Why Meadow Died / The Parkland Shootings

[goldberry]

A new book is out by the parent of one of the students killed in Florida.  It is the result of investigations into the school district and policies that potentially contributed to the shooting.

This book is a hard read and is gut-wrenching.  I will say upfront that the parent is clearly right-leaning, but does not set out to make partisan arguments.  His wording, however, often reflects his political bias, and occasionally I had to purposely not focus on that.   It's been discussed other times that bias doesn't equal falsehood, and this book seems very well researched and documented.  

It is also not set out to be a book about why guns are a-okay because it was the school district's fault.  He is not making that argument, but instead focusing on what policies contributed to the things that happened and why those policies are dangerous.  Specifically, policies designed to address inequity in arrests and disciplinary actions among students of color, but often don't seem to have the affect they are intended to have.  Huge problems can result from underreporting and school systems more concerned about their own "stats" or "reputations" than about the safety of students.  I think he makes some very good points and wanted to see if anyone else has read the book.

[goldberry]

This is an article from earlier this year regarding the controversy.

https://www.huffpost.com/highline/article/parkland/

The article details how after Columbine many schools went to zero tolerance policies which were of course destructive.  But the pushback to that seems to be just another swing to the other extreme.  

I would also like to add that the push for "forced leniency" is opposed by many teachers (including ones I know directly).  

Edited September 26, 2019 by goldberry

[Jaz]

I think I'd like to read it. Thanks for the reminder!

[goldberry]

1 hour ago, happysmileylady said:

I haven't read the book.  I googled some news articles about it and if the news articles are accurately describing what is said in the book, I think it's probably a very accurate book.Though, I don't know that the policies are anything new.  Some of the things that the articles mention as part of the book, I experienced when I was teaching.  Including students who made specific threats being treated basically as if nothing happened, violent students with IEPs being allowed to simply "cool down" in the resource room after physically injuring other students, and students convicted of assault being returned to the very same classrooms where their victims (teachers and students) were.  It's one of the reasons I left teaching.  

 

 I left teaching before Obama was president and these things were not happening in a majority white school.  

 

This is very true.  That's why I think some of the way the book is presented (he uses the phrase "politically correct" numerous times) makes some political assumptions from his own perspective.  It's really just the swing of the pendulum, once again swinging without regard for actual effectiveness.   He even acknowledges that the problems which initiated these policies are real.  He proposes correctly I think that new policies should be implemented with much collaboration from those in the trenches, and then monitored and evaluated *carefully* to see if they are having the desired effect.  And not just on paper.    One of the people in his book was initially totally stoked about the new policies when they first came out.  But then as he realized they weren't having the effect in practice, no one felt they could say anything.  Their jobs were at risk for not being team players.

 

[ktgrok]

3 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

I haven't read the book.  I googled some news articles about it and if the news articles are accurately describing what is said in the book, I think it's probably a very accurate book.Though, I don't know that the policies are anything new.  Some of the things that the articles mention as part of the book, I experienced when I was teaching.  Including students who made specific threats being treated basically as if nothing happened, violent students with IEPs being allowed to simply "cool down" in the resource room after physically injuring other students, and students convicted of assault being returned to the very same classrooms where their victims (teachers and students) were.  It's one of the reasons I left teaching.  

 

 I left teaching before Obama was president and these things were not happening in a majority white school.  

 

ETA: I might go ahead and put the book on my tablet for my drive tomorrow though.  Looks interesting.  

Yes, my family member in education was hoping a known violent student would actually attack her in front of the police, as that was really the only way to get him expelled. 

[Laurie]

I've listened to interviews with Meadow's father.  I almost bought the book but I know it would make my blood boil.   Anyone who has been banned from bringing a backpack to school and must be frisked by security every morning DOES NOT belong in a "regular" school.   

The city where I live is doing weird things in the juvenile court system for similar reasons.  Peacemaking circles that include burning sage and passing around talking sticks or feathers...

I think schools should bring back the "board of education" and the justice system should keep locking up people who commit crimes.  (I used to watch the tv show Baretta when I was young..."Don't do the crime if you can't do the time" makes perfect sense to me!)

 

[SKL]

13 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

I haven't read the book.  I googled some news articles about it and if the news articles are accurately describing what is said in the book, I think it's probably a very accurate book.Though, I don't know that the policies are anything new.  Some of the things that the articles mention as part of the book, I experienced when I was teaching.  Including students who made specific threats being treated basically as if nothing happened, violent students with IEPs being allowed to simply "cool down" in the resource room after physically injuring other students, and students convicted of assault being returned to the very same classrooms where their victims (teachers and students) were.  It's one of the reasons I left teaching.  

 

 I left teaching before Obama was president and these things were not happening in a majority white school.  

 

ETA: I might go ahead and put the book on my tablet for my drive tomorrow though.  Looks interesting.  

Yeah, I saw a bit of this in my nephew's middle school about 10 years ago.  Individuals who were habitually violent were not punished / intervened with as severely as people on a first offense.  The school needed cops in the halls at all times because there was no real deterrent to constant violence.  I assume this was not a rare case.

[goldberry]

11 hours ago, Laurie said:

I've listened to interviews with Meadow's father.  I almost bought the book but I know it would make my blood boil.   

 

 

It is hard reading.  I had to stop several times.  That night I was going to make dinner, and instead pinned down my husband as soon as he got home to let it all flood out. 

I do want to read some rebuttals and further info that will undoubtedly come out.  

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, SKL said:

Yeah, I saw a bit of this in my nephew's middle school about 10 years ago.  Individuals who were habitually violent were not punished / intervened with as severely as people on a first offense.  The school needed cops in the halls at all times because there was no real deterrent to constant violence.  I assume this was not a rare case.

And yet, at the same time, we have in the same state, kids as young as 8 years old being arrested for minor issues. 

And yes, there is very much a racial component. In some cases it is blatant racism (alive and well in Florida) but in others it is more of unconscious bias - we are more likely to relate to and give the benefit of the doubt to people that are most similar to ourselves. Be that someone of our race, someone with similar taste in music, a fellow homeschool mom, etc. It's natural, but can become an issue if not consciously addressed. 

But way more powerful than that is the level of socioeconomic status of the parents. Specifically, how likely are the parents to have access to good lawyers who will sue if little Johnny gets kicked out. And how many powerful allies do they have in local politics, school board, etc. 

The worst job my relative who is now a high school principal ever had was working in a very wealthy school in Wellington (think Polo families). EVERY parent had the means and will to sue over anything. They couldn't even kick kids out of the stands at football games for being drunk without worry of a lawsuit. 

So yeah, we have kids being arrested by actual police for stuff that should just have them cleaning the chalkboard after class, and other kids who are known to have guns and drugs and to have made threats and we can't get them out of the classroom. (mind you, the only reason they show up to class is to have a better market for their drugs)

Edited September 27, 2019 by Ktgrok

[SKL]

38 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

And yet, at the same time, we have in the same state, kids as young as 8 years old being arrested for minor issues. 

And yes, there is very much a racial component. In some cases it is blatant racism (alive and well in Florida) but in others it is more of unconscious bias - we are more likely to relate to and give the benefit of the doubt to people that are most similar to ourselves. Be that someone of our race, someone with similar taste in music, a fellow homeschool mom, etc. It's natural, but can become an issue if not consciously addressed. 

But way more powerful than that is the level of socioeconomic status of the parents. Specifically, how likely are the parents to have access to good lawyers who will sue if little Johnny gets kicked out. And how many powerful allies do they have in local politics, school board, etc. 

The worst job my relative who is now a high school principal ever had was working in a very wealthy school in Wellington (think Polo families). EVERY parent had the means and will to sue over anything. They couldn't even kick kids out of the stands at football games for being drunk without worry of a lawsuit. 

So yeah, we have kids being arrested by actual police for stuff that should just have them cleaning the chalkboard after class, and other kids who are known to have guns and drugs and to have made threats and we can't get them out of the classroom. (mind you, the only reason they show up to class is to have a better market for their drugs)

Well in the school I'm talking about, it was black repeat offenders getting off and white first offenders getting severe consequences. The administration was black, so that could have been a factor.  But it is consistent with the apparent overall issue, i.e., not responding to a problem that happens to plague low income communities, in the hope that it will magically go away or something.

