Teen Sues Parents for Cash and College Tuition. Does She Have a Case?

[Barb]

And I did not specify rape, as you continually contend either. I said it was (and it IS!) a huge red flag that the father plied her with booze on at least a couple of occasions, until she was black out drunk, and posted links to information about incest (and the definition of that is not limited to penetration) that explain many of the facts of that matter that many here either don't know and refuse to consider in the mob like slut shaming of an 18 year old young woman who had the audacity to want her college fund spent on her college education.

You want the abuse to be true to justify some need in you, not justice. All the evidence points to her lying about her father. The red flag is she lies, constantly. None of your links are relevant to this case.

No one is slut shaming her, that's just ridiculous!

Her college fund was never in question. That was one more lie you continue to embrace

Re read the the thread - the mob screams burn the witch. The "evidence" cited against her overwhelmingly rests on the words of her parents, including that "Her college fund was never in question." The witness to HER side includes school faculty that heard the parents scream obscenities at Rachel on speaker phone.

My needs are simple, met, and don't have anything to do with this board. I'm simply appalled at the (right out of the gate!) piling on that took place against this girl.

as to that suggestion

 

[CaféAuLait]

just like you wanted to try and convince us Rachel had been raped when she had not been or when you assumed her parents were racists. hyperbole on display.

This is just one instance of you fraudulently cherry-picking what you repeat.

I suggested that the kid might have been from a lower economic class as well as possibly of another race, and you ignore it. Fact is, the rebuttal from the young man's father stated that Rachel's father had an issue with ANY boy she dated.

And I did not specify rape, as you continually contend either. I said it was (and it IS!) a huge red flag that the father plied her with booze on at least a couple of occasions, until she was black out drunk, and posted links to information about incest (and the definition of that is not limited to penetration) that explain many of the facts of that matter that many here either don't know and refuse to consider in the mob like slut shaming of an 18 year old young woman who had the audacity to want her college fund spent on her college education.

The only Cherry picking of statements are yours as you try and pin it on me. LOL That's rich!

And then you neg me for YOUR refusing to admit that you blatantly inferred racism of Rachel's parents and call it "fraudulent" on my part? Please.


Post 108 you said "I bet he is not the right color or class"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719293-post108.html

Three posts later you say in post 112:

"I bet it's all about the boyfriend"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719387-post112.html

Then you proclaim you were right. "It's all about the boyfriend!"

Yet another three posts later you state in post 115

Post 115

You say:"I want a look at the boyfriend, I bet he is black or Hispanic"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719437-post115.html



At least be honest in what you were saying, it's quite clear you were inferring the parents were racists written in "black and white" -sadly ironic.

I'm off for now, I'll link to your other posts later, I have to run.

 

[Barb]

just like you wanted to try and convince us Rachel had been raped when she had not been or when you assumed her parents were racists. hyperbole on display.

This is just one instance of you fraudulently cherry-picking what you repeat.

I suggested that the kid might have been from a lower economic class as well as possibly of another race, and you ignore it. Fact is, the rebuttal from the young man's father stated that Rachel's father had an issue with ANY boy she dated.

And I did not specify rape, as you continually contend either. I said it was (and it IS!) a huge red flag that the father plied her with booze on at least a couple of occasions, until she was black out drunk, and posted links to information about incest (and the definition of that is not limited to penetration) that explain many of the facts of that matter that many here either don't know and refuse to consider in the mob like slut shaming of an 18 year old young woman who had the audacity to want her college fund spent on her college education.

The only Cherry picking of statements are yours as you try and pin it on me. LOL That's rich!

And then you neg me for YOUR refusing to admit that you blatantly inferred racism of Rachel's parents and call is fraudulent on my part? Please.


Post 108 you said "I bet he is not the right color or class"

my actual words: My bet is that he isn't the "correct" economic class, or color.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719293-post108.html

Three posts later you say in post 112:

"I bet it's all about the boyfriend"

and it was!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719387-post112.html

Then you proclaim you were right. "It's all about the boyfriend!"

my actual words: YUP! Just as I thought, it was all about the boyfriend!

Yet another three posts later you state in post 115

Post 115

You say:"I want a look at the boyfriend, I bet he is black or Hispanic"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719437-post115.html



At least be honest in what you were saying, it's quite clear you were inferring the parents were racists written in "black and white" quite ironically!

