|
Post by lucillebluth on Dec 1, 2016 23:20:27 GMT
Rosie could have so easily been the bigger person in this stupid feud--it wouldn't have taken much, given the petty fool she's feuding with! I guess neither of them have any self-control when it comes to tweeting.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Dec 1, 2016 23:21:35 GMT
If/when Melania comes to the board and talks about/asks for advice about Barron's issues, I have no problem with us discussing it with her.
Until then, he should be off limits.
exactly - I think there's a clear difference between a parent discussing/asking for advise and other parents chiming in and a public figure PUBLICLY discussing someone else's child without permission ^^^ good point.
|
|
|
Post by destined2bmom on Dec 2, 2016 3:43:16 GMT
Twinsmomfla99 said:
"However, I have to disagree with the bolded part, and I'm not sure the OP really means that as an absolute statement.
Would you not move your child if it meant going tens of thousands of dollars in debt to stay behind during a move so s/he could finish the school year in order to maintain two residences while your spouse was working elsewhere? Would you forgo a sales contract on your home at full-price just so you could stay in the same location for the next four or five months, or accept the offer and then pay the high cost of temporary housing to remain?
Families do this all the time, and to act like it is some extreme hardship to have your kid switch schools is ridiculous when you have to weigh it against the high cost of remaining in place for an extended time while maintaining two households. The length of time and the cost of the move vs. the hardship on the parents and the cost of staying behind have to be weighed against each other. The shorter the time period, the less expensive it is and the more likely that I would make the choice to stay with my kid.
I've been in a situation where my husband was transferred and needed to start his new job in January. We chose to move our daughter mid-year in fourth grade because (a) we had a near-full-price offer on our house, (2) temporary housing was going to be ridiculously expensive, and we could not find a reasonable lease for the 5 months we needed for her to finish the school year, and (3) we felt that she would have an easier time making the transition and friends during the school year when she was getting attention from her peers as the "new kid" than she would have if she moved at the beginning of summer after sports team practices had already started and when there were few other organized activities to meet other kids in our neighborhood. It worked well for us.
Our most recent move was at the end of a school year, and our kids only needed about 3 weeks to finish the school year plus another 3 weeks of summer to finish up sports activities. We had a contract on our house, but we were able to finish all the school/sport stuff before we had to move. I had no problem staying behind while DH lived in our new house (we put in an offer and were able to rent it before the purchase was final).
Looking at the cost/benefit analysis for Barron Trump, it's not going to cost the Trumps much to keep him in school because the $1-2 million per day that it is expected to cost to maintain a residence in NY is being paid primarily by the taxpayers. I guess it is a no-brainer for them to keep him there. It is a pretty crappy and entitled attitude, though, to expect the taxpayers to pick up the cost. I wonder if they would have been so willing to do it if they had to pay the full price of the decision."
I understand your points and they are valid. I was just saying that given the choice, as a family, we decided against the moving. There is speculation that they are keeping Barron in school, because he is on the spectrum. Some families just decide not to move during the school year because it is not good for their families.
|
|
|
Post by sillyrabbit on Dec 2, 2016 4:29:58 GMT
As the parent of a 20 year old DS with autism, I can recognize some behaviors in other people that appear to be typical of those on the spectrum. However, I would never state that observation to others unless I was asked, and even then I would say I am not a medical professional and would recommend they seek one out. I don't believe Rosie's statement was out of concern for Barron, but a way for her to lash out at Trump. That's just not cool. At all. Not even a little.
|
|
|
Post by Night Owl on Dec 2, 2016 8:04:28 GMT
I know a family who has a child in the same school as Barron. There are more prestigious schools in that area that are more popular with the rich and famous, but his school has a great program for kids with learning disabilities. The mom I know did not say he was autistic but said he has learning disabilities and is a very sensitive kid who cries a lot. I don't want to get into a political debate but from what I hear Melania and Barron aren't too thrilled about Donald being president and the change it will bring to their lifestyle.
|
|
scrapaddie
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,090
Jul 8, 2014 20:17:31 GMT
|
Post by scrapaddie on Dec 2, 2016 9:45:55 GMT
She isn't the first or only person to write that speculation. It was a pretty popular theory/rumor before she repeated it. ^^^ that. The video she posted was made by someone else, not by her. She said what she did so that if it was true, it might be a great opportunity to raise awareness and to tie in with Melania's anti-bullying campaign to help stop bullying of kids with autism just for being 'different.' (if I recall the article I saw correctly.)
it's not like she was commenting on how ugly he was, or that he looked stupid, or anything like that- while I agree that a candidate's family shouldn't be raked over the coals for stuff like that, this wasn't like that. (And if people didn't write speculation, then no one would read US magazine, or any number of other magazines on the rack at the supermarket.)
It may not have been in 'good taste' for her to say it, but again, she wasn't the first one to do it. And last I looked, we're still free to say what we think, aren't we? (with notable exceptions prohibited by law, of course.)
She May have the right to say anything she wants, but it still doesn't say much for her. You can try to give all the good justification you want, But is not her place to use somebody else's child for her own agenda, whatever it is. To label a person is to overlook everything else about them, and many children are sensitive to being labeled ( including many children on the spectrum )
|
|