[SKL]

As for cleaning the chalkboard after class etc - unfortunately you can't do those seemingly logical things without intense backlash.  At least where I live, color doesn't make a difference as far as which parents will raise hell if their kid gets disciplined.  The reason for the sensitivity may be different, but teachers have seriously limited options.

[goldberry]

24 minutes ago, SKL said:

Well in the school I'm talking about, it was black repeat offenders getting off and white first offenders getting severe consequences. The administration was black, so that could have been a factor.  But it is consistent with the apparent overall issue, i.e., not responding to a problem that happens to plague low income communities, in the hope that it will magically go away or something.

 

That's the thing though, it's so much not just low income communities.  As KT said, the "entitled rich kid" is alive and well and equally causing problem.  I think part of instituting these strictly defined policies is to avoid the inconsistencies in how different people are treated (which is a real problem).  But the outcome is it takes away the ability to exercise common sense and take immediate action when someone doesn't fit the A then B then C of the policies.

Are there teachers that are racist (consciously or unconsciously)?  Sure.  I've seen it personally, and my teacher friends have seen it personally.  So how do you keep those teachers from showing bias in disciplining?  If you take away the ability of the teachers to use judgment (which seems to be the point of these super-strict forced leniency policies) then you eliminate in many cases the person who knows the child best AND who has to deal most directly with the child's behavior.  So how do you address inequalities in disciplining without tying hands when there is a real problem that needs to be addressed?

As an anecdotal story going on right now, I have a teacher friend in California.  She has seen a fellow first grade teacher respond radically differently to white versus non-white children.  It breaks her heart because now some of those same kids are 5th grade "behavior problems", and she really sees a connection between how they were disrespected and provoked by authority figures as younger children.  This schools system has some uber-strict discipline rules/steps, which sometimes tie the teacher's hands.  The flip side is she knows personally some of the teachers would absolutely be racially biased in dealing out discipline otherwise.

Edited September 27, 2019 by goldberry

[Sneezyone]

I dunno. The students most likely to commit heinous, multi-casualty, gun offenses at school are NOT black and YET the focus of this whole thread is violent, minority youth. Something is not proportional there.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone

[goldberry]

15 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

In one case of a violent student returned to a classroom after his conviction, I was informed that the only reason he was moved to a different classroom instead of returned to the same classroom was because the judge had issued a restraining order and he couldn’t be within X feet of the teacher in there.  But if they expelled him, then that meant he would be out on the street instead.  So......what to do?

 

In the Broward district, kids could be returned to regular school after a felony conviction.  There were kids convicted of sexual assault and battery that were returned to regular classrooms.  There has to be some way to help THOSE kids while at the same time protecting mainstream kids from dangerous people.

[goldberry]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I dunno. The students most likely to commit heinous, multi-casualty, gun offenses at school are NOT black and YET the focus of this whole thread is violent, minority youth. Something is not proportional there.

 

My understanding is the impetus for newest policy trends was the inequality in discipline for minorities.  That's where that comes in.  The OUTCOME on the other hand, is that violent youth in general (white or minority) are not able to be properly addressed because of the restrictions on the discipline process.  The thread has also addressed the rich white kid with lawyered up parents.  Obviously Nikolus Cruz was not a minority.  

I know this is a sensitive topic, so I want to be as clear as possible in addressing what my personal concerns are, and I hope I am doing that!

 

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, goldberry said:

 

My understanding is the impetus for newest policy trends was the inequality in discipline for minorities.  That's where that comes in.  The OUTCOME on the other hand, is that violent youth in general (white or minority) are not able to be properly addressed because of the restrictions on the discipline process.  The thread has also addressed the rich white kid with lawyered up parents.  Obviously Nikolus Cruz was not a minority.  

I know this is a sensitive topic, so I want to be as clear as possible in addressing what my personal concerns are, and I hope I am doing that!

 

I hope the conversation can, as you said, focus on the unintended consequences of trying to address real, documented disparate discipline with blanket policies (vs. bias training) rather than suggesting black kids are the reason white students are shooting up their classmates.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone

[goldberry]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

I hope the conversation can, as you said, focus on the unintended consequences of trying to address disparate discipline with blanket policies vs. bias training rather than  suggesting black kids are the reason white students are shooting up their classmates.

 

Oh gosh no, I hope that is not even implied.  That's why this is hard to address I think.  It's sensitive and can easily be twisted.  But it's important enough to discuss I think.

How do you address a legitimate problem of unequal discipline of minorities, but at the same time make sure that kids are protected from violent kids with severe behavioral problems (of any ethnicity)?  And then the added problem of how to really help those kids themselves while accomplishing all that...

[Sneezyone]

17 minutes ago, goldberry said:

 

Oh gosh no, I hope that is not even implied.  That's why this is hard to address I think.  It's sensitive and can easily be twisted.  But it's important enough to discuss I think.

How do you address a legitimate problem of unequal discipline of minorities, but at the same time make sure that kids are protected from violent kids with severe behavioral problems (of any ethnicity)?  And then the added problem of how to really help those kids themselves while accomplishing all that...

 I would absolutely support additional bias training/awareness education for teachers and administrators. I do not want violent people in classrooms with my kids anymore than the other parents. That said, I have experienced bias toward BOTH of my very well-behaved kids (academically and disciplinary) and I’m not willing to trade uniformity for safety or vice versa. I want ALL adults to do better.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

Well in the school I'm talking about, it was black repeat offenders getting off and white first offenders getting severe consequences. The administration was black, so that could have been a factor.  But it is consistent with the apparent overall issue, i.e., not responding to a problem that happens to plague low income communities, in the hope that it will magically go away or something.

That may go back to human nature - we are more empathetic with people "like us", without meaning to be. Or, it could also go back to who has the connections with the powers that be - whatever the make up of the town, that will possibly be reflected in who has power in that town, and power can mean getting off without punishment. 

1 hour ago, SKL said:

As for cleaning the chalkboard after class etc - unfortunately you can't do those seemingly logical things without intense backlash.  At least where I live, color doesn't make a difference as far as which parents will raise hell if their kid gets disciplined.  The reason for the sensitivity may be different, but teachers have seriously limited options.

But that makes no sense - there is intense backlash for cleaning the chalkboard after school but not for calling the cops and arresting the kid? My complaint was that kids are being arrested for stuff that doesn't need police involvement. (and disparately, kids are NOT being dealt with who need to be)

33 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I dunno. The students most likely to commit heinous, multi-casualty, gun offenses at school are NOT black and YET the focus of this whole thread is violent, minority youth. Something is not proportional there.

I don't think that's the focus at all - I was talking about rich white kids in Wellington, for instance. Parkland is also another rich, white area. 

31 minutes ago, goldberry said:

 

In the Broward district, kids could be returned to regular school after a felony conviction.  There were kids convicted of sexual assault and battery that were returned to regular classrooms.  There has to be some way to help THOSE kids while at the same time protecting mainstream kids from dangerous people.

As I heard it explained to me, a felony alone is not reason to expel. It has to also "impact the learning environment" someway. So a felony off school grounds may not be considered a reason. But one committed on school grounds, or against other students, would be. It's bizarre. 

[Sneezyone]

5 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I don't think that's the focus at all - I was talking about rich white kids in Wellington, for instance. 

At least two people mentioned black youth as the reason for lax discipline/enforcement/protection of kids. Disciplining black kids doesn’t keep white shooters from killing school children. There were/are people making that leap.

[Sneezyone]

30 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

No, not as a reason for lax discipline polices.  As victims of such policies.   When violent kids are blown off, all the students around them are at risk, regardless of their skin color   

The question is/has been who defines violence/risk? The teacher corps in America is made up of a vast majority of white women.  Do they, by and large, treat temper tantrums from six year old kids of all stripes the same? No. Do teachers, by and large, treat recalcitrance (no physicality) the same among middle school kids of all stripes? No. Do they successfully identify academic talent among all groups? Again, no. So why should anyone take, without SIGNIFICANT additional training, their complaints about violent tendencies at face value?

Now I, for one, recognize that we are less ‘blind’ to these these characteristics among people who are like ourselves. In the absence of more training, I am more inclined to hear a black teacher WRT a black child than a white teacher, or a white teacher WRT a white child. That’s not legal tho as a policy position. So what, short of people training, is the alternative?