I'm off for now, I'll link to your other posts later, I have to run.

You don't even see what you repost. Like I said - I suggested, ALONG WITH race, that it might have to do with economic class. And as we've found, it WAS "all about the boyfriend."

Mean while I imply, you infer from that implication. And how is t ironic to suppose that race or economics might be likely in her parent's dislike of her boyfriend? Even worse that they didn't want her involved with anyone at all. Isolation.

 

[R.D.]

Re read the the thread - the mob screams burn the witch.

Dramatic much?

The "evidence" cited against her overwhelmingly rests on the words of her parents, including that "Her college fund was never in question." The witness to HER side includes school faculty that heard the parents scream obscenities at Rachel on speaker phone.

You're just wrong about that. Not much more to say about it.

So what? You being the perfect parent should maybe recuse your self

as to that suggestion

Well, sweetie, when all your angst is based on distortions, irrelevant information, proven lies and lashing out at those who feel Rachel needs help for her real troubles what other conclusion is there?

 

[driveby]

A liberal finds a way to bring race into the equation, shocking ....

 

[Againsheila]

Best story I've read on this case


The Real Tragedy of the Rachel Canning Case


The Cannings, unfortunately, can't do this and that's the real tragedy here. Rachel doesn't have to sit down with her family and work things out because the Inglesinos, her best friend's family, have changed the dynamic, and not in a good way. By allowing Rachel to live with them indefinitely and advancing her money for legal bills (and perhaps encouraging her to sue in the first place?), the Inglesinos undermined Rachel's parents' ability to resolve things with their daughter and empowered a young woman who appears unprepared for the level of responsibility she claims to want. I'd like to think that the Inglesinos just wanted to help their daughter's friend when she was fighting with her parents. However, there's a line between helping and improperly inserting yourself into a family conflict and the Inglesinos crossed it a long time ago. Unless the Inglesinos believed Rachel was being emotionally or physically abused or neglected, at which point they should have notified the authorities, they had no place in her dispute with her parents. I'd have no problem if they had listened, sympathized, offered Rachel a bed for the night (after letting her parents know where she was) and told her she was always welcome in their home. But in the very next breath, they should have told her that she needed to go back to her home and work things out with her parents. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's first and foremost a matter of respect for the Cannings and every other parent struggling with a rebellious teen. Families deserve the opportunity to muddle through crises together -- it's how children (and parents) learn respect and compromise and perspective and how to navigate conflict. Slammed doors and frustrations and the occasional "I hate you" are part and parcel of that process. We don't want kids to run away when things get hard -- otherwise, they'll spend a lifetime sprinting away from challenges. But ultimately, it's more than just giving parents the benefit of the doubt and not substituting our own values or judgments for theirs. Refusing to try to solve someone else's problems is also a matter of self-interest. If I give someone else's kid an "escape hatch" when things get tough, will they turn around and give my son a crash pad when we have an argument? Will I come home one day to find myself on the receiving end of court papers when my kid wants an iPhone? It's a slippery slope and not one I ever want to be on. I wonder if the Inglesinos thought about that when they turned themselves into a long-term hotel for their daughter's friend. Here's hoping they never have to find out.




The Real Tragedy of the Rachel Canning Case*|*Devon Corneal

That's what I said.

 

[Againsheila]

here is the flip side....i just dont have time to make thread


sorry alll



Meet the Other Rachel Canning (the One Not Suing Her Parents)

I saw her Facebook page, she has turned this into something positive and is raising money for Autism Awareness. Many people are now donating to her cause who never heard of her before. She's an example and the "bad" Rachel could learn a lot from her.

 

[Againsheila]

And I did not specify rape, as you continually contend either. I said it was (and it IS!) a huge red flag that the father plied her with booze on at least a couple of occasions, until she was black out drunk, and posted links to information about incest (and the definition of that is not limited to penetration) that explain many of the facts of that matter that many here either don't know and refuse to consider in the mob like slut shaming of an 18 year old young woman who had the audacity to want her college fund spent on her college education.

You want the abuse to be true to justify some need in you, not justice. All the evidence points to her lying about her father. The red flag is she lies, constantly. None of your links are relevant to this case.

No one is slut shaming her, that's just ridiculous!

