficult to emancipate oneself.
        I only know one person who has successfully emancipated herself from her parents when she was 16, and that wasn’t for a financial aid scam, it was because her mother was a very unstable alcoholic and her father an in and out of jail crack addict and she wanted nothing more to do with either of them and found the means to support herself.

      • moonie27

        Yup. My friend emancipated herself because of sexually abusive father and crazy drug-addicted mother. An aunt gave her a place to stay but rather then go through the whole foster care thing, she just got emancipated.

      • pixie

        The girl I know found a really cheap apartment with her boyfriend. She had some help from her grandparents (not sure if any of the help was financial) but wanted nothing to do with her parents. I have a lot of respect for her considering she worked to pay her own living expenses and finished high school and then went to university. I have no idea if I could have been able to do all that.

      • moonie27

        You can also be emancipated if your parents are unfit but you’re close enough to graduation/have someone to stay with to not necessitate the foster care system.

      • deb

        I have no problem with this teenager being penalized for a year. She can get a job to while away her time.

      • Andrea

        Ok, so no they aren’t obligated. As bl said of course, the wrinkle is that when doing financial aid, your parent’s income IS counted and they do come up with some god forsaken amount they are supposed to “contribute”. Even if, of course, they shouldn’t or they couldn’t.

        However, there is another wrinkle here: as far as college saving accounts go, there are some accounts that revert to the child’s exclusive use once they turn a certain age (somewhere between 16 and 18) and some of those accounts don’t even HAVE to be used for college. So there might be the possibility that this brat has a college savings account that does belong to her (now) even if all the funds came from her parents.

    • pixie

      Oh how hard it must be, being affluent.

      My understanding of child support is that it only lasts until the child turns 18. Rachel is 18 now and therefore legally an adult. She can get a job and pay for her own way to college. Her parents shouldn’t have to give her anything, especially since she ran away and is refusing anything else from them.

      My best friend’s younger sister ran away from home at 16 a few times because she decided she didn’t like the rules of having to go to school and a job and therefore went to go hang out with her friends who lived on the street or in dirty apartments with bugs. The difference is, though, my friend’s little sister knew her mom didn’t owe her anything and has since matured and realized that although her mom doesn’t have a lot of money, she is quite lucky with what she does get (a roof over her head, food, a phone) and agreed to go to an alternative school that would better meet her needs.

      While we don’t know exactly what her home life was like, perhaps they can ask her younger sisters (not necessarily get them to testify in court, but to get other views on how the parents behave towards Rachel and her sisters). I’m sure they’ve already gotten reports from the school and her teachers. This girl does need some help professionally, but not the route she’s taken by getting a professional lawyer to sue her parents for money. Actually, they all should go see a therapist as a family. It all just sounds like a giant temper tantrum, perhaps fuelled by the friend’s parents wanting some compensation (as someone below suggested).

      • keelhaulrose

        In college I met a man who had been kicked out of his house at fifteen for being gay. He never saw another some from his parents, the only means of “support” they did was lite and said he still loved with them so the school didn’t question his residency, and I’d bet that was more for their appearance than wanting him to have an education.
        Kids like that are the ones who should be getting child support from their estranged sperm and egg donors (I can’t, in good conscience, call anyone who kicks their child out for being gay a parent), not a runaway who is legally an adult.

      • pixie

        I agree with that. If the kid is kicked out for something they have no control over, they should be getting child support.
        It’s also very difficult to find a job under 16 unless it’s at McDonalds.

        A legal adult “running away” is more like a legal adult moving out of her parents’ home and shouldn’t get anything (except maybe to just finish up the school year since it’s near finished, but nothing past that).

      • personal

        I completely understand and appreciate your opinion. I just want to humbly ask that we not call unfit parents ‘sperm and egg donors.’ There should be nothing offensive about sperm and egg donors. I have only respect for the people who helped us have our kids. Without them, I’d be sitting here reading something else.
        Drunk.

      • keelhaulrose

        You’re right. I’ll just stick with ‘jackasses’

      • LiberalGilt

        she’s a typical indoctrinated leftie. denigrating those she disagrees with while pretending to be open minded

      • Melanzana

        Near hoboken

      • LiberalGilt

        There’s no difference. you’re drinking too much of the gay agenda kool aide sweetie

      • keelhaulrose

        I’ve just spent enough time around children being raised by gay parents to know that they are wonderful, kind, normal children. I’ve also spent enough time around children to know that having a mommy and a daddy isn’t some magical equation for some ideal, perfect home. I also believe all men are created equal, and that the Constitution, through the 14th Amendment, guarantees this.
        I also know that your job as a parent is to love your children and to care for them unconditionally. NOTHING would make me love my children less or stop loving them. I’d love them if they are gay. I’ll love them if they become murderers even if I will condemn their actions and advocate that they pay their debt to society. And I’ll love them even if they have an irrational dislike of a group of people who have no impact on their everyday life, like you, though I’ll do my best to change it if that happens.

      • LiberalGilt

        being born gay doesn’t equate to “normal.” Straight is normal.Period.

      • keelhaulrose

        Funny, I know seven gay couples raising children who are past puberty, and not a single one of their children are gay, even the ones that are biologically one of the couple’s.
        I also know eight straight couples who have gay children, including my hyper-religious Aunt and Uncle
        When I said “normal” I wasn’t talking sexual orientation. I was talking about how the children are normal teenage kids. They study hard and get good grades, some are in sports and some of those excel at their sports, they have friends, some have jobs, many volunteer. You wouldn’t be able to pick them out of their classmates if you didn’t know who their parents were.
        You’re the one who immediately took ‘normal’ to be some reference to sexual orientation.

      • LiberalGilt

        I think you secretly built a Gaydar on your roof. Considering they are 3% of the population, you sure do have an abundance of gay around you.

      • keelhaulrose

        Considering I’m bisexual and have been active in the gay community through advocacy, peer mentoring and counseling, and community education services it’s not surprising I know so many gay couples with children. I’ve been doing it for fifteen years. I’ve known gay couples my whole life as my parents are friends with two couples with a child each, both around my age and both straight, married, with kids of their own.
        Face it, you’re a dying breed.

      • LiberalGilt

        That last line is one of the funniest comments a clown face has ever made!! Gays can’t procreate! That’s the dying breed, dumbo.

        Militant and overly represented, but dying.

      • brebay

        I though when you said “period” you were done, so shut the hell up. Go troll someplace else.

      • LiberalGilt

        playing semantics wont make me love you, loser

      • keelhaulrose

        Gays can’t procreate but there’s evidence of them all throughout time. They’re coming from somewhere, my guess is straight parents. Gays aren’t going anywhere.
        And, you genetic genius, they can’t procreate with EACH OTHER. Thanks to modern science a gay or lesbian can be a biological parent.

      • LiberalGilt

        ya fictitious evidence made up by the gay agenda pushing morons who want us to believe everybody is gay.
        so silly

        tom cruise is gay, you know

      • keelhaulrose

        The gay agenda, which is being treated equally in a country that has that protection in the Constitution because we’re sick of being beaten, fired, watching kids kill themselves, and being treated like second class citizens.
        I’ve seen Family Guy, South Park, and the Enquirerer talk more about Tom Cruise’s sexuality than any LGBT group, and considering the source I’d hardly them credible sources.
        In fact the side I see speculating more on people’s sexuality is the right wing ultra-religious. If you think I’m lying listen to Pat Robertson for a while. He sees the gay everywhere.

      • LiberalGilt

        the gay agenda is to be MORE equal that normal people, to be a protected minority and to squelch counter opinion and ruin the lives of anyone who disagree with the lifestyle….especially people who are expressing their free religious beliefs.

        Liberalism is about control of thought and action. It’s the millennial version of slavery.

      • keelhaulrose

        Out of curiosity, where do you get your information about the so-called gay agenda? Hearsay of hearsay on Fox? Or is it a personal connection?

      • LiberalGilt

        where do you morons get your info? msnbc?
        i’m so sick of you idiots always defaulting to the kool aide drinking playbook
        get a new routine. this one is played out and it makes you look like a bigger fool.

      • keelhaulrose

        I read six different news sources every day, from my local paper, to huffpo (obviously liberal) to Fox because I like to hear what they’re saying. I also go to factchecker on a regular occasion. Where do you go? Still not saying. You’ve ducked every question I throw at you and counter with a question of your own, and often an insult.

      • LiberalGilt

        So you don’t even realize Hufpo is not a news source?

      • keelhaulrose

        According to whom? They have news, though liberally slanted. They bill themselves as a news site. Who says they aren’t? Answer one of my questions for once.

      • LiberalGilt

        It’s a blogger site that includes news. It’s not a news site.
        This is how they describe themselves:The destination for news, blogs and original content offering coverage of US politics, entertainment, style, world news, technology and comedy.

        Grow up. It’s not US News and World Reports. It’s a place for nuts to write opinion pieces that nuts like you think is factual news.

      • keelhaulrose

        You do realize that description has the word “news” in it twice, right?
        Us News and World Reports has bloggers, too. So does Fox News, msnbc, the Wall Street Journal, and my local news stations. Can you name me a single news source that doesn’t have a single opinion blogger/writer on staff?

      • LiberalGilt

        keep trying
        it is common knowledge that hp is not a news site. it started as a blog and added “news” years later.
        you mention fox. there is not one blog tab on the site. can you find one?

        Then go to hp…right there in the prominent section that the NYT uses for the lead and most important news story is what?

        Featured blog posts.

        I rest my case.

      • keelhaulrose

        Right there on the top of the Fox News website is the tab entitled “Opinion”. Also featured on the front page. According to your own admissions opinion isn’t news.

        Click that, seven featured bloggers.

        http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/index.html

      • LiberalGilt

        Wrongo…opinion columns are different from blogs.

        All news orgs have opinion columns — generally by well known and recognized experts.

        ANYONE can blog on HuffPo. Anyone.

        That’s why they have garbage on Huff Po like

        10 Things You Should Not Do After You Get Engaged
        By Sandy Malone
        Owner, Weddings in Vieques

        or

        16 Essentials of Mindlessness Meditation

        By Michael Sigman

        Writer/Editor; Music Publisher

        That’s news? It’s a blog. Not news. Not opinion on the news.

      • keelhaulrose

        Oh, look, scrolling down on Fox News, what do I find? A listing of blogs. I guess they’re on there, too.
        http://blogs.foxnews.com/
        And such fun titles, like “Yes, Miracles do Happen” by Don Jacobson and “Life Lessons from the Bible’s Most Popular Women” by Geoffrey Morin.
        And by the number of different authors I’d say they’d let pretty much anyone write anything there, too. Except, you know, liberals.

      • LiberalGilt

        There are plenty of liberals on there…unlike the HP or msnbc which is crazy far left.

      • keelhaulrose

        Yeah. Sure. They’re the ones getting talked over on the air.

      • keelhaulrose

        BTW, my favorite news sources are BBC and Al Jazeera, but I didn’t want to hear you rant about foreign news sources even if they’re not all foreign.

      • LiberalGilt

        I read everything. I used to go to newshub but it went under years ago. Now I start at google news and examine stories from all sources all over the world.

        Here’s the one thing I noticed — the level of journalistic standard is non existent. Doesn’t matter what the site it, you’ll find extraordinary typos, wrong information, and grammatically incorrect writing.

        There was one last week on that Italian astronaut who had water leaking into his suit and had to run into the space station to get the suit off. The title was “Fatal Space Suit Accident.”
        It wasn’t fatal. The editor apologized to me and changed the title in embarrassment. But how does that happen? They hire HS students to write this crap. You can’t believe any of it.

        That’s why it’s important to read multiple sources. But even so, in the end you’re still making your own judgement about whether the story is true or not.

      • keelhaulrose

        Finally something we agree on.
        Finding something with any level of journalistic integrity is difficult.

        At least HuffPo doesn’t try to hide the fact that they are liberal. Fox News is starting to admit they’ve got a massive conservative bias, but they’re still fighting it, as evidenced by ‘fair and balanced’ still prominent on their site. I have more respect for a news source that admits their slant.

      • LiberalGilt

        You are 110% wrong about Fox News.

        Firstly, Murdoch — years ago — was interviewed on the conservative POV that Fox takes. He talked about how unique that was considering every other news outlet is left of center or worse.

        Secondly, the LEFT leaning PEW institute recently released a study that said Fox News really WAS the most fair and balanced cable news channel. And MSNBC was nothing but propaganda.

        And thirdly, did you know that Huffington was a raging Republican and the Huff Post was co-founded by conservative Breitbart? It originally was a conservative blog, but Adriana found out the left had all the militant sheep so she took a left hand turn. She actively sought the resignation of Clinton and even had a web site called resignation.com back in the day.

        She’s a farce.

      • keelhaulrose

        How is it “more” equal to want the same legal protections as any straight person?
        So far even a marriage certificate is not a guarantee for a same sex couple to have visitation rights to each other in the hospital. I visit my husband hospital and no one questions that we’re married. I could be lying, they don’t ask. How is that equal?

      • LiberalGilt

        Moron…gays are a protected minority..get some education. That means you get special treatment. MORE equal. Idiot. stop playing dumb…or are you?

      • keelhaulrose

        No, gays aren’t. Yet. In fact, just recently the Ninth District courts became the first to put gays under “heightened scrutiny” standards, meaning that they do need to be treated equally and protected from discrimination just because they’re gay. Only seventeen states provide protections in both state and public accommodations, another six in state employment only. Twenty-nine states currently have NO protections for gays, meaning you can be fired simply for being gay and there’s nothing you can do about that.

      • LiberalGilt

        you just made that up. Gays are a protected minority. If someone beats a white guy up in a singles bar it’s assault. Beat up a gay and it becomes gay bashing and a hate crime with more severe penalties. That’s absurd. They have become more equal than the rest of us. Protected minority.