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone

[Sneezyone]

Quote

Quote

“As I heard it explained to me, a felony alone is not reason to expel. It has to also "impact the learning environment" someway. So a felony off school grounds may not be considered a reason. But one committed on school grounds, or against other students, would be. It's bizarre.”.

 

There  may be very good reasons for this tho. We know that non-white students are charged with more severe offenses in the criminal justice system than non-minority youths. A felony for the same offense that earned another student probation shouldn’t be the reason we deny kids an education (See Turner, Brock). My daughter was accused of “theft” for taking headphones that her white classmate took (and DD returned the same day). Thieving girl gave them to DD to ‘hold’ and said they were hers. DD didn’t understand the consequences of the accusation and said, “Sure, I did it.” to the ‘counselor’ to end the interrogation and return to class. She was nearly suspended for three days. NOT.ON.MY.WATCH!! It’s not at all bizarre to recognize that all offenses are not the same, regardless of how they are charged and what convictions/punishments may be applied b/c a parent is too apathetic or unempowered to fight back.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone

[goldberry]

I don't know what the answer is.  I would think better accountability would be part of it.  Who is monitoring these programs to see if they were being implemented fairly, if they are actually working.  The school districts implementing these drastic disciplinary policies are monitoring themselves and reporting on themselves.  OF COURSE they are going to fudge the numbers and be most interested in making themselves look good.  Broward was bragging about how there was NO bullying, NO vandalism, etc.  Of course there was, it was just not getting reported.  They also looked very "cutting edge" about it.  The author uses the word "woke".  That grated on me a bit, because I don't think being woke is a bad thing.  But he's right in the way it was being used by the district.

I agree with something the author of the book mentioned, that changes should be closely monitored by independent agencies or committees (ideally within the community), and also re-evaluated regularly to see the results, rather than doing something for years that isn't really working.  

[goldberry]

The book also discusses that it wasn't just even the regulations, that the school district was going beyond the regulations because of the "culture" created, that the kids were always right and were the poor, misdirected ones, because it played well in the community.  This was being applied equally regardless of race.  But was good for no one obviously. People were told that this or that "wasn't allowed" but were given inaccurate information.  Even the people running the programs didn't know what their own regulations were.  It was a total s***show to be honest.

To be honest I kind of wondered why parents weren't more involved.  But that's my homeschool bias showing! 🙂  Seriously though, where was the accountability?  

[Sneezyone]

8 minutes ago, goldberry said:

The book also discusses that it wasn't just even the regulations, that the school district was going beyond the regulations because of the "culture" created, that the kids were always right and were the poor, misdirected ones, because it played well in the community.  This was being applied equally regardless of race.  But was good for no one obviously. People were told that this or that "wasn't allowed" but were given inaccurate information.  Even the people running the programs didn't know what their own regulations were.  It was a total s***show to be honest.

To be honest I kind of wondered why parents weren't more involved.  But that's my homeschool bias showing! 🙂  Seriously though, where was the accountability?  

I may have to read it. I’m always up for a good discussion. “The brown kids are just so violent that we can’t touch anyone now” isn’t policy, it’s a questionable judgment. Personally, I am deeply concerned that schools are not tough enough gun-toting youths (or those with access to them) in middle/upper-middle class communities like mine. These seem to be prime target areas for school shootings. There are 4000+ kids in DDs high school. I worry each and every time she leaves the house about the loaners and unsecured weapons they have access to. Discipline (short of too much chatter in class) hasn’t been an issue here.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone

[goldberry]

I don't know what policies my local district has, because I was never involved there.  An incident a couple of years ago at the high school seems very similar to some of the accounts in this book.

A friend of mine had a son who was being seriously bullied by a boy.  This boy was a generally disruptive and oppositional student.  He had cases of bringing nazi crap to school, and never received any punishment although he even did it more than once.  My friend talked to the principal about the bullying and received no help.  Was in fact told that "this boy has rights also, you know."  Eventually boy starts a fight with another student (not my friend's son).  Breaks this boys face, literally.  The victim was in the hospital for several weeks.  The bully was suspended for TWO WEEKS, then allowed to return to the same school.  