Her college fund was never in question. That was one more lie you continue to embrace

The parents set that money aside. They have every right to decide where it goes and if shes being suspended from school, refuses to live by their rules, etc. They have every right to keep that money or decide to spend it elsewhere, or even save it until they believe she is mature enough for college.

 

[Againsheila]

And I did not specify rape, as you continually contend either. I said it was (and it IS!) a huge red flag that the father plied her with booze on at least a couple of occasions, until she was black out drunk, and posted links to information about incest (and the definition of that is not limited to penetration) that explain many of the facts of that matter that many here either don't know and refuse to consider in the mob like slut shaming of an 18 year old young woman who had the audacity to want her college fund spent on her college education.

You want the abuse to be true to justify some need in you, not justice. All the evidence points to her lying about her father. The red flag is she lies, constantly. None of your links are relevant to this case.

No one is slut shaming her, that's just ridiculous!

Her college fund was never in question. That was one more lie you continue to embrace

Re read the the thread - the mob screams burn the witch. The "evidence" cited against her overwhelmingly rests on the words of her parents, including that "Her college fund was never in question." The witness to HER side includes school faculty that heard the parents scream obscenities at Rachel on speaker phone.

My needs are simple, met, and don't have anything to do with this board. I'm simply appalled at the (right out of the gate!) piling on that took place against this girl.

as to that suggestion

Yeah, where is that person? I didn't read about that person testifying. Is that just something else Rachel made up?

 

[Vikrant]

It hurts when you try to help someone and that someone happens to be too stupid to understand the importance of accepting and making good use of that help. I have been in similar situation myself so I can feel for the parents.

 

[Katzndogz]

The overwhelming evidence including several DCFS investigations and independent actions by the school is that this girl is a liar, thief and alcoholic.

Having been thwarted in court she has continued her war on her parents on facebook. In itself this is childish.

Rachel Canning in the perfect emblem of a child raised in a liberal home. She was likely told how special she was. She never lost or was disappointed. She was always entitled to everything. The damage started when her parents opted to not beat her ass until it blistered.

 

[Vikrant]

Beating your kids up is not a bright idea either. It affects the personality of the kid for life. They often grow up to be violent people or submissive. Neither is a good outcome. The best way to raise your kids is through patient reasoning and showing them good examples to emulate.

 

[CaféAuLait]

This is just one instance of you fraudulently cherry-picking what you repeat.

I suggested that the kid might have been from a lower economic class as well as possibly of another race, and you ignore it. Fact is, the rebuttal from the young man's father stated that Rachel's father had an issue with ANY boy she dated.

And I did not specify rape, as you continually contend either. I said it was (and it IS!) a huge red flag that the father plied her with booze on at least a couple of occasions, until she was black out drunk, and posted links to information about incest (and the definition of that is not limited to penetration) that explain many of the facts of that matter that many here either don't know and refuse to consider in the mob like slut shaming of an 18 year old young woman who had the audacity to want her college fund spent on her college education.

The only Cherry picking of statements are yours as you try and pin it on me. LOL That's rich!

And then you neg me for YOUR refusing to admit that you blatantly inferred racism of Rachel's parents and call is fraudulent on my part? Please.


Post 108 you said "I bet he is not the right color or class"


http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719293-post108.html

Three posts later you say in post 112:

"I bet it's all about the boyfriend"


http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719387-post112.html

Then you proclaim you were right. "It's all about the boyfriend!"

my actual words: YUP! Just as I thought, it was all about the boyfriend!

Yet another three posts later you state in post 115

Post 115

You say:"I want a look at the boyfriend, I bet he is black or Hispanic"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8719437-post115.html



At least be honest in what you were saying, it's quite clear you were inferring the parents were racists written in "black and white" quite ironically!

I'm off for now, I'll link to your other posts later, I have to run.

You don't even see what you repost. Like I said - I suggested, ALONG WITH race, that it might have to do with economic class. And as we've found, it WAS "all about the boyfriend."

Mean while I imply, you infer from that implication. And how is t ironic to suppose that race or economics might be likely in her parent's dislike of her boyfriend? Even worse that they didn't want her involved with anyone at all. Isolation.

(emphasis added)

Isolation?

Once again you are grasping.

