Parents of autistic child charged with $400K fraud...

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.care2.com/causes/education/blog/parents/


What in the blue................gah, I have no words here.

Only in San Francisco. How else would you fund your fleet of Priuses, shopping trips to Neiman Marcus and Bloomingdale's, nightly dinners in the Financial District and monthly contributions to Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer?

SF is such a fscked up city, it ain't even funny.

OK, then....

I don't even know what to say.

Just having an autistic child does not make a saint. Greed can overcome anyone.

The father was a graduate of Stanford and Harvard law schools! He probably pulls down MORE in a year being a lawyer than the couple ripped off from the school district in four! What did they do with the extra money, probably used it to fund a high flying lifestyle. Boomer parents with a grandiose sense of entitlement is the problem, and when they have NT kids those kids have even MORE grandiose senses of entitlement, they think that they should be paid six figures for just showing up to work then spending all day IMing their friends. The cheap labor can do all the work, they were BORN TO CONSUME! On credit, of course. People, especially in the cities, have such high expectations of life that I'm afraid that they will be VERY disappointed in life in America from now on. No scheme is too wild for these people to make money, and it ALL goes towards spending. There was a guy in the early 2000s who embezzled $100 million, and he spent every last cent, him and his wife. Americans have a truly prodigious appetite for spending, they can spend all day, they "relax" by spending. Now that the money is all gone, all that's left is a pile of debt to be paid back.

Every city has their basket of bad apples. I really don't believe that San Francisco has any more than the next place. Maybe they're just more colorful and obvious in SF. I certainly know more than my share of good eggs in this area; I don't think the broad brush in your post is fair to them at all.

It actually kind of sounds like she was trying to get paid for her own time teaching her own child. Something all of us would love to do, especially if one has to give up a paying job to do so. I realize that doesn't make it right, it just puts another potential spin on it.

In CA some parents can actually get caregiver money from the state for taking care of their own children's difficult medical conditions but, obviously, in those situations everyone is upfront about it. The payments are really low, but better than nothing; the simple theory being that if a parent is willing to forgo other paid work to do the care that the state would otherwise have to pay a third party for, it does save the state money.

I'm just wondering if this scheme was inspired by that concept.