How does that happen?  The answer given to my friend was that "the boy has the same rights to an education as anyone else" and "we don't just write him off because he made a mistake."

Fortunately my friend was in a position to move her kids to another school. We live rural and so it involved almost an hour drive each way to do so.  It's easy to see why not all parents can do that.

Just an aside regarding the racism issue, I live in the whitest county on the planet.  No diversity at all here.  And pretty solidly Republican as well.   

[Sneezyone]

In our area, racism is an issue. We live in one of the more diverse school zones but go 10 miles in any direction and things are more tense. Our realtor was kind enough to be frank about her nephew’s experience in the high school zone next door. I would love to see more objective discipline policies, not unlike what DoDEA has (one of a few things they get right). It, essentially, allocated points for various offenses (on/off campus, property or people/animals, weapon/no weapon, etc.) and proscribes a *narrow* range of disciplinary options based on the severity of the offense. Bullying off school grounds that carried over into the school was, as a second offense, mandatory in-school suspension on up to expulsion. Corporal punishment was not allowed nor would I ever sign off on it.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone

[ktgrok]

40 minutes ago, goldberry said:

The book also discusses that it wasn't just even the regulations, that the school district was going beyond the regulations because of the "culture" created, that the kids were always right and were the poor, misdirected ones, because it played well in the community.  This was being applied equally regardless of race.  But was good for no one obviously. People were told that this or that "wasn't allowed" but were given inaccurate information.  Even the people running the programs didn't know what their own regulations were.  It was a total s***show to be honest.

To be honest I kind of wondered why parents weren't more involved.  But that's my homeschool bias showing! 🙂  Seriously though, where was the accountability?  

Um, who do you think it was pushing the narrative that the kids were always right? It was, and is, the parents. There was a time when if a teacher called and told a mother that her son had messed up in class the mother at least entertained the possibility that yeah, her kid messed up in class. In some areas, that is no longer the case. Parents go on the defensive - everything is the teacher's fault. 

32 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I may have to read it. I’m always up for a good discussion. “The brown kids are just so violent that we can’t touch anyone now” isn’t policy, it’s a questionable judgment. Personally, I am deeply concerned that schools are not tough enough gun-toting youths (or those with access to them) in middle/upper-middle class communities like mine. These seem to be prime target areas for school shootings. There are 4000+ kids in DDs high school. I worry each and every time she leaves the house about the loaners and unsecured weapons they have access to. Discipline (short of too much chatter in class) hasn’t been an issue here.

that's not what people were saying. I think what people were trying to describe is that for a while, particularly in Florida, children of color were being not only punished at alarming rates, but ARRESTED at alarming rates, for minor school problems. Seriously, the school to prison pipeline here is a real thing, especially in South Florida. So, in recognizing that this was a real problem, people tried to stop it, but ended up going too far the other way, and now kids (of all colors, and in my experience, more often white boys than anything) who really SHOULD be expelled/suspended/arrested were facing zero punishment. 

It went from zero tolerance and extreme punishments to total tolerance and non existent punishment. Neither is good. Neither is the fault of minorities. Hell, the school boards here are mostly white middle aged women with dyed blonde hair. If it is anyone's fault, I blame 50 year old white women with platinum blonde bobs. 

[Sneezyone]

2 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

that's not what people were saying. I think what people were trying to describe is that for a while, particularly in Florida, children of color were being not only punished at alarming rates, but ARRESTED at alarming rates, for minor school problems. Seriously, the school to prison pipeline here is a real thing, especially in South Florida. So, in recognizing that this was a real problem, people tried to stop it, but ended up going too far the other way, and now kids (of all colors, and in my experience, more often white boys than anything) who really SHOULD be expelled/suspended/arrested were facing zero punishment. 

It went from zero tolerance and extreme punishments to total tolerance and non existent punishment. Neither is good. Neither is the fault of minorities. Hell, the school boards here are mostly white middle aged women with dyed blonde hair. If it is anyone's fault, I blame 50 year old white women with platinum blonde bobs. 

That may not be what you were saying, I take you at your word, but that was the very clear implication of some of the earlier comments.

I agree that parents can be a major obstacle tho. No one wants to believe *their* Janie/Jack is at fault.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sneezyone