      • keelhaulrose

        So, according to you, it’s equal because if you beat up a gay person you might get a hate crime charge.
        We’ll just ignore the fact that in many states the wife of the lesbian you beat up might not be able to visit her in the hospital because that state doesn’t recognize her marriage and the fact that it makes her next of kin (because Section 2 of DOMA was not struck down). That’s if they can marry in the first , because that’s only legal in 17 states. And the paperwork that replaces the $35 license I got when I married my husband can cost $10,000 in legal fees and has been ignored by some states/entities anyways.
        Not to mention that should that one wife die the other can be blocked from the funeral and inheritance can be challenged and denied. And the funeral homes and lawyers could deny doing business with her because she’s a lesbian.
        Not to mention that in all districts but the Ninth currently a gay person be kept off the jury for the beating trial simply for being gay.
        Not to mention the widow might lose custody of the children they were raising together because some states don’t allow same sex adoption so one is being a parent with none of the legal protections.
        Nope, according to you everything is equal because if you beat a gay person you might get charged with a hate crime (though you might walk if you beat them in an area that thinks they had it coming for being queer).

      • LiberalGilt

        So, according to you, it’s equal because if you beat up a gay person you might get a hate crime charge.

        IT’S MORE EQUAL, NOT EQUAL

        We’ll just ignore the fact that in many states the wife of the lesbian you beat up might not be able to visit her in the hospital because that state doesn’t recognize her marriage and the fact that it makes her next of kin (because Section 2 of DOMA was not struck down).

        THIS IS A CROCK LIE THAT THE CRAZY FAR LEFT PERPETUATES AND HAS NO BASIS IN REALITY.

        Not to mention that should that one wife die the other can be blocked from the funeral and inheritance can be challenged and denied. And the funeral homes and lawyers could deny doing business with her because she’s a lesbian.

        EVER HEAR OF A WILL? MONEY HAS BEEN INHERITED BY CATS. NO FUNERAL HOME IS GOING TO TURN AWAY BUSINESS EITHER. GOD YOU ARE JUST A RECORD SPOUTING FROM THE SHEEP PLAYBOOK.

        Not to mention that in all districts but the Ninth currently a gay person be kept off the jury for the beating trial simply for being gay.

        THAT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE CONSIDERING HOW CHILDISH AND MILITANT YOU ALL ARE. SHOULD A JURY FOR A BLACK BEATING BE MADE UP OF KKK MEMBERS?

        Not to mention the widow might lose custody of the children they were raising together because some states don’t allow same sex adoption so one is being a parent with none of the legal protections.

        MORE PLAYBOOK THAT DOESN’T HAPPEN

        YOU ARE JUST A SHILL FOR THE AGENDA

      • keelhaulrose

        ITS MORE EQUAL, NOT EQUAL

        It’s ‘more equal’ in the same sense that if that white man who was beaten up in the bar would also qualify under ‘hate crime’ if they were Jewish, or black, or Christian, or a woman. The difference between assault and hate crime is the reason. That hypothetical man I hit in a bar earning me an assault charge was assaulted because of something he SAID or DID, not something he IS. It doesn’t matter if he happens to be gay, or black, or Christian, or Jewish, or a woman. Being an asshole is not a protected class, and many, many assaults on gays, blacks, etc stay assaults because they were not assaulted because that’s what they ARE. But if you beat someone FOR NO OTHER REASON other than they are gay, black, Jewish, Christian, whatever it’s a hate crime because you did it out of hate, and you wouldn’t have done it but for they are part of a group you don’t like.

        Examples of couples denied hospital rights because they are gay and not married, or because the hospital disregarded their legal relationship:

        http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/08/20/713251/nevada-same-sex-couple-denied-hospital-visitation-despite-domestic-partnership/#

        http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/health/19well.html

        http://www.chicagonow.com/joeys-corner/2013/04/gay-man-denied-visitation-rights-arrested-in-kansas-city/

        There’s more. Google them. I won’t do continuous research for you.

        Should we move on to adoption:

        A legally-married gay couple wants to make sure that, should they move or travel to a state that doesn’t recognize said marriage that they’re covered in the event of a medical incapacitation, and files for a non-contested adoption of the non-biological mother. Gets denied.

        http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/judge-refuses-lesbian-couple-request-adopt-son-article-1.1594320

        Another denied partner adoption:

        http://www.wisconsingazette.com/breaking-news/court-denies-adoption-citing-alabama-anti-gay-marriage-law.html

        Housing denials:

        http://www.dallasvoice.com/va-denies-housing-loan-gay-couple-10163319.html

        http://www.wsaz.com/news/headlines/84994592.html

        (this second one cites that 30 states have NO protections for gays looking for housing)

        The documentary Bridegroom involves a gay man named Shane who suddenly lost his partner in an accident- and the partner’s family took the body across the US and barred Shane from coming to the funeral.

        Citation that the Ninth Circuit is the ONLY one that applies ‘heightened scrutiny’ to LGBT individuals (read last paragraph)

        http://blogs.findlaw.com/decided/2014/01/jurors-cant-be-excused-for-being-gay-9th-circuit.html

        You can tell me all you want about how this doesn’t happen, but I’ve been there, and I’ve seen it, and I can provide evidence, something you’re lacking in your increasingly angry rants.

      • LiberalGilt

        Sometimes drunks just hit people for no reason. If they are a protected minority they are accused of a hate crime. Fair?

        You cite a bunch of left wing propaganda web sites. Really?

        Saying gays are denied crap across states lines is just a load of bunk. It’s like the dumb laws on the books.

        Example…In New York, adultery is still a crime.

        It is illegal for a woman to be on the street wearing “body hugging clothing”.

        A fine of $25 can be levied for flirting.

        Wisconsin

        The state definition of rape stated that it was a man having sex with a woman he knows not to be his wife.

        It is illegal to cut a woman’s hair.

        California

        Women may not drive in a house coat.

        I can go on and on but the point is whack y unenforced laws are abundant, but the gay community has to get militant over nothing. Why? Because they have an agenda that included maintaining the status of protected minority.

      • keelhaulrose

        “Sometimes drunks just hit people for no reason. If they are a protected minority they are accused of a hate crime. Fair?”
        Evidence?
        And I’ll counter with the men who killed Matthew Shepard were NOT charged with a hate crime, so it goes the other way, as well, if you can show evidence it even goes the way you claim.
        The New York Times is a left wing propaganda site now? The Wisconsin Gazette? A West Virginal news station? Yeah, that sounds sane.
        I’ll give you your insane laws if you show me one shred of evidence of someone ACTUALLY getting the $25 flirting fine. Or of a Wisconsin man ACTUALLY being charged with rape because he committed adultery.
        That’s the difference between us. I provide evidence. You rant.

      • LiberalGilt

        Try searching for wrongly accused of a hate crime.

        Example:
        It’s all too common for people to get wrongly accused of hate crimes. There is often a rush to judgment merely because the alleged victim of a crime is from a different ethnic or social group than the defendant.

