Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine a world in which my child drew something like this (such a cry for help) and then not immediately getting then just leaving them at school. While I don’t have much sympathy for the shooter, I do feel like his parents utterly failed him. How many lives would be different right now if his parents had taken their son’s red flags seriously.

These parents probably crowed about "parents rights" and thought the school was "wimpy snowflakes" for being concerned about their son's gun obsession.

10 bucks says they were screaming at the school board within the past year.

They certainly had no concerns about his bullets fetish.

Fortunately the parents have been charged.

Anonymous wrote:
Well, it sure sounds like he would have benefitted by being raised by better adults. Is that not obvious?

Kids who enter their schools to murder their peers are damaged human beings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^She did not say they refused, she said they resisted.
Does not matter.

Why would you leave the safety of everyone else in the school in the hands of parents of the disturbed kid? What are the odds that they make great decisions?

The child gave every sign of wanting to kill himself. The school told the parent to get him help within TWO DAYS. He should have been shipped off to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation immediately.

Again, kids like these have often spent a lifetime with poor parents. Time for the professional to step in and over-ride their poor judgement.

This is NOT downplaying parents' culpability. It is saying that the school administration was responsible for protecting the other students and staff, not whatever semblance of a parent walks thru the door.

But but but this would be socialism.

Its funny because this same board has been arguing for a year for PARENT'S RIGHTS. Parents should choose. Parents harassing the school boards. Parents threatening teachers.

Now you want the school to override the parents decision not to take their troublemaking kid? Funny.

NO, it is called child welfare.

Parents sometimes abuse and neglect their kids.

They do not have unbridled freedoms when it comes to harming another human or putting them at risk.

What do you not get about that?

Children are not property. They deserve protection.

This kid didn't need protection. He's the one who murdered 4 promising teens in cold blood, not the other way around.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Normally, I would not blame parents for their children's mental illness...but the circumstances of this case are unbelievable.

I think the parents are DEFINITELY negligent, as is the school.

That kid should have been sent directly to a mental hospital, and not allowed back into any classroom until a professional said it was safe for him to return.

He was suicidal and homicidal. If the administration was aware of that level of PHYSCIAL illness, he would not have been returned to the classroom.

Tragic.

How is the school negligent. Within the last 10 days pre-shooting and including the DAY of the shooting - I've seen that they've reached out to the parents at least 4 times. On top of the parents knowing he had issues and still buying him a weapon at 15. WTF?

November 21st - Ethan was searching bullets on his phone - his mother was called immediately and a voicemail was left.

November 21st - Ethan was searching bullets on his phone - his mother was sent an email regarding the same subject

November 26th - Father takes him Black Friday shopping for a gun

November 27th - Mother posts on FB 'Mom and son tests out his present' - she went shooting with him

November 29th - Ethan called in by administration

November 30th - Ethan called in by administration with parents

November 30th - Ethan shoots and kills 4 fellow students

The school is negligent because they kept letting him go to school everyday. If schools finds a kid to a threat they need to suspend them immediately until kid has been evaluated by a psych professional and home has had weapons removed or verified secured. Those things don’t legally happen now, but the least the school could have done was not allow him back to school. Holding a bunch of meetings with the parents is pretty pointless if he is still attending classes.

The parents should not have allowed him to attend school. They did. They provided the gun. The dad LOL'd about it. It's a pretty straight line here.

Schools can and should have suspended him. Duh. While of course the parents are negligent, the school is too. Just because the parents didn’t keep him home doesn’t mean the school can’t say he is allowed to attend because he is unsafe. That is the schools job to ultimately make that call because they are responsible for the safety of the entire student body. They failed the kids

Suspended him for what? I see he searched bullets, but did he threaten someone?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine a world in which my child drew something like this (such a cry for help) and then not immediately getting then just leaving them at school. While I don’t have much sympathy for the shooter, I do feel like his parents utterly failed him. How many lives would be different right now if his parents had taken their son’s red flags seriously.

These parents probably crowed about "parents rights" and thought the school was "wimpy snowflakes" for being concerned about their son's gun obsession.

10 bucks says they were screaming at the school board within the past year.

They certainly had no concerns about his bullets fetish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine a world in which my child drew something like this (such a cry for help) and then not immediately getting then just leaving them at school. While I don’t have much sympathy for the shooter, I do feel like his parents utterly failed him. How many lives would be different right now if his parents had taken their son’s red flags seriously.

These parents probably crowed about "parents rights" and thought the school was "wimpy snowflakes" for being concerned about their son's gun obsession.

10 bucks says they were screaming at the school board within the past year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^She did not say they refused, she said they resisted.
Does not matter.

Why would you leave the safety of everyone else in the school in the hands of parents of the disturbed kid? What are the odds that they make great decisions?

The child gave every sign of wanting to kill himself. The school told the parent to get him help within TWO DAYS. He should have been shipped off to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation immediately.

