Reply to Is it true the Lacrosse player from Lightridge HS was Bullied or not?

Forum Index » Lacrosse

Reply to "Is it true the Lacrosse player from Lightridge HS was Bullied or not?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]School Board and Court denied her being able to play at Independence.  She says she was bullied at Lightridge, but there's no real known evidence.[/quote]

If she was bullied why didn't she choose to go to a school much closer to where she lives (ie John Champe, Freedom, etc.)? Instead chose the school that made it to the state finals in lacrosse last year.

My DD is friends with several girls on the Lightridge lacrosse team and they are pretty adamant that this is purely a desire to move to a better team team.[/quote]

Not sure you’re familiar with the area but we previously lived in that area and Champe and Independence (there are cut throughs across rt. 50 to it) would be close to equally distant depending where she lived in the Lightridge zone, and Freedom farther. Not to mention the article said she had friends at Independence so a built in support system would be important if she was having social struggles affecting her mental health at Lightridge. I think we can all agree on that as parents. And since the girls who started the Lightridge team are now seniors I’d imagine they’d be similar in strength to Independence by this point. As far as what the girls are saying, if you’re a parent of teenagers you know that of course they all have opinions and not all of the facts unless they were directly involved. Regardless it’s ridiculous and a slippery slope to question the mental health of a teenage girl who wants to switch schools for her senior year-that’s not the norm. If she wanted a guarantee to win some sort of championship she probably would have switched to PVI. But it’s like a victim of assault—what teenage girl would really subject herself to this if she wasn’t struggling at her school. I also think it’s horrible a kid’s name was used from Lightridge and that the team as a whole has now been insinuated as bullies. Not sure why the school board dug their heels in sadly making this worse for all of the girls. They’ve also now set a precedent that if you’re struggling with mental health issues or bullying and you need to transfer schools that you can’t participate in sports and extracurriculars that are documented to help with mental health. Sad all around.[/quote]

Indy was ranked 16th by MaxPreps, Lightridge in the 30s.

They've not set any sort of precedence, Lauren. That dog isn't going to hunt. I see you making that argument in other forums and the like, but that's not a factual interpretation of what's happening here. And how dare you complain about mental illness and allow your lawyer to make unsubstantiated accusations on the courthouse steps about another child? By name?[/quote]

I’m assuming Lauren is the mom and sorry but that’s not me but I’m guessing from the comments it’s personal and there are both parties represented here. I wouldn’t put my kid through this if she had mental health struggles, even if she begged me to fight it. It’s not healthy and I would as I suggested probably move her to a private school or move to a new district because I know from living there that LoCo is a small world, especially for the kids and with social media. I’m guessing you’re directly involved in this based on your comments but if you took the time to read my comment I said it was wrong to mention a child’s name—assuming she was 18 maybe it’s legal but absolutely wrong and no doubt that kid is now struggling too. I also said it’s bad because that entire team now has to deal with speculation that they’re bullies.

But I do stand by the fact that I find it hard to believe a senior girl would chose to switch high schools for that final year for the sole reason to potentially win a state championship in one sport. It’s just not something you see a girl who is happy and thriving at her school do. Plus, no offense this is not MD private school level lacrosse with a championship meaning you’re one of the best HS teams in the country, and if Indy is 16th how do they even have a shot not being top 10? At a minimum she was having social issues whether it was in school or in sports. And I’m not sure who has the right to question that because I would not respond well if someone was questioning if any of my daughters or sons was struggling—that’s gross.

And is this woman wrong saying that a kid who transferred for the same reasons but was in marching band could participate in that or could get the lead in a play? The rule only applies to sports? That seems a messed up message too.[/quote]

Yes, she's wrong. VHSL stands for Virginia High School League. It governs athletics statewide. The eligibility provision is a statewide rule, not something LCPS made up. What they wanted was a WAIVER and LCPS denied it, likely because of the optics that have been discussed here. So they sued, arguing that their daughter had some right to play on the high school team because of her mental health. LCPS and a judge decided the interests of others outweighed that.

But there's NOTHING here that restricts a student who transfers from doing activities like marching band, theater, yearbook, Model UN, or whatever. And suggesting that there's some precedent here that DOES restrict transferees from doing that is just a lie. This is entirely about athletics. And the policy is in place to prevent recruiting between HS and player poaching. [/quote]

Got it but in the competitive environment we live in to dismiss there couldn’t be “recruiting” of the smartest kids so kids could win academic competitions for pride and college applications or a kid wanting to move to the school with the best drama program so they can tout being the lead in so and so’s production on their acting resume seems wrong. It’s not fair to single out athletes and it’s wrong to dismiss the importance of these other activities. But I guess that’s another topic.

Seems like LCPS should have not granted the transfer waiver because they’ve now become the arbiter of a child’s mental health struggles. That’s scary. Whether people chose to believe her or not, I know it’s not my right to question her because I’m not living it. Plus it sounds like from the media that she’s been in therapy so again, LCPS should have denied the transfer knowing participation in sports for an established athlete is part of their identity and if a positive environment can play a healthy role in improving mental health. By granting the transfer waiver and not the sports LCPS set her up for failure. A very sad way for this girl to have to finish high school-I think we can all agree on that and hope that college provides her with a fresh and positive experience.[/quote]

I have no idea about academic competitions -- they aren't covered by VHSL.

And it's not "scary" and no matter how much the family has tried to make it about her mental health, it hasn't thrust LCSP into the role of arbiter. And even if it was, they're still weighing the interest of one person against the interest of the whole, and in the case of athletic competitions, the whole has a defined meaning. If they allowed this, you'd start to see a whole bunch of others transferring to powerhouse athletic programs on the grounds of "mental illness."

There's also an acute sense of entitlement at work here. The family knew she'd be ineligible and just transferred anyway and figured they'd try to make a stink and force a waiver. It didn't work out for them.

She's going to play in college. Her lacrosse career isn't over. But let's really stop acting like she's a victim here. [/quote]

100% it is “scary” especially based on LCPS’s and its school board’s history. Also your comments are very dismissive of a child’s mental health even if as it sounds you know and dislike her. Unless you’re the girl or her parent you’ll never know. People generally don’t publicize false mental health struggles to be ridiculed just like they don’t sexual assault. And no one said her career is over but it also is sad she can’t play her senior season—you can balance all of that anger with some compassion for a kid, especially assuming you’re a parent. It also doesn’t sound like she’d put the team over the top one way or the other unless she’s a goalie and Independence doesn’t have a seasoned one without her. But bottom line the transfer waiver shouldn’t have been granted which would have forced the family to move to private or elsewhere where she could protect her mental health and play the sport she loves her final year of high school. Sounds like it could have been an option for this family but not for most people so that also creates issues if we’re going to start disallowing sports participation by children with documented mental health struggles.[/quote]

I don't know the girl, never met the family. My curiosity is piqued because I have a daughter who plays for a different team that will face Independence. I'm also a coach in a different sport. I am skeptical of the mental health claims primarily because of the tone and tenor of their pressure PR campaign. I actually have a child who has severe mental health issues -- hospitalized, in fact. And so, honestly, I'm a little put off by their latching on to mental health as their reason. The fact that they allowed their lawyer to drag the name of another child through the mud to me suggests they really AREN'T CONCERNED about mental health -- or they would have taken the high road instead of intentionally inflicting distress on another child.

I'd also say that demanding the right to play as some salve for mental health issues is a stretch. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics