<p>Well this is interesting. According to the parent’s lawyers:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So the parents are willing to give her the money from a college fund?! But apparently for her that is not enough, she wants even more.</p>
<p>Great review/analysis by Jrcsmom.</p>
<p>Stop trying to contradict her on this point; there are indeed states that mandate child support/college costs for adult children. As Jrscmom said, New Jersey is one of those states and New York recently did likewise. The law in NJ clearly says that ‘there is no set age’ for terminating child support, and reaching majority does not bring about independence. I’ve been told that there are cases where graduate students can make a successful claim for child support in NJ. Probably the exception to the rule, but permissible nevertheless. Morally, I can’t support that.</p>
<p>Yes, but is it child support if neither parent wants to pay? This is a question. I have no idea, but it seems like a huge distinction as there is no requirement that every parent fill out a FAFSA if for whatever reason they decide the kid is not going to college this year.</p>
<p>The parents aren’t willing to give her the $ without strings. Mom has said she thinks D still has an eating disorder so she wants D to live at home for at least a year (and presumably abide by their rules during that year) before she can go to college. They also want input into which college she attends—not just the amount of $ they give her. </p>
<p>They have complained that they had “no input” into the list of colleges to which Rachel applied. Personally, I think it’s more than a bit weird that no discussions about this occurred before the end of October. (And personally I think the fact that they had no input into Rachel’s college list is the real reason they want her to delay college for a year. Again, I’m NOT saying that’s right or wrong–just that I think it’s the real reason.) </p>
<p>It’s pretty obvious that Rachel wants to go away to college and her parents want to stop her from doing so and force her to live at home. I’m NOT saying that there’s necessarily wrong–just that the parents, thus far at least, haven’t been willing to say she can have the college $ without strings.</p>
<p>^^^^And I don’t blame her on any of those counts.</p>
<p>Well, it sounds like the relationship with her parents has been rocky for a long time. Then, she moved out and filled out college applications on her own. She will not be the first kid whose parents say that’s not happening.</p>
<p>Most scream and cry. She chose to file a lawsuit. </p>
<p>Twinmom, did you read the transcript of the girl’s message to her mother?? I’m sorry, I can’t call anyone who says those horrible things a “good kid.”</p>
<p>I don’t think she’s a good kid and I don’t think they’re good parents.</p>
<p>The whole family seems to be a hot mess. </p>
<p>Correct Flossy - and just imagine if a mom like Rachel’s mom posted here…one of the responses that would get repeated over and over would be some of “us” telling the mom to not send the D off until her anorexia/bulimia was fully under control, to not send her off until her wild child behavior was under control, tough love and everything that I’ve read over and over when someone posts about these types of issues… Rachel chose to bolt. The difference is now Rachel’s trying to get control of money. We don’t presume that the parents that come here and ask what to do with mentally ill or recalcitrant kids are “bad parent”…why would we “presume” the parents in this situation are bad parents. Also each side has a “month” to get their story straight so unless they are able to arbitrate something between now and April, it will all come out in the air. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. And how would we respond if said parent told us her child was demanding they pay for college but have NO INPUT on which college that is?! We’d all be telling her to tell the child to like it or lump it.</p>
<p>Actually, we’d likely think a parent sending a kid off to school where it is already KNOWN to the family that there are mental health, alcohol and other issues is a waste of money or worse. There is no entitlement that this child has to go off to sleep away college while she has all of these unresolved issues. Giving the kid money for college could be interpreted to be paying tuition while said kid lives AT HOME, which is the most economical choice for most situations anyway. </p>
<p>I have never heard of any state which requires a family to fund a kid to go off to the U of the kid’s dreams with all expenses including room and board, especially where said kid refuses to follow family rules and get counseling, where it is shown there are problems that are unresolved. </p>
<p>The chance of the judge setting that precedent are slim to none.</p>
<p>It is always difficult and sad when courts are being asked to figure out how to help dysfunctional families and their laundry is aired so publicly. Especially awful for sibs, who are just trying to live their lives and I’m sure don’t relish the spotlight being thrust in the family. </p>
<p>At this point, it doesn’t sound like the parents or this young woman are likely to reach any happy resolution. I am sure the judge will be very cautious about what is ruled. </p>
<p>If Rachel Canning actually started the “Education for Rachel” Facebook page, I’m going to be sick. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can’t link to the page because it would be against TOS.</p>
<p>From the NY Post: </p>
<p>The New Jersey parents being sued for tuition by their entitled teenager were excoriated in a Friday rant on her new Facebook page as “spoiled” baby boomers who would rather feather a retirement nest than pay their kids’ college bills.</p>
<p>“I have been stunned by the financial greed of modern parents who are more concerned with retiring into some fantasy world rather than provide for their children’s college and young adult years,” a poster — presumed to be Morris Catholic HS senior Rachel Canning or a supporter — wrote in the pre-dawn web screed.</p>
<p>“Suburban baby boomer types are the spoiled lot, they make massive amount of money a year, they are used to flying to luxury destinations when they want, and buy things that they don’t need, people should be inclined to see things my way.”</p>
<p>The post appeared on the “Education for Rachel” Facebook page, which Canning previously told The Post she set up to support her cause.</p>
<p>The thing I feel worst about is that this young girl very likely still has no understanding of the damage she is doing to her future and her relationship with her family, but she has been put in a position where it becomes increasingly difficult to turn back. This was an extraordinarily poorly conceived venture where everyone will suffer. Everyone.</p>
<p>Whether or not you ever had the bad judgment to say things you wish you had not, I don’t think there’s any one of us who hasn’t had an unfortunate personal or family moment they would never want to see dragged through the public eye. </p>
<p>Wow! That’s really bad. Really, really bad. She’s 18. She just doesn’t get it and it’s very sad. </p>
<p>The lawyer/father who is allowing Rachel to live in his home asserts that the Facebook page is a hoax:</p>
<p>“This page is a hoax,” attorney John P. Inglesino said in an email to the Los Angeles Times on Friday morning.
<a href=“Facebook hoax targets N.J. teen suing parents, lawyer says”>Facebook hoax targets N.J. teen suing parents, lawyer says;
<p>But the New York Post said that she previously told them she set it up to support her cause.
<a href=“http://nypost.com/2014/03/07/teen-su…-spoiled-ones/”>http://nypost.com/2014/03/07/teen-su…-spoiled-ones/</a></p>
<p>I agree that the posts I quoted above don’t sound like they were written by an 18 y/o.
What a huge freaking mess.</p>
<p>I think the attorney who brought the case is really a big part of the problem. The sad thing is that the family–especially kids are likely to suffer severe permanent damage, while he may or may not. It is just an awful spectacle and example of awful things that can ensue when wills collide. Nothing good will come of this for the D or family. </p>
<p>I just looked at Rachel Canning on Facebook. No way that page is real. It’s clearly a parody. </p>