[Oswald2001]

Originally Posted by nyazzip ↗

interesting concept.

It is only 'interesting' when other people pay for it.

[jtonkfan]

Poor child. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[Oswald2001]

Originally Posted by jtonkfan ↗

Poor child. They should be ashamed of themselves.

How much of your own money have you sent the parents to take care of that child?

None?

Orly?

You "should be ashamed" of yourself.

All talk.

No committment.

[jtonkfan]

Originally Posted by Oswald2001 ↗

How much of your own money have you sent the parents to take care of that child?

None?

Orly?

You "should be ashamed" of yourself.

All talk.

No committment.

I should be ashamed of myself? Why?

Did I send my child to an unequipped school? No.

The SCHOOL should be ashamed that they put a child into such poor conditions. I never mentioned the parents?!

Parents send their child to school in good faith, naturally assuming that their child would be looked after in a safe environment and in this case the child was not looked after appropriately. I have no reason to be ashamed of myself or what I've said. The school should have known better and shouldn't have accepted a child that they knew they could not effectively support.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Oswald2001 ↗

Selfish parents dump their uncontrollable kid on a school unequipped to deal with a problem which is the parents' responsibility alone.

Then the irresponsible parents complain about the school while expecting the school to spend unlimited money and devote enormous time and other resources to taking care of the parent's responsibilities to their kid.

All at the expense of the many many other kids at that school who will now be cheated.

Force the parents to home school.

Your stupidity never fails to amaze me. I refuse to believe that YOU believe the crap you spout.

[Oswald2001]

Originally Posted by jtonkfan ↗

I should be ashamed of myself? Why?

Did I send my child to an unequipped school? No.

The SCHOOL should be ashamed that they put a child into such poor conditions. I never mentioned the parents?!

Parents send their child to school in good faith, naturally assuming that their child would be looked after in a safe environment and in this case the child was not looked after appropriately. I have no reason to be ashamed of myself or what I've said. The school should have known better and shouldn't have accepted a child that they knew they could not effectively support.

You didn't answer the question.

How much of your own money have you sent the parents of this child to help with the problem?

Put up or shut up.

Show us a photocopy of your cancelled check.

Otherwise, you're just another blowhard.



And the parents shouldn't have tried to foist off their kid on a school unequipped to deal with him.

It was the parents' responsibility in ensure that the school was equipped for their out-of-control kid...before...the dumped him there.

They knew that he was ultra incredibly high maintenance and they knew that very very few schools in the world a set up for such a child.

But they, like you, are also phonies.

You don't want to spend your own money and the parents didn't want to spend their own money.


(Let's just dump this kid on some poor unsuspecting school. )

[jtonkfan]

Originally Posted by Oswald2001 ↗

You didn't answer the question.

How much of your own money have you sent the parents of this child to help with the problem?

Put up or shut up.

Show us a photocopy of your cancelled check.

Otherwise, you're just another blowhard.



And the parents shouldn't have tried to foist off their kid on a school unequipped to deal with him.

They knew that he was ultra incredibly high maintenance and they knew that very very few schools in the world a set up for such a child.

But they, like you, are also phonies.

You don't want to spend your own money and the parents didn't want to spend their own money.


(Let's just dump this kid on some poor unsuspecting school. )

I haven't sent them any money, and why should I? Me sending them money has NOTHING to do with what I've posted, my issue remains with the school not the parents. Like I'd said, the parents sent the child to school assuming the child would be appropriately looked after yet the school locked the poor child in a cage, do you think that is acceptable? Because I certainly don't.

The child has autism, if the school did not have the means to support him then why accept him? Why let the child suffer?

I'm not wasting any more of my time reacting to your utter nonsense.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by jtonkfan ↗

I haven't sent them any money, and why should I? Me sending them money has NOTHING to do with what I've posted, my issue remains with the school not the parents. Like I'd said, the parents sent the child to school assuming the child would be appropriately looked after yet the school locked the poor child in a cage, do you think that is acceptable? Because I certainly don't.

The child has autism, if the school did not have the means to support him then why accept him? Why let the child suffer?

I'm not wasting any more of my time reacting to your utter nonsense.

[vipersna]

Originally Posted by Oswald2001 ↗

You didn't answer the question.

How much of your own money have you sent the parents of this child to help with the problem?

Put up or shut up.

Show us a photocopy of your cancelled check.

Otherwise, you're just another blowhard.



And the parents shouldn't have tried to foist off their kid on a school unequipped to deal with him.

It was the parents' responsibility in ensure that the school was equipped for their out-of-control kid...before...the dumped him there.

They knew that he was ultra incredibly high maintenance and they knew that very very few schools in the world a set up for such a child.

But they, like you, are also phonies.

You don't want to spend your own money and the parents didn't want to spend their own money.


(Let's just dump this kid on some poor unsuspecting school. )

The school could have said "we do not have the facilities to care for the individual" and he would have been bussed to a special needs school. The school probably gets additional funding for special needs cases. My child is special need, they have a district plan, a skiia, and receive additional funding from the state for anything that she may need there that I cannot provide. If they cannot deal with her or she gets too out of hand they call me and i will pick her up. A cage is not place for a child because most children, especially those who do not understand, will be frightened and attribute a cage to a jail inmate or animal that "has done something bad" which usually makes their condi tion worse. Most of the time a facility just needs a patient and caring adult who understands how to communicate with one of these individuals. Yes i am responsible for my child but my school has assured me they have the facilities and training needed to care for such an individual. Whoever was in charge of this school was looking for an easier way of dealing with children that wasnt time and resource consuming.

[Morbid75]

Originally Posted by MrCorpse ↗

Sounds like a complete over-reaction. I think the principle did the best he could when faced with a bad situation and had it blow up in his face.

If retarded kids are too much hassle they should just be kicked out of the classroom and home schooled/privately tutored. If the parents cannot afford it or do not want to get it done it should be okay to just euthanise them. They're not real people anyway.

A cage like this is an extravagance and the parents of the downy mong should be overjoyed that such and effort was made to accommodate their mutant. The school was already bending over backwards, sadly it appears the parents/retard activists wanted a blow job as well.

downy mong