        In particular, it’s very common for prosecutors to try to make a case bigger than it otherwise would be . . . and get a longer sentence for the defendant . . . by trying to argue that s/he committed an ordinary crime because of racial, gender, etc., bias.

        http://www.shouselaw.com/hate-crime.html

      • keelhaulrose

        So, you question the validity of the New York Times, but then quote me a DEFENSE ATTORNEY’S website as a ‘credible news source’. You’re talking about hate crimes, that’s public record. You should be able to find actual statistics and not from a place that is trying to sell you their service.
        OK, I’ll bite, though I shouldn’t because that gives you validity.
        First off, here’ what the FBI has to say about hate crimes:
        http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2012-hate-crime-statistics
        Here’s the Bureau of Justice Statistics (encompasses 2004-2012) http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4883
        Both of these site, BTW, put the VAST majority of hate crimes as ‘racially motivated’, with religion second. LGBT crime ranks third.
        The DOJ also claims that only 1% of all crimes qualify as ‘hate crimes’ (Langton and Planty, “Hate Crime 2003-2009″ DOJ publication released in 2011)

        Now, going to your source, the law they quote specifically says that in order to be charged with a hate crime the prosecutors must be able to prove, at least in part, that what you did was motivated by your feelings towards a protected group. They can’t prove that, no hate crime, as written by the website you quote.

      • LiberalGilt

        BTW, I don’t listen to your Robertson with whom you are obsessed (clearly part of your gay agenda indoctrination) but he’s allowed to have any opinion he wants. You on the other hand want to kill freedom of speech.
        That makes you dangerous.

      • keelhaulrose

        If mentioning Pat Robertson once makes me obsessed, what does your several mentions of the gay agenda make you? Stalker-level obsessed?
        He can say whatever he wants, the public opinion is singing the other way and he’ll soon be irrelevant. I don’t want to oppress anyone’s right to say what they want, and I defy you to find any point where I say so on any thread.

      • LiberalGilt

        no, dummy…you know 6 billion times more about him than i do and want to silence him.
        you’re obviously on the gay agenda bus which makes what you say inert.

      • keelhaulrose

        Again, no proof saying I want to silence him. In fact I want quite the opposite. There’s nothing better for my cause than those on the right making blatantly bigoted and obviously exaggerated statements, such as he does. Because when one side starts to look like children having a collective tantrum because “I don’t want them to be able to marry, mommy!” more and more people start looking the other way. So he can talk all he wants. I hope he keeps going. I personally know three people who listened to him and found what he was saying so ridiculous they’d be willing to have a conversation, and while they aren’t going to wave signs for gay marriage if it came to a vote in my state (which it won’t because it’s legal here now) they’d vote in favor of marriage equality. I know about Pat because I read different news sources, and many report on what he says because it’s so outrageous. You have to know what the opposition is saying so you know how to provide evidence to counter their claims. So I rather prefer your kind keep talking. You’re driving people away with your rants and name-calling, and it really helps that when you make an outrageous claim based on no facts we can throw studies and experts to counter it.

      • LiberalGilt

        you talk about facts and then make opinion based statements
        youre a nut. fact.

      • LiberalGilt

        oh, and clearly you dont believe what you just said or you would not have brought him up to begin with
        you are so transparent

      • keelhaulrose

        I bring up one example for evidence. You know, because evidence is better than blindly repeating right-wing talking points.

      • LiberalGilt

        you brought him up as someone you wish wouldnt exist

      • keelhaulrose

        Where did I say that? If I did you easily find the quote. I’m quite sure I said the exact opposite when I said I want him to keep talking.

      • Bigmommlita

        can’t procreate just like the impotent trolls? and yet thanks to the web you are finally being over-represented somewhere.

      • LiberalGilt

        BTW, you who wrap gays around you. Any gay person will tell you bisexuality doesn’t exist. They claim if you have same sex sex you’re gay.
        So much for your lifestyle. You’re gay. Time to come out of the dying breed closet hunny bunny.

      • keelhaulrose

        I’ll just leave my husband, the man I’ve been with a decade, then, to conform to your narrow world view.
        I’m comfortable and confident in who I am. I don’t need the small portion of the gay population who doesn’t believe in bisexuality to validate me. A third of this country doesn’t believe in evolution, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

      • LiberalGilt

        uh, it’s not my view. it’s the gay agenda. own it. bisexual? according to them youre gay

      • keelhaulrose

        According to a few I’m straight because I’m in an opposite sex relationship. I don’t give a damn what someone else says about my sexuality, I know it and everyone around me supports me and let’s me have my identity.
        I’m beginning to think I’m starting to live up to the old adage about arguing with an idiot, but I refuse to your childish level.

      • LiberalGilt

        In that case you are arguing with yourself.

      • keelhaulrose

        I’m not the one resorting to childish name calling.
        Your style of argument seems to be “if you can’t be right, be loud”.

      • LiberalGilt

        your’s is just be condescending — the characteristic of the militant left

      • Melanzana

        The rest comes later

      • LiberalGilt

        You mean the Feds come after you.
        Hope you look good in an orange jump suit because i wont stop until you are in jail
        Look up the cyber stalking laws clown face.

      • Melanzana

        I’m going to publish your name, address and phone number if you continue to harass me or threaten me.

        And we can both call the Feds to see who is harassing who.

      • LiberalGilt

        You’re the one threatening.
        I’ve printed out all your posts.
        I will ensure you are in prison.
        The Feds take cyber stalking seriously

      • Melanzana

        lol

        Sheriff Schillari’s people may want to see your hard drive and smartphone in a few days. Democrat friends can do amazing things.

        You can’t avoid a search warrant. You shouldn’t have said some of those terrible things to strangers on the “anonymous” internet. Over and out Ahole!

      • LiberalGilt

        Kindly be put on notice that I am printing out all your posts and will be pursuing this with the Feds.

        Cyber Stalking, Cyber Bullying, and Cyber Terrorism are serious offences.

        I will be working diligently with the Feds to have you incarcerated.

        You’re just digging yourself deeper into the hole.

      • Melanzana

        Oh noes! Am I gonna b thrown out of school too?

        Im ascared. Terrible ascared. You fucking pervert better clean up your hard drive before u go to jail. PERVERT

      • LiberalGilt

        Expect the Feds to be coming for you in about 6 – 8 weeks.

      • Melanzana

        Bald

      • Bigmommlita

        no different than the troll-dar that’s on your roof…or more likely the roof of your mother’s house.

      • LiberalGilt

        trolls don’t go on roofs moron. that’s santa claus. or in your case a big black hooded home invader. good luck on the short bus

      • Melanzana

        72

      • Bigmommlita

        but trolls aren’t normal and you know that I know that. period.

      • LiberalGilt

        so you’re a dyke, right? and upset that you’ve been outed

      • Melanzana

        Male

    • cesp

      Next she’ll be accusing he dad of hugging her and saying he loves her…..pedophile.

    • EX

      I’m so confused by this. She’s 18. She’s not a minor. The parents should have no legal obligations towards her at this point. As far as I can see any financial support they give her beyond age 18 is up to their discretion. Am I missing something? How did this not just get thrown right out of court?

      • Upsilon

        In my state, the parents are required to support a child who is in high school regardless of whether they have reached 18. Otherwise, there could be a situation where a legal adult is suddenly expected to support themselves without even having finished high school. Very disruptive.

      • EX

        Interesting. I just looked up the law in my state and it looks like it’s the same. It does say though that if the child (between ages 18-21) has left home willingly and “without good cause” then the parents are not responsible. If the law is the same in NJ I guess it hinges on a) whether she ran away or was kicked out and b) if any of her allegations of abuse are valid. Well, that explains why the case is even being considered. Thanks for the clarification!

      • brebay

        Too bad she doesn’t live in Nebraska or Alabama (the age of majority is 19) although federal law preempts, so it probably wouldn’t matter for the FAFSA, but she could at least get child support until 19, though it would be paid directly to the adult, who would have to become her legal guardian.

      • brebay

        Someone needs to sue NJ on the constitutionality of that. A degree is no guarantee on anything anymore, and there is no age limit on going to school. I think this is absolute insanity!

    • NYBondLady

      This basically proves the point that parental income should have no bearing on financial aid to college.

      • EX

        Wouldn’t she be considered an independent student and not have to report her parents’ income?

      • LadyClodia

        Only if they emancipate her, I think, and she doesn’t want the court to do that.

      • pixie

        It is incredibly difficult to do that, at least in Ontario. There’s a ton of forms that need to be filled out, paperwork proving that the student is emancipated from their parents (or in the process of becoming emancipated) and receiving no financial support from them. It’s a complete nightmare to get any sort of financial aid that isn’t part of an entrance scholarship if you’re not hovering around the poverty line.

      • brebay

        Nope, not if she wasn’t emancipated before 18. The only way out (sadly,) is if she has a baby. Then she doesn’t have to include her parents’ income as long as she’s not living with them an filing her own taxes WITH a minor child dependent in her custody. Kind of nutty, but that’s the rule.

      • Zoe Lansing

        If parental income isn’t considered for need-based financial aid, what should be?Not many 17/18-year-olds can afford to pay all of their own college expenses, so almost everyone would qualify for aid which wouldn’t be economically feasible,at least not given the way higher education is currently funded within the US.We could switch to the a system like the one they have in EU but that’s a whole other issue (and would involve large tax increases and/or cuts to spending in other areas of our national budget, not to mention blood-curdling cries of “SOCIALISM!” from the right). If parents have money but aren’t willing to pay for whatever reason and the kids have proof of this then, yes, students should be able to legally emancipate themselves so that their parents’ incomes are not taken into consideration when applying for aid. But, as I and others have noted above, that’s not what Rachel is trying to do in this case.

      • NYBondLady

        It’s a very complicated issue and I have a lot of thoughts- too many to be discussed here in enough detail. In a nutshell, if college costs acutally become aligned with ability to pay and cheap credit is curtailed (i.e. lots of student loans/parental loans & guarantees), as well as reduction in subsidies (econ 101- the cost of a good rises directly with the value of a subsidity) then the “cost” of college will come down. It’s basically like the housing crisis- a product pushed on people who did not need it nor were able to actually afford it.
        In a perfect world, I think that colleges would underwrite their own student loans. I don’t think it’s fair that colleges can recruit poor kids, have them take out exorbitant loans, and then fail to provide an education that is worth what it cost to get (everyone knows the tale of the sociology PHD with $200k in loans). Also, it would make it more likely that the school would keep costs in check and it would be held accountable with expenses.
        Lots to say, lots to think about…

      • Zoe Lansing

        In terms of loans, the college both my fiancé and one of my brothers attended, Davidson College in NC, recently started doing something similar to what you’re suggesting. In fact, it might be actually exactly what you’re suggesting; I’m not sure of the exact details and I didn’t sleep last night and am therefore too tired and lazy to look them up ;) I do know, though, that as of a few years ago, none of their students graduate with debt from student loans (unless they attended another school that they took out loans for and then transferred).It’s one of the top liberal arts colleges in the country but also really expensive, so it’s really awesome that academically qualified kids can go there now without going into a huge amount of debt (that wasn’t the case, unfortunately, when my fiancé and brother attended).It’s a small school with a very loyal –and largely wealthy– alumni base, so I’m sure that helps in terms of endowments. I’m fairly certain they still take parents’ incomes into consideration when deciding which students are given need-based aid,however.

      • JustaGuest

        Uh, you know tht most of higher education isn’t filled with profs eating bon bons while lazing around their gold-plated offices, right? Most universities are desperately trying to get enough money to cover their expenses; they don’t generally have huge endowments that they live off of like cash cows. (Particularly after the Bernie Madoff thing – a lot of universities lost huge chunks of their investments.)

        Unless you want hem to go to 500 person classes taught only by adjuncts, universities could use more money, not less. The funding model for higher education is seriously broken, unfortunately, so it’s not clear what’s going to happen.

      • WriterLady

        I absolutely agree with you. The issue of adjuncts now comprising the majority of undergraduate faculty on many college campuses is deeply disturbing–not because they lack the appropriate qualifications and credentials, but because the schools pay them close to minimum wages to design, teach, and execute all facets of the courses. I am acutely aware of this because I’ve been there and done that. Even 10 years ago it was a burgeoning problem, but now it is crippling faculty members who work at institutions across the nation. When I taught as an adjunct instructor of freshman composition at a well-known, four-year public university in Ohio, I had to pick up 5 courses per quarter (the school has now gone to semesters) in order to break $20,000 in a single year. Imagine taking on 5 classes with 25 students in each class as a writing teacher. That’s 125 students per quarter and thousands of papers to grade, not to mention the prep work that went into teaching (there is no script or formula to follow, so everything is self-designed…right down to the texts you assign), as well as the one-on-one conferences held each quarter/semester. I would spend evenings and weekends (even all-nighters) grading papers or responding to student inquiries via email. Mind you, I only have an M.A., yet there are numerous adjunct instructors or lecturers with PhDs also working for pennies on the dollar struggling to get by. Ultimately, the universities end up benefiting quite nicely from this arrangement. They have qualified instructors who will do all the grunt work for next-to-nothing, and they only have to pay a handful of tenured professors and administrators in each department an honest salary. I left after three years of slaving away at the adjunct lifestyle to work in the educational publishing industry, but I still keep abreast of the “adjunct crisis” and the ways that universities are undercutting the very people they depend on to provide a solid education. College should be much more affordable, but that’s not how to go about cutting costs.

      • Allen

        I’m not sure that it should have no bearing whatsoever, since many young adults do receive some amount of help from their parents (mine didn’t give me very much money for school, but helped a lot with living expenses). But I think that more factors need to be taken into account, and that it should be easier for kids to apply for financial aid as independents if their parents are unwilling or unable to help, of if the child really is living independently.

        I don’t think think parents are obligated to pay for their kids’ college educations, but sadly, the financial aid system isn’t very well set up for kids to do it on their own.

    • CMP414

      I don’t even know what to make of this. I read 2 articles about this online yesterday and no where did it mention the Child Protective service call, the drinking, eating disorders. I was totally on the parents’ side yesterday now I am wondering what’s what. I do have to say regardless if she is 18 and doesn’t want to abide by her parents’ rules she will have to learn to manage on her own. It’s also really sad that family matters became so public.

    • Momma425

      I can maybe see an argument here for requiring her parents to pay for the rest of her tuition fees to finish high school. She certainly isn’t going to switch schools most of the way during her senior year of high school- she would have problems graduating potentially. But that is it.

      Parents are not required to pay for college education. My parents didn’t pay for mine. It’s called student loans. It’s called growing up and getting a job. Welcome to life.