You have done everything to paint these parents as something other than even presented by Rachel. First you suggested her boyfriend must come from a poor family, but he does not, he goes to the same highly expensive Catholic school as Rachel does.

Race is not a factor as he is white, so your racist theory is out the door.

You tried and failed to paint them as racists and bigots. When those arguments were proved false, you moved onto sexual abuse and "child abuse syndrome" because Rachel APOLOGIZED in texts and emails said her behavior was wrong. You quoted my posts about those apologies and linked to child abuse syndrome to make it seem as if she apologized out of fear. It could not possibly have been because she was wrong and wanted to make amends, there must be some 'other' reason in your eyes.

Now you are trying to say her parents did not want her to have a boyfriend because they wanted to "isolate" her. GMAB.

Rachel is or was on several sports teams, she was the captain of the cheer squad, she was involved in school clubs until she was kicked out for her bad behavior by school officials and removed from her position on the Cheer squad because of bad behavior in school.

If her parents were going to isolate her they certainly would not allow her to go to prom, homecoming, play on many sports teams, go to her friends homes on the weekends, be a cheer leader or buy her a car, etc., etc., etc.

As I have said before, her parents probably have issues, no parent is perfect. This is a family who was dealing with a child going through teen behavior as many teens do. Instead of being allowed to work it out as a family another family financed her to sue, enabled her to disobey her parents and worst of all KNEW about supposed abuse and did not bother to call police but pushed her to sue. They did not call the police and report it for a reason. He is a lawyer and he knows the law, he knew he was a mandated reporter but did not report...

 

[CaféAuLait]

You want the abuse to be true to justify some need in you, not justice. All the evidence points to her lying about her father. The red flag is she lies, constantly. None of your links are relevant to this case.

No one is slut shaming her, that's just ridiculous!

Her college fund was never in question. That was one more lie you continue to embrace

Re read the the thread - the mob screams burn the witch. The "evidence" cited against her overwhelmingly rests on the words of her parents, including that "Her college fund was never in question." The witness to HER side includes school faculty that heard the parents scream obscenities at Rachel on speaker phone.

My needs are simple, met, and don't have anything to do with this board. I'm simply appalled at the (right out of the gate!) piling on that took place against this girl.

as to that suggestion

Yeah, where is that person? I didn't read about that person testifying. Is that just something else Rachel made up?

I read what her statement was about the phone call on a facebook page, I don't know if it is 100 percent true or even true at all, since it is not in the paper but this is supposedly what her certification said she heard after Rachel had to call her parents, because once again she was caught drinking and was being suspended from school:

Mom: Are you serious? What the hell? NOT this same shit AGAIN!!

Phone disconnects.

Dad: What the fuck is going on now, why are you getting kicked out of the dance, why do you keep this same old crap?

Mom: You PROMISED no more Rachel, why are you acting like a fucking spoiled brat why are you constantly lying to us!!! You said this shit was over and you keep doing exactly what you promised you would not do. I mean what the hell is going on in your head? When you do this shit and lie you hurt us you hurt your sisters...

Dad: I am putting you back in the hospital and this shit ends, now we have to come back early, we thought you were past this and had matured, that you had changed, and once again its the same fucking shit! GD!!

 

[Barb]

You want the abuse to be true to justify some need in you, not justice. All the evidence points to her lying about her father. The red flag is she lies, constantly. None of your links are relevant to this case.

No one is slut shaming her, that's just ridiculous!

Her college fund was never in question. That was one more lie you continue to embrace

Re read the the thread - the mob screams burn the witch. The "evidence" cited against her overwhelmingly rests on the words of her parents, including that "Her college fund was never in question." The witness to HER side includes school faculty that heard the parents scream obscenities at Rachel on speaker phone.

My needs are simple, met, and don't have anything to do with this board. I'm simply appalled at the (right out of the gate!) piling on that took place against this girl.

as to that suggestion

Yeah, where is that person? I didn't read about that person testifying. Is that just something else Rachel made up?

Nope, she was the school faculty member at the homecoming dance the "parents" claim she was drunk at, the one who was on Rachel's end of the speaker phone, and the one who called child protective services.