Again, kids like these have often spent a lifetime with poor parents. Time for the professional to step in and over-ride their poor judgement.

This is NOT downplaying parents' culpability. It is saying that the school administration was responsible for protecting the other students and staff, not whatever semblance of a parent walks thru the door.

But but but this would be socialism.

Its funny because this same board has been arguing for a year for PARENT'S RIGHTS. Parents should choose. Parents harassing the school boards. Parents threatening teachers.

Now you want the school to override the parents decision not to take their troublemaking kid? Funny.

NO, it is called child welfare.

Parents sometimes abuse and neglect their kids.

They do not have unbridled freedoms when it comes to harming another human or putting them at risk.

What do you not get about that?

Children are not property. They deserve protection.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^She did not say they refused, she said they resisted.
Does not matter.

Why would you leave the safety of everyone else in the school in the hands of parents of the disturbed kid? What are the odds that they make great decisions?

The child gave every sign of wanting to kill himself. The school told the parent to get him help within TWO DAYS. He should have been shipped off to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation immediately.

Again, kids like these have often spent a lifetime with poor parents. Time for the professional to step in and over-ride their poor judgement.

This is NOT downplaying parents' culpability. It is saying that the school administration was responsible for protecting the other students and staff, not whatever semblance of a parent walks thru the door.

But but but this would be socialism.

Its funny because this same board has been arguing for a year for PARENT'S RIGHTS. Parents should choose. Parents harassing the school boards. Parents threatening teachers.

Now you want the school to override the parents decision not to take their troublemaking kid? Funny.

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine a world in which my child drew something like this (such a cry for help) and then not immediately getting then just leaving them at school. While I don’t have much sympathy for the shooter, I do feel like his parents utterly failed him. How many lives would be different right now if his parents had taken their son’s red flags seriously.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^She did not say they refused, she said they resisted.
Does not matter.

Why would you leave the safety of everyone else in the school in the hands of parents of the disturbed kid? What are the odds that they make great decisions?

The child gave every sign of wanting to kill himself. The school told the parent to get him help within TWO DAYS. He should have been shipped off to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation immediately.

Again, kids like these have often spent a lifetime with poor parents. Time for the professional to step in and over-ride their poor judgement.

This is NOT downplaying parents' culpability. It is saying that the school administration was responsible for protecting the other students and staff, not whatever semblance of a parent walks thru the door.

Oh wait - now you want to Baker Act the kid without the permission of the legal guardians or parents? The parents say there, refused to do anything about their, resisted taking him home. They sure as hell weren't going to help section him.

So disturbing. The school did all they could.

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine a world in which my child drew something like this (such a cry for help) and then not immediately getting then just leaving them at school. While I don’t have much sympathy for the shooter, I do feel like his parents utterly failed him. How many lives would be different right now if his parents had taken their son’s red flags seriously.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^She did not say they refused, she said they resisted.
Does not matter.

Why would you leave the safety of everyone else in the school in the hands of parents of the disturbed kid? What are the odds that they make great decisions?

The child gave every sign of wanting to kill himself. The school told the parent to get him help within TWO DAYS. He should have been shipped off to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation immediately.

Again, kids like these have often spent a lifetime with poor parents. Time for the professional to step in and over-ride their poor judgement.

This is NOT downplaying parents' culpability. It is saying that the school administration was responsible for protecting the other students and staff, not whatever semblance of a parent walks thru the door.

Oh wait - now you want to Baker Act the kid without the permission of the legal guardians or parents? The parents sat there, refused to do anything about their kid, resisted taking him home. They sure as hell weren't going to help section him after buying him a gun days before.

So disturbing. The school did all they could.

Since when does a school need a parents permission to suspend due to safety concern?

What happens when you suspend a kid? You call the parents and have them take him/her home. The parents were sitting right there and refusing to take their kid.

I hope the conversation was recorded - considering the mom's Trump rants I'm pretty sure she threatened the administration as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^She did not say they refused, she said they resisted.
Does not matter.

Why would you leave the safety of everyone else in the school in the hands of parents of the disturbed kid? What are the odds that they make great decisions?

The child gave every sign of wanting to kill himself. The school told the parent to get him help within TWO DAYS. He should have been shipped off to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation immediately.

Again, kids like these have often spent a lifetime with poor parents. Time for the professional to step in and over-ride their poor judgement.

This is NOT downplaying parents' culpability. It is saying that the school administration was responsible for protecting the other students and staff, not whatever semblance of a parent walks thru the door.

Oh wait - now you want to Baker Act the kid without the permission of the legal guardians or parents? The parents sat there, refused to do anything about their kid, resisted taking him home. They sure as hell weren't going to help section him after buying him a gun days before.

So disturbing. The school did all they could.

Since when does a school need a parents permission to suspend due to safety concern?