      If I were the parents, I honestly would be more upset at the friend’s parents funding the lawsuit than my kid. The girl is 18. Who didn’t throw a temper tantrum and act entitled at that age? The friend’s parents, however, know better.

      • CMP414

        I agree about paying the rest of the tuition part too. If nothing else they owe that to school. Frankly, I am surprised it wasnt already paid. When I went to Catholic school I remember that needing to be paid well in advance each year.

      • brebay

        Yeah, that seemed weird to me too. I’m guessing the friend’s father is probably holding them off, telling them that they’ll win in court.

    • keelhaulrose

      Even if what she said is true no child is owed a college education. There’s lots of bright young men and women whose parents can’t or won’t help pay for their college education.
      And $654 a week in child support? I’ve run a family of four on that every two weeks. If love to be getting that kind of money right now.
      Her requests are so over the top and entitled its hard to take her seriously. She’s not asking for the bare minimum of what she needs to survive, she’s asking to be cared for like she’s living at home without the burden of living at home.

      • brebay

        I wish I got that much child support in a MONTH!!

      • deb

        True, her requests are over the top. And why haven’t these benefactors of hers let her know that if she wants daddy’s money then she plays by daddy’s rules? As I recall, I learned that lesson pretty fast when I was her age.

    • Nica

      Seems like there are three sides to this one – the daughter’s side, the parents’ side and the truth… Having read several items on this one now, I do think it’s fair that her parents pay for her to complete her HS education since they did make the decision to send her to a Catholic school. After that, she’s 18, no longer a minor and on her own. You can’t have it both ways – either you are supported by your parents and play by their rules OR you strike out on your own and finance your own life. There’s really no middle ground here…

    • CMJ

      Affluenza Strikes Again.

    • Zoe Lansing

      I grew up in affluent area and it was amazing how most of my peers took the fact that their parents were both able and willing to pay for all of their educational expenses for granted. They truly saw it as a right, not a privilege.My parents paid for me to go to college (well,I got a partial scholarship but they were going to pay the entire amount before I was awarded the scholarship) but made sure I was very aware of the fact that I was extremely lucky that they were both able and willing to do so. Almost nobody from my high school had to turn down their top choice for financial reasons or even take out student loans, so I think that skewed a lot of kids’ perceptions of what is “normal” and “expected”. It appears that this may be the case with this girl, as well .My two oldest brothers, on the other hand, went to a high school with a majority working class population and a small, but existent, economically disadvantaged, minority. They (and their fellow affluent classmates) seemed to have had a much better understanding than most of my classmates of how blessed they were to not have to worry about paying for college. The three of us younger siblings went to a different high school because people in our upper class town (which was too small to have it’s own high school) felt the school we went to would be a better “socio-economic fit” (vomit) and campaigned endlessly and, eventually, successfully to sever the town’s send/receive relationship with the working class school and have us sent to the “better” (re: wealthier) school I ultimately attended. Both my dad and stepmom were very much against this, not only because my older brothers received an excellent education at their high school, but because they believed it to be a healthier environment in many ways. One reason for this was the fear that if we grew up surrounded by only wealthy kids, we would become entitled with little to no awareness of the vast difference between what we were fortunate to have been given and what we were “owed” just for existing. In short, they were afraid we would become like Rachel Canning. To me, the only strong case she has made is for the benefits of economically diverse schools and the dangers of homogeneous ones.

    • SunnyD847

      Apparently in New Jersy there are laws regarding “unemancipated adults” (basically those over 18 who are in school) and parents’ financial responsibility. I think these were put in place for divorced parents, so one parent couldn’t just shift the burden to the other as soon as the kid turned 18. I think the girl in this case is acting like a spoiled brat and the parents should have no obligation unless she agrees to live under their roof and follow their rules (assuming there is not abuse.)

      • Zoe Lansing

        Does the law refer to young adults >18 who are still in any type of school (including college) or just high school?

      • bl

        According to http://www.divorcenet.com/states/new_jersey/emancipation_of_a_minor_child_in_nj, which was linked in a Salon article about this:
        “Many people assume that turning 18 results in automatic emancipation. This is not so. There’s no set age that will trigger automatic emancipation in New Jersey. Reaching the age of 18 provides the court with prima facie (Latin for “at first sight”) or presumptive proof of emancipation; but this presumption can be defeated with evidence that the 18-year-old child has not yet reached a truly independent status. For example, a court may not emancipate a child over the age of 18 if he or she is in still in college and relies on parental support”
        and
        “In New Jersey, courts may and often do, order the payment of support and expenses for a child attending college. The mere fact that such a child is at the age of majority (over 18) will not prevent a court from ordering that the parent(s) must continue to support the child.”

        However, these laws or at least their explanations seem to be more geared to preventing divorces parents from bailing. I’ve never heard of anyone forcing a specific level of financial support from parents regardless of their income. I actually feel for Rachel here, but could I have sued my parents because I thought they didn’t spend enough money on me? This is an odd case.

      • brebay

        That statute is intended for divorce where the parents disagree about support. (that’s why it’s on a divorce law sit, it really is a construct of divorce law, not parent versus child generally). A judge could choose to apply it here, but it would probably get overturned on appeal. They’re really reserved for divorced parents, that’s why we don’t hear about many cases like this, thank goodness!

    • Zoe Lansing

      I’d be really curious to see what her sisters have to say about all this (while not in Rachel’s or their parents’ presence).

      • brebay

        she’s the oldest, so hopefully the press will give the minor sisters some privacy. But I’d be surprised if her lawyer doesn’t try to depose them.

      • Zoe Lansing

        Yeah, although I’d be interested because I’m curious, I agree their names or what they have to say on the matter (if anything) should not be dragged into the public eye.

    • Muggle

      Salon has an article about this that makes way more sense and doesn’t make Rachel look like a spoiled brat who ran away just because she didn’t want to do chores. There’s a lot of weird shit going on with this case, lots of conflicting accounts too. The only true thing I’ve found in this case is that whatever Rachel’s situation now, she’s in limbo at her high school because her parents won’t pay for that. If your kid in 18 and still in high school, they’re still dependent on you to help them complete high school, whatever form that may take. They signed a contract with the school that they are still bound to while Rachel is a student there.

      • Kate

        The contract with the school was canceled by the parents in accordance with all contractual terms. There are no contractual obligations, which is why Morris Catholic High School is not suing the Canning family. They simply do not have a case. They should not have allowed Rachel to return for her second semester, and they did so at their own risk.

    • tk88

      I’m deeply troubled that these people would keep this girl–who really seems to have mental health problems, out of therapy her parents forced her into. If she has an eating disorder there is A LOT going on. I definitely question the issues of her father giving her alcohol and possibly abusing her, but it’s all just so fishy. Either way I really don’t think the actual issue is her parents paying for high school/college. It’s much deeper than that and I hope someone helps this family with their real problems.

      • Zoe Lansing

        100% agreed. This girl (the whole family, really) is in dire need of therapy. If she still has an eating disorder, not getting her help could literally kill her.

    • MaebykittyRN

      Something just feels so “off” about this whole thing. I feel like there must be some very important details that we are missing. Like why on earth are her friends parents paying 12K for her legal fees? All involved need to get out of the courtroom and drive straight to a therapists office.

      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        Ooooo see above? Maybe this was just a very cheap commercial for his lawyer services

    • AlbinoWino

      I am very fortunate that my parents paid for my college and even though we didn’t always get along, I was always grateful for this. I also knew that if I was screwing up in school or taking my dear sweet time they would cut me off. I thought this was more than fair. I wonder if this family didn’t lay down the rules soon enough and their daughter just got used to a certain lifestyle and has all of this entitlement. You can’t just sue people to get your way and the parents of her friends that are supporting her are morons. This does not seem at all like a case of the girl being mistreated so they should really mind their own damn business.

      • brebay

        yep, maybe more people will think about this when they’re letting their 6-year-old get away with murder, it could end up costing you a LOT!!!

    • T

      WOW….talk about first world problems…what a spoiled brat!

    • Crusty Socks

      I’m sure Rachel will have NO problems finding a 45 yr old man who’ll take real good care of her.

    • brebay

      If her parents are assholes, fine; you’re 18, you can move out. You don’t get restitution for that. Plenty of parents don’t support their kids past 18 and you still have to claim them on the FAFSA, which is all she’s trying to do, is get herself out of that catch. Too damn bad. Work yourself through school or wait until you’re 24 to go (or have a baby) jk. Anyway, welcome to the wonderful world of adult children of crappy parents. There’s no prize, start working.

    • SA

      There are a lot of children whose parents have actually abandoned them that find the resources to continue school and pursue their dreams. I believe at the most the parents should be required to finish paying the school year (ONLY because she had already entered her last year); the daughter should be allowed to come and retrieve any clothing she left behind; and enough money to cover her meals (outside of school) until she graduates. She can find means of public transportation, a part-time job, and pursue financial aid opportunities on her own. So many kids have it so much worse.

    • Kelly

      The school called social services on these parents after they yelled at the girl on the phone for bein drunk at her homecoming dance. I’d be reluctant to pay $6,000 to an institution that initiated an unfounded CPS call too

    • Ann

      To me this sounds like a little girl who is throwing a temper tantrum because someone said no and finally put their foot down. We are now paying for 2 children in college and another one this coming fall, the reason we are is because they live at home, they help maintain the home (yard work, cleaning, laundry) and they have jobs to pay for gas and car maintenance. We will help them through their undergrad work because college is crazy expensive but once they all hit grad school they will need to apply for loans, since we would like to retire someday. I do not “owe” my children anything and vice versa but it is nice when you are part of a family and can work together to accomplish a goal. Hopefully one day this woman-child will look back on this with some regret that she has alienated her family.

      • brebay

        Exactly. College is a gift, not an obligation. If a kid wants an education badly enough, they’ll find a way; whether that means abiding by the rules of parents, or going out on your own and working through a few classes at a time. I think this is a horrible precedent to set. To make parents use their personal savings to send an adult to college? Especially with the was the economy is now, what are people supposed to do for retirement? An 18-year-old is in a much better position to work her way through school or even take loans out than a parent in their 50s who won’t be getting social security or a pension…terrifying!

    • Emily A.

      Generally, when children while that they want to be treated like an adult, it is because… they are being treated like an adult.

      • brebay

        Truth. Adults get jobs, pay their bills. Wait to do things (like college) until they can afford it…all kinds of fun stuff!

    • rachelallent

      I just LOVE LOVE LOVE, that the friends parents are going to have to eat their ridiculous legal fees!

      • brebay

        He was paying for advertising…he got it!

      • http://Mommyish.com/ Eve Vawter

        …. this is a very good point right here. I didn’t even consider that. BINGO

      • WriterLady

        I just mentioned this in my own post, but something seems amiss here. As a lawyer, he is making a mockery of the judicial system. While it may get him some publicity, most of it will be negative. My intuition on this is that he has invested entirely too much time, money, and energy on a friend of his child. If Rachel were unattractive and not prone to wild, unrestrained behavior, does anyone think he would be nearly as invested in this situation? In my opinion, absolutely not. As soon as I posted about the article, several guy friends commented on how beautiful she is…which is true. Methinks this guy has ulterior motives…and they certainly don’t involve her education. ;) And although the girl is certainly a spoiled brat, I definitely don’t like the idea of a much older man preying upon a girl who hasn’t even graduated high school yet (or at least that’s the way I see it….pure speculation, of course).

      • brebay

        Yeah, he is making a mockery of the profession, but so do most lawyers who advertise in those horrible, embarrassing commercials. There are good and bad, honorable and dishonest lawyers, just like in any other profession. Fame will always trump respect for some.

      • brebay

        Well if she weren’t prone to wild, unrestrained behavior, she’d have been home by curfew and we wouldn’t have the situation at all, regardless of her looks.

      • WriterLady

        Yes, but that doesn’t really address the point I made. This girl wouldn’t have had the options she currently does if this man had not chosen to take her in. Instead, she would be back at home with mom and dad, whether she liked it or not. This isn’t the type of girl who would truly run away and become homeless because she doesn’t like mommy and daddy’s rules. She is entirely too high maintenance to make that leap, so instead she found a fairly wealthy, older man to latch on to. Also, I think his status as a lawyer is less relevant than the fact that he has gone so far out of his way to accommodate this girl in every possible way, even putting his family’s name out there for public shaming. I wouldn’t put it past either of them to trade benefits, so to speak. Regardless, her actions have seriously damaged her reputation–a fact that will follow her through college and possibly into the career world.

    • shirleyevans

      What a “terribly spoiled brat”…. I feel sorry for any guy who marries her one day. Can you imagine how she would take him to the cleaners if she didn’t get her way on everything? WHOA!

    • dcizscumm

      the girl hated her fathers mixed sexual messages in his inappropriate behavior towards her, sounds abusive to me….getting her drunk?? beer pong at midnight? just wrong!

      • brebay

        I’m sure she wouldn’t lie…it’s not like she has a financial motive or anything. Abused children usually run as far and as fast as they can when they turn 18, pretty much the opposite of what she’s doing.

      • dcizscumm

        age 18, a kid, kids act out in rage when abused or sexually molested…wake up!

      • whiteroses

        Realistically- if she was abused, she wouldn’t want anything else from them. Child support? Really?

      • dcizscumm

        assholle she s18! where can she get $$ from?? maybe be a prostitute????

      • whiteroses

        She can probably get money the same place all the other 18 year olds who aren’t supported by their parents get it.

        It’s called a full-time job.

      • dcizscumm

        the girls a needy 18 year old you are a dumbazz

      • whiteroses

        Apparently smart enough not to call someone a “dumbazz” or “assholle”.
        Best of luck to you.

      • brebay

        you’re on the wrong board for this kind of language and rage.

      • brebay

        All abused kids act differently, and most of US took off. Girls often direct their rage INWARD (duh…eating disorders) some act out, some act in, some go all perfectionistic over-achiever; people are different…go back to sleep!

      • joesmith

        Dude there is such a thing as waitress ing. The rest of us did it.

      • dcizscumm

        you come from lower class families she doesn’t its a different cultural world chum

      • joesmith

        LOL actually my family is oil rich. My family made me earn everything I have so I learn the value of money.

      • Kate

        Oh, aren’t we jumping to conclusions? Pray do tell, how did you arrive at this tremendous insight? I do not remember being introduced, thus, you have absolutely no information about my or my family’s social, educational and economic background, “cultural world”, nationality, etc.

      • joesmith

        Kisses on the cheek. You are right that is sexual!! Moron.

      • dcizscumm

        My father gave me the sense that he was inappropriately affectionate with me. He mentioned frequently that my relationship in his eyes was not one of a daughter, but more than that.

        ‘In the summer before my senior year he got me drunk at a wedding and said I was his date. He kept giving me shots and mango martinis. I blacked out that night and woke up at the toilet bowl in our room and he was in bed.

        ‘He constantly put his arm around me in public and would kiss me on the cheek. When we moved to Hackettstown, he once woke me up at 2am to come down to play beer pong with him. The refrigerator was about 75 per cent full of liquor.’

      • joesmith

        A desperate attempt to turn nothing into something. When he said she was more then a daughter he meant she was a friend and unfortunately he treated her like a friend. She needed a dad that would spank her and draw hard rules that had real consequences.

    • whiteroses

      I was a college professor. I can’t tell you how many students I had who (through necessity or choice) paid for their own educations, and how many students I had whose educations were bankrolled by someone else. I could usually tell the difference by week two of the course. For the most part, the students who paid for their own educations didn’t take it for granted.

      She’s 18. By any reasonable standard, child support shouldn’t be in the cards. If the parents alerted the school that they wouldn’t be paying, they don’t owe school fees either. And college is a privilege, not a right. As hard as this would be- if it were my kid, I would never write her off completely (I hope) but she wouldn’t be getting a single red cent from me. You want to be an adult so bad? Fine. Go be an adult. It’s not as great as you think.

    • Nanbre

      She’s 18, right? That’s not running away, that’s moving out. No one can force her to move back in with her parents.

    • Pingback: Rachel Canning Parents Blame Boyfriend For Leading Her Astray

    • dcizscumm

      If I was abused Id probably burn the house down in my rage

      • joesmith

        So kissing on the cheek is rape now? Because that is all she has accused the father of. How do you give a peek on the check and it be inappropriate affection., This girl is reaching for anything. Just slinging mud and seeing what sticks.

      • Kate

        Yes, you have made it quite clear that you have anger-management and spelling problems. Are you also on the warpath against punctuation marks?

      • dcizscumm

        go teach ur 3rd grde rtrdz loser

    • WriterLady

      Pardon me if someone else has already mentioned this, but here’s what I find the most perplexing about this case: Why on Earth would a grown man take in an unruly, coddled girl and then decide to fund a lawsuit against her parents for tuition to both a private high school and her choice of college? Every article I’ve read (aside from this one) focuses only on the father of the friend, not the friend’s mother. Now, I realize he is a lawyer, which may make his opinions perhaps more relevant in this situation, but does anyone smell a rat here? The girl is clearly gorgeous, and she’s also a little wild and likely mentally unstable. It doesn’t take a whole lot to draw the possible conclusion that the friend’s father has “other interests” at stake. Now, I do not condone Rachel’s behavior at all. I believe she is another case of entitlement and privilege run amok; however, I can’t help but think this older man might be preying on her for reasons that are far from virtuous and helpful. I can possibly see him allowing her to seek refuge at his house if she doesn’t want to live with her own parents any longer, but to pay thousands of dollars out of his own pocket to fund her lawsuit and place himself in the middle of a highly publicized national debate (for which could damage his own reputation as an attorney)? I don’t think so. If the girl weren’t 18 years old, I would be investigating him in a heartbeat.

      • brebay

        Just a guess but, like most kids, she’s probably only a heinous bitch to her own parents. Most kids are better behaved at friends’ houses than their own, which means you probably raised them right. The thing is; as parents most of us understand how that sweet kid who always says please and thank-you when they come over to play can be a surly, eye-rolling brat for their own parents. We’ve all heard “Oh, he’s so polite” about our tweens/teens and been like “Uh…yeah…” This guy seems to be clueless about that basic parenting fact so, yeah, there may be something fishier afoot!

      • WriterLady

        I agree. I’m sure she’s as polite as can be at the friend’s house. That I have no doubt about, because she needs him to do her dirty work. With that said, I would be highly suspicious if I was his wife.

    • brebay

      Another good reason not to red-shirt your kindergartner (I don’t know if that happened here, her birthday is October so it could be a close call.) But where I live, at least half the people in our district red-shirt their kids now for “developmental reasons” (unofficially, so the boys will be bigger for football and the girls will be older before they go off to college and slut it up–Princeton mom’s words, not mine–) But I always wonder how that works where you have a rebellious, legal 19-year-old still in high school. and under your roof. I think it depends on the family, but I’m sure there are a lot of people regretting it by then! DISCLAIMER**If you red-shirted your kid for actual developmental reasons, I’m not talking about you, so don’t get your panties in a bunch; but no way do HALF of the kids in this city have developmental delays ;)

    • MargieAtPolitiChicks

      This lawyer guy, John Inglesino, freaks me out. I don’t care how good of friends she is with their daughter, this is just bizarre. He’s creepy.

      • joesmith

        He is probably sleeping with Rachel or hopes to hit her with room and board fees once she has money, Not sure his angle here but he has one for sure. No attorney becomes a millionaire by being a nice guy.

      • WriterLady

        I mentioned the same thing. It seems that he has other interests at stake. I can maybe see him taking her in, but to fund her lawsuit and put himself and his family out there for the public to mock and scorn, he has to have much more invested in this girl than he is letting on.

    • jennifer hyndman

      Sounds like her dad wanted to be HER BEST FRIEND. This puke of a girl should be slapped across her lying face. How DARE her slander her father. I hope this spoiled brat burns.

    • Erin

      I have a real concern for how much and how long this person funding the lawsuit has over Rachel and what is real motivations are. All this did not unravel in one night. I don’t think there are innocent parties in this case. Maybe we’ll know more in 5 years as the stories unfold but for now, I don’t think the court settling the case or dismissing the case will be the end of the story. There are many deeper issues here.

    • sunsmasher

      As this case has proceeded, it is becoming very apparent that Rachel Canning is mentally ill. She is totally out of touch with reality regarding her legal case and sees things only in her own way, with absolutely no comprehension of any other viewpoint.
      She is not open to reason. She feels she can spit in her parents faces, and then expect them to support her anyway. She really comes across as out of touch with any sort of normal social reality and is making up her own world where things are, or should be, the way SHE thinks they should be, and no ones else’s opinions, realities, or normal social precedents, matter. That is delusional behavior.

    • Bigmommlita

      I feel for the parents, I feel for the kid…oops I mean 18 yr old who is suddenly supposed to be all grown up just because of a magic number. If this world ever experiences a zombie apocalypse, this case has shown us that parents should eat their young first.

    • Pingback: Rachel Canning Scholarship Bragging Has Got To Stop

    • Pingback: Rachel Canning Runaway Cheerleader Gets Huge Scholarship