 

[Barb]

And I did not specify rape, as you continually contend either. I said it was (and it IS!) a huge red flag that the father plied her with booze on at least a couple of occasions, until she was black out drunk, and posted links to information about incest (and the definition of that is not limited to penetration) that explain many of the facts of that matter that many here either don't know and refuse to consider in the mob like slut shaming of an 18 year old young woman who had the audacity to want her college fund spent on her college education.

You want the abuse to be true to justify some need in you, not justice. All the evidence points to her lying about her father. The red flag is she lies, constantly. None of your links are relevant to this case.

No one is slut shaming her, that's just ridiculous!

Her college fund was never in question. That was one more lie you continue to embrace

The parents set that money aside. They have every right to decide where it goes and if shes being suspended from school, refuses to live by their rules, etc. They have every right to keep that money or decide to spend it elsewhere, or even save it until they believe she is mature enough for college.

but the private Catholic school is raising her tuition to keep her there. Clearly THEY feel she is worthy of support.

 

[Wake]

but the private Catholic school is raising her tuition to keep her there. Clearly THEY feel she is worthy of support.

Barbara, they aren't her parents.

 

[Againsheila]

You want the abuse to be true to justify some need in you, not justice. All the evidence points to her lying about her father. The red flag is she lies, constantly. None of your links are relevant to this case.

No one is slut shaming her, that's just ridiculous!

Her college fund was never in question. That was one more lie you continue to embrace

The parents set that money aside. They have every right to decide where it goes and if shes being suspended from school, refuses to live by their rules, etc. They have every right to keep that money or decide to spend it elsewhere, or even save it until they believe she is mature enough for college.

but the private Catholic school is raising her tuition to keep her there. Clearly THEY feel she is worthy of support.

That's on them, nothing to do with her parents.

 

[Againsheila]

Re read the the thread - the mob screams burn the witch. The "evidence" cited against her overwhelmingly rests on the words of her parents, including that "Her college fund was never in question." The witness to HER side includes school faculty that heard the parents scream obscenities at Rachel on speaker phone.

My needs are simple, met, and don't have anything to do with this board. I'm simply appalled at the (right out of the gate!) piling on that took place against this girl.

as to that suggestion

Yeah, where is that person? I didn't read about that person testifying. Is that just something else Rachel made up?

I read what her statement was about the phone call on a facebook page, I don't know if it is 100 percent true or even true at all, since it is not in the paper but this is supposedly what her certification said she heard after Rachel had to call her parents, because once again she was caught drinking and was being suspended from school:

Mom: Are you serious? What the hell? NOT this same shit AGAIN!!

Phone disconnects.

Dad: What the fuck is going on now, why are you getting kicked out of the dance, why do you keep this same old crap?

Mom: You PROMISED no more Rachel, why are you acting like a fucking spoiled brat why are you constantly lying to us!!! You said this shit was over and you keep doing exactly what you promised you would not do. I mean what the hell is going on in your head? When you do this shit and lie you hurt us you hurt your sisters...

Dad: I am putting you back in the hospital and this shit ends, now we have to come back early, we thought you were past this and had matured, that you had changed, and once again its the same fucking shit! GD!!

Since it didn't show up in court, we have to assume this is just another one of her lies. And what is this about being put "back in the hospital?" Has she been committed once already?

 

[Barb]

Re read the the thread - the mob screams burn the witch.

Dramatic much?

The "evidence" cited against her overwhelmingly rests on the words of her parents, including that "Her college fund was never in question." The witness to HER side includes school faculty that heard the parents scream obscenities at Rachel on speaker phone.

You're just wrong about that. Not much more to say about it.

So what? You being the perfect parent should maybe recuse your self

as to that suggestion

Well, sweetie, when all your angst is based on distortions, irrelevant information, proven lies and lashing out at those who feel Rachel needs help for her real troubles what other conclusion is there?

Funny thing about parenting. 90% is all about showing up. Cheerleading helps, but listening, really listening with an interested and appreciative ear keeps them coming back.

You people on this thread want to talk about entitlement, but you fail to understand the GIFT a child is, the HONOR that is bestowed on the recipient OF that gift, or that the guardianship of that life is not about it's reflection on YOU, but on what YOU did or did not do to see that the potential of this precious person was reached - that you did or did not recognize that that potential WAS precious.

THAT is the pass/fail test of parenthood.

That most of you would, given the chance, EAT your young is all too evident.

Shame ON most of you.