Teen Sues Parents for ‘Child Support’—What’s Next?

            A teenager in New Jersey is suing her parents for “immediate support, current private school fees, and future college tuition.” She claims that her mother and father “tossed her out of their home and cut her off financially.” Her parents, meanwhile, say that their daughter Rachel Canning, 18, moved out willingly after “refusing to abide by their rules.”

            Rachel’s father, Sean Canning, is a town administrator and retired policeman. He shared with the Daily Record how much he and his wife love and miss Rachel. “This is terrible. It’s killing me and my wife…We have a child we want home…and now we’re getting hauled into court.” He explains the “rules” in question as her reconsideration of a problematic boyfriend, “being respectful, and abiding by her curfew.”  What loving and serious parents with young adult children have not faced similar issues?

            But this scenario takes parenting to a whole new level. Every normal family in history has faced similar difficulties and heartaches in raising children. Granted that some children are more cooperative and pliable than others, but all have rebelled in varying degrees. No parent has ever had to teach a child to do wrong---they do that automatically. “Behave yourself” and “do right” are valid mottos of childrearing, along with parental discipline to correct wrong behavior. It’s not uncommon for a rebellious teenager to leave home for a time until conflicts can be resolved; but to blatantly sue well-meaning parents for “child support” is ludicrous.

            What’s happened to respect and gratitude of children for their parents? Rebellion toward authority abounds everywhere. This father had several reasonable conditions (rules) that Rachel was to follow, but she refused; therefore, she lost her privileges, which was only right. Evidently her action was prompted by some outside influence, namely, her best friend’s father—attorney John Inglesino. Wouldn’t you know that instead of attempting to reconcile Rachel with her parents, Mr. Inglesino is “bankrolling Rachel’s lawsuit.” In fact, according to the paper, he’s already requesting in the lawsuit that the Cannings reimburse him $12,597 for legal fees!

            Something is radically wrong with this picture. Many of us remember the “ol’ days” when fathers and mothers ruled the household with loving firmness. There was a semblance of peace because unruly children were dealt with properly. Obedience was honored, and brought reward. Submissive and teachable children were happy and content.  If one rebelled against parental authority and left home, they had no where to go. The attempt to stay at a friend’s home raised a “red flag” with those parents who were sure to ask questions. Parents stuck together, not hesitating to make a phone call to help reconcile the situation. What’s happened to that attitude today?

            Rachel’s so-called “best friend,” along with her father, has only exacerbated the problem. Here’s a father who should have empathy toward Sean Canning, doing everything possible to get Rachel back home. Instead he’s part of the problem, literally making a “federal case” out of a solvable family setback. Shame on this ego-centric and greedy attorney!

The Law can never take the place of loving and firm parents. The courts will never fulfill the inner needs of this young lady, who has chosen to rebel against the folks who love her the most. Parental guidance is a God-send to govern and nurture a child’s developmental years. To spurn this gift is the height of selfishness and ingratitude. Rachel needs to repent of her “bratty” spirit and seek her parent’s forgiveness; she might also seriously consider the far-reaching consequences of “biting the hand” that has so graciously “fed” her